Altogether, aside from any of the reasons which have been publicly advanced against the so-called right of peremptory objection, may be mentioned this: that Masonry can never be made responsible for an alleged rule, which, every time it is applied in practice, produces discord and animosity, and never once contributed to any good which can be pointed out, for it is after all nothing more nor less than a universal license to those disposed to use it to gratify their personal animosity when opportunity offers-that is, it provides the opportunity to such, and compels a Lodge duly assembled to execute the caprice of a single member by inflicting a flagrant indignity upon a stranger, perhaps a Mason of the highest character without so much as knowing why it is called upon to act. Under this senseless rule, so called, the Worshipful Master is compelled to utter a mandate for the expulsion of a visitor in the presence of strangers to him from the very communication of a Lodge to which he has been invited as a mark of special esteem; and this while he (the Master) is filled with indignation at the act of the objector, in thus attempting to advertise what he calls his conscience (?) at the expense of the dignity and decency of the Lodge.

Whoever will look back through his Masonic experience will see that so far as it goes, the rule in question has never produced any good; and whoever will reflect will certainly, in time, come to see that there is no possible good it can accomplish in any way; but that is what might be called a dispensation of " indulgence" to any Mason who may choose to do so, to violate the laws of common hospitality, and disturb the very harmony of the Lodge it pretends

to secure.

The very case which called forth the decision of Grand Master French, and the letters and circular of Grand Master Donaldson, above mentioned, was that of a Mason in good standing who came from Scotland, and was warmly received in the Lodges in the District of Columbia. The following is the statement of the matter in the circular of Grand Master Donaldson :

A alleged that B was a "bogus Mason." B demonstrated that he had been regularly made a Master Mason in Scotland, and was there affiliated and in good standing. A then made an effort to keep B out of the Lodges, by getting some member to object to his (B's) presence as a visiting brother, alleging as a reason for so doing that B had wronged him (A) in some business transactions. This produced the inquiry, "Why does not A prefer charges?" He did so. A

trial ensued. A, the accuser, was assisted by counsel; B, the accused, conducted his own case, which resulted in an unanimous verdict of "not guilty," by a very full Lodge. The commissioners who tried the case, closed their report by rebuking A for the unMasonic spirit he had manifested throughout the whole proceedings. Friends of A, in one or two Lodges, still continued to object to the admission of B as a visitor, although he had in the meantime dimit ted from his Lodge in Scotland and affiliated with a Lodge in this Jurisdiction. ***

So much for the harmony secured by the rule in the District of Columbia. Now to show that Grand Master Darrah's remarks were not only wise but timely, here is a case which happened since he uttered them.

In a well-known Lodge having about two hundred and fifty members, election night came on, also a presentation to the retiring Worshipful Master. The attendance was very large, many visitors being present. A, a Past Master of two Lodges and former member of the Lodge then sitting, a resident of the town, long held in high esteem by the community, and especially by all the Lodges, and noted for proficiency in the work and knowledge of Masonry, visited the Lodge, and was invited by the Worshipful Master to a seat in the East. B, who had been a member of the Lodge last presided over by A, but now a member of the Lodge present, also attended, and after the transaction of considerable business he arose and objected to A. The elderly and worthy Past Master was compelled by the enforcement of the rule to step down from the East to which he had been invited without being permitted to ask for an explanation; and, in the presence of many strangers, make his way (for the last time as it proved to be) to the door of the Lodge, and depart alone in the darkness and cold to his home, a mile distant.

Some eight days afterward, and while the feelings of the Fraternity were still ruffled by what they had been compelled to witness, came the summons to his funeral; and it was learned that during his short sickness his mind was preyed upon by the indignity to which he had been subjected; and, in the delirium of his last hours, he repeatedly murmured, "I can't believe that I was wrong; 'I don't think I exceeded my authority;" " "I meant to do right."

66

I will only add, that the dispute out of which it all arose was a ruling made by A as Worshipful Master concerning the accounts of

the Secretary and the Treasurer, as I am informed by the members of his Lodge.

Away forever with such a doctrine as peremptory objection in such an institution as Ancient Craft Masonry ;—it has never borne any different fruit. It never will. Its apples of Sodom have been ashes on the lips of the Craft since first they plucked them from their stem. And, as to any qualified objection to be brought before the Lodge or the Master, to the interruption of business and order, without charges or witnesses or opportunity or reflection, and without any object, except that of having a fuss, by a member who has to put up with the presence of every other member, however great an enemy to him, the absurdity of the whole thing is on its face.

Take either horn of the dilemma, and what is to hinder any weak and stubborn member of a Lodge from keeping outside every Mason who might attend a grand reunion and festival at the dedication or installation of officers-even to the officers of the Grand Lodge, except the Grand Master, or his deputy or proxy, if he be absent. The very schools of instruction, ordered by the Grand Lodge, can be dispersed by the operation of either rule, for manifestly if the right of objection is "inherent" in a member, it must be as good against one visitor as another, no matter what may be his object in visiting.

The right of visitation, which is very different from the right to visit, and which is possessed only by the Grand Master, his deputy or proxy, can only withstand an objection in either case.

The truth is there is but one rational and Masonic mode of keeping any Mason whomsoever, who can prove himself, off the Masonic floor, and that is by subjecting him to charges, and proving his unworthiness to the satisfaction of a regular Lodge of Masons having jurisdiction. I, for one, confess that it required, in my case, a long time "to unlearn" what I had "learned amiss" on this really simple subject.- Voice of Masonry.

ANOTHER MASONIC TEMPLE.-The Brethren of Binghampton, N. Y., have bought the "Phelps' Castle" for forty thousand dollars. The grounds are said to be worth the sum paid, while the "castle" is reputed to have cost one hundred and twenty thousand. The Brethren of Binghampton are evidently "in luck.”

JACOB NORTON, THE MASONIC AGNOSTIC.

BY ROB MORRIS.

In a recent issue of the Freemasons Chronicle (London, England) I find myself the subject of an article by Brother Jacob Norton entitled "What a great American Mason can believe." Mixed with more or less error (for even an Agnostic may err) Brother Norton has exposed my Masonic creed in a strain equally amusing and instructive. As "the great American Mason" of the day, I was expecting a volley from the quill of this Bostonian animosus, for, in their turns, he has demolished Mackey, Pike, Oliver and Charles W. Moore. I say, I have been waiting my turn as when a school. boy I stood trembling at the tail of the column which was undergoing their matutinal and merited castigation. It is not enough that the Christian Cynosure makes me the subject of its weekly (weakly) abuse It is not enough that the anti-Masonic Convention, now in session, holds me up to public ridicule as the “head devil" (vide Blanchard passim) of “the thrice accursed institution." No. More 'and worse was awaiting me. From the setting-room of that pleasant and hospitable dwelling in Boston (where I wish I was this snowy thirty-first of March) a winged arrow flies, and behold the world is informed, to my shame and mortification, "what the great American Mason believes."

Well, the good natured Norton, after all, hasn't hurt me. His castigatory hands were encased in gloves. He has remembered my weaknesses and only touched on my silly creed without once impugning my morals. I am glad of that. As long as the attack only reaches my head, leaving my heart unscathed, I can stand it.

Seriously, for twenty years I have been reading after this iconoclastic and agnostic Bostonian. In that period he has successively encountered every Masonic principle and every Masonic belief. He has proven

I. That there were, anciently, but two degrees.

2.

That there was, anciently, but one degree.

3. That, anciently, there was no Masonry at all.

4.

error.

That to introduce the name of Jesus into Masonry is a modern

5. That the Broken Column is a modern invention.

6. That, anciently, there were no emblems.

7.

That the words J and B have been reversed. 8. That, anciently, there was no J and no B.

9.

sonry.

IO.

That Philadelphia is not the mother city of American Ma

That Price was an imposter and Lord Montague another. That there is no evidence that Freemasonry ever was introduced into America.

II.

But why enlarge? The labors of Bro. Norton were well characterized by King Solomon (or was there a King Solomon ?) under the term vanity. Why all this iconoclastic labor, Brother Norton ? Nobody cares for it. The Order (or is it an Order ?) moves along just the same as before the Nortonian demonstration. Look over your scrap-book, and review all your attacks upon Masonic beliefs, and see where one of those beliefs has been affected, even in the slightest degree.

Come, come, old Friend, quit this trifling. You and I have so little time left! Let us leave pleasant imprints behind us and not bitter ones. Tell the world what you believe. Build up instead of knocking down. And may the good Lord who has given you zeal and learning add good nature to your other gifts.

GAMBLING.—It is not only a subject that calls for energetic action on the part of the Legislature, but offers a field for our brethren in which they can manifest their true appreciation of the beauties of Freemasonry. To save a thoughtless brother from the effects of the allurements attendant on gambling in every form should be a work of love to a Mason, while he who encourages an indulgence in one of the worst of vices cannot expect to be deemed a worthy member of the Craft by any of his brethren. This is a most serious question,—the machinations of the "black leg" have been the means of ruining many young men who should have become a credit to their parents, -the seductive influence of the wily "dear friend" who extends hospitality merely for the sake of a little pecuniary gain, has had the effect of leading sociable but honestly-inclined persons into trouble,-aye, even the self righteous-the professed christian has often figured as a gambler, his degradation having been supervened through a gradually increasing-desire for betting; and we call on brethren more especially those in exalted Masonic positions--to use their influence, whenever opportunities offer, in seeking to materially check the rapid progress in their midst of one of the worst vices that has disgraced the civilized world.--New Zealand Freemason, Feb. 15, 1887.