The Principles of Masonic Law.

by Albert G. Mackey.

Preface.

In presenting to the fraternity a work on the Principles of Masonic Law, it is due to those for whom it is intended, that something should be said of the design with which it has been written, and of the plan on which it has been composed. It is not pretended to present to the craft an encyclopedia of jurisprudence, in which every question that can possibly arise, in the transactions of a Lodge, is decided with an especial reference to its particular circ.u.mstances. Were the accomplishment of such an herculean task possible, except after years of intense and unremitting labor, the unwieldy size of the book produced, and the heterogeneous nature of its contents, so far from inviting, would rather tend to distract attention, and the object of communicating a knowledge of the Principles of Masonic Law, would be lost in the tedious collation of precedents, arranged without scientific system, and enunciated without explanation.

When I first contemplated the composition of a work on this subject, a distinguished friend and Brother, whose opinion I much respect, and with whose advice I am always anxious to comply, unless for the most satisfactory reasons, suggested the expediency of collecting the decisions of all Grand Masters, Grand Lodges, and other masonic authorities upon every subject of Masonic Law, and of presenting them, without commentary, to the fraternity.

But a brief examination of this method, led me to perceive that I would be thus constructing simply a digest of decrees, many of which would probably be the results of inexperience, of prejudice, or of erroneous views of the masonic system, and from which the authors themselves have, in repeated instances, subsequently receded--for Grand Masters and Grand Lodges, although ent.i.tled to great respect, are not infallible--and I could not, conscientiously, have consented to a.s.sist, without any qualifying remark, in the extension and perpetuation of edicts and opinions, which, however high the authority from which they emanated, I did not believe to be in accordance with the principles of Masonic jurisprudence.

Another inconvenience which would have attended the adoption of such a method is, that the decisions of different Grand Lodges and Grand Masters are sometimes entirely contradictory on the same points of Masonic Law.

The decree of one jurisdiction, on any particular question, will often be found at variance with that of another, while a third will differ from both. The consultor of a work, embracing within its pages such distracting judgments, unexplained by commentary, would be in doubt as to which decision he should adopt, so that coming to the inspection with the desire of solving a legal question, he would be constrained to close the volume, in utter despair of extracting truth or information from so confused a ma.s.s of contradictions.

This plan I therefore at once abandoned. But knowing that the jurisprudence of Masonry is founded, like all legal science, on abstract principles, which govern and control its entire system, I deemed it to be a better course to present these principles to my readers in an elementary and methodical treatise, and to develop from them those necessary deductions which reason and common sense would justify.

Hence it is that I have presumed to call this work "The Principles of Masonic Law." It is not a code of enactments, nor a collection of statutes, nor yet a digest of opinions; but simply an elementary treatise, intended to enable every one who consults it, with competent judgment, and ordinary intelligence, to trace for himself the bearings of the law upon any question which he seeks to investigate, and to form, for himself, a correct opinion upon the merits of any particular case.

Blackstone, whose method of teaching I have endeavored, although I confess "ab longo inter-vallo," to pursue, in speaking of what an academical expounder of the law should do, says:

"He should consider his course as a general map of the law, marking out the shape of the country, its connections, and boundaries, its greater divisions, and princ.i.p.al cities; it is not his business to describe minutely the subordinate limits, or to fix the longitude and lat.i.tude of every inconsiderable hamlet."

Such has been the rule that has governed me in the compilation of this work. But in delineating this "general map" of the Masonic Law, I have sought, if I may continue the metaphor, so to define boundaries, and to describe countries, as to give the inspector no difficulty in "locating"

(to use an Americanism) any subordinate point. I have treated, it is true, of principles, but I have not altogether lost sight of cases.

There are certain fundamental laws of the Inst.i.tution, concerning which there never has been any dispute, and which have come down to us with all the sanctions of antiquity, and universal acceptation. In announcing these, I have not always thought it necessary to defend their justice, or to a.s.sign a reason for their enactment.

The weight of unanimous authority has, in these instances, been deemed sufficient to ent.i.tle them to respect, and to obedience.

But on all other questions, where authority is divided, or where doubts of the correctness of my decision might arise, I have endeavored, by a course of argument as satisfactory as I could command, to a.s.sign a reason for my opinions, and to defend and enforce my views, by a reference to the general principles of jurisprudence, and the peculiar character of the masonic system. I ask, and should receive no deference to my own unsupported theories--as a man, I am, of course, fallible--and may often have decided erroneously. But I do claim for my arguments all the weight and influence of which they may be deemed worthy, after an attentive and unprejudiced examination. To those who may at first be ready--because I do not agree with all their preconceived opinions--to doubt or deny my conclusions, I would say, in the language of Themistocles, "Strike, but hear me."

Whatever may be the verdict pa.s.sed upon my labors by my Brethren, I trust that some clemency will be extended to the errors into which I may have fallen, for the sake of the object which I have had in view: that, namely, of presenting to the Craft an elementary work, that might enable every Mason to know his rights, and to learn his duties.

The intention was, undoubtedly, a good one. How it has been executed, it is not for me, but for the masonic public to determine.

Albert G. Mackey.

Charleston, S.C., January 1st., 1856.

Introduction.

The Authorities for Masonic Law.

The laws which govern the inst.i.tution of Freemasonry are of two kinds, _unwritten_ and _written,_ and may in a manner be compared with the "lex non scripta," or common law, and the "lex seripta," or statute law of English and American jurists.

The "lex non scripta," or _unwritten law_ of Freemasonry is derived from the traditions, usages and customs of the fraternity as they have existed from the remotest antiquity, and as they are universally admitted by the general consent of the members of the Order. In fact, we may apply to these unwritten laws of Masonry the definition given by Blackstone of the "leges non scriptae" of the English const.i.tution--that "their original inst.i.tution and authority are not set down in writing, as acts of parliament are, but they receive their binding power, and the force of laws, by long and immemorial usage and by their universal reception throughout the kingdom." When, in the course of this work, I refer to these unwritten laws as authority upon any point, I shall do so under the appropriate designation of "ancient usage."

The "lex scripta," or written law of Masonry, is derived from a variety of sources, and was framed at different periods. The following doc.u.ments I deem of sufficient authority to substantiate any principle, or to determine any disputed question in masonic law.

1. The "Ancient Masonic charges, from a ma.n.u.script of the Lodge of Antiquity," and said to have been written in the reign of James II.[1]

2. The regulations adopted at the General a.s.sembly held in 1663, of which the Earl of St. Albans was Grand Master.[2]

3. The interrogatories propounded to the Master of a lodge at the time of his installation, and which, from their universal adoption, without alteration, by the whole fraternity, are undoubtedly to be considered as a part of the fundamental law of Masonry.

4. "The Charges of a Freemason, extracted from the Ancient Records of Lodges beyond sea, and of those in England, Scotland, and Ireland, for the use of the Lodges in London," printed in the first edition of the Book of Const.i.tutions, and to be found from p. 49 to p. 56 of that work.[3]

5. The thirty-nine "General Regulations," adopted "at the annual a.s.sembly and feast held at Stationers" hall on St. John the Baptist"s day, 1721,"

and which were published in the first edition of the Book of Const.i.tutions, p. 58 to p.

6. The subsequent regulations adopted at various annual communications by the Grand Lodge of England, up to the year 1769, and published in different editions of the Book of Const.i.tutions. These, although not of such paramount importance and universal acceptation as the Old Charges and the Thirty-nine Regulations, are, nevertheless, of great value as the means of settling many disputed questions, by showing what was the law and usage of the fraternity at the times in which they were adopted.

Soon after the publication of the edition of 1769 of the Book of Const.i.tutions, the Grand Lodges of America began to separate from their English parent and to organize independent jurisdictions. From that period, the regulations adopted by the Grand Lodge of England ceased to have any binding efficacy over the craft in this country, while the laws pa.s.sed by the American Grand Lodges lost the character of general regulations, and were invested only with local authority in their several jurisdictions.

Before concluding this introductory section, it may be deemed necessary that something should be said of the "Ancient Landmarks of the Order," to which reference is so often made.

Various definitions have been given of the landmarks. Some suppose them to be const.i.tuted of all the rules and regulations which were in existence anterior to the revival of Masonry in 1717, and which were confirmed and adopted by the Grand Lodge of England at that time. Others, more stringent in their definition, restrict them to the modes of recognition in use among the fraternity. I am disposed to adopt a middle course, and to define the Landmarks of Masonry to be, all those usages and customs of the craft--whether ritual or legislative--whether they relate to forms and ceremonies, or to the organization of the society--which have existed from time immemorial, and the alteration or abolition of which would materially affect the distinctive character of the inst.i.tution or destroy its ident.i.ty. Thus, for example, among the legislative landmarks, I would enumerate the office of Grand Master as the presiding officer over the craft, and among the ritual landmarks, the legend of the third degree. But the laws, enacted from time to time by Grand Lodges for their local government, no matter how old they may be, do not const.i.tute landmarks, and may, at any time, be altered or expunged, since the 39th regulation declares expressly that "every annual Grand Lodge has an inherent power and authority to make new regulations or to alter these (viz., the thirty-nine articles) for the real benefit of this ancient fraternity, provided always that the old landmarks be carefully preserved."

Book First

The Law of Grand Lodges.

It is proposed in this Book, first to present the reader with a brief historical sketch of the rise and progress of the system of Grand Lodges; and then to explain, in the subsequent sections, the mode in which such bodies are originally organized, who const.i.tute their officers and members, and what are their acknowledged prerogatives.

Chapter I.

Historical Sketch.

Grand Lodges under their present organization, are, in respect to the antiquity of the Order, of a comparatively modern date. We hear of no such bodies in the earlier ages of the inst.i.tution. Tradition informs us, that originally it was governed by the despotic authority of a few chiefs. At the building of the temple, we have reason to believe that King Solomon exercised an unlimited and irresponsible control over the craft, although a tradition (not, however, of undoubted authority) says that he was a.s.sisted in his government by the counsel of twelve superintendants, selected from the twelve tribes of Israel. But we know too little, from authentic materials, of the precise system adopted at that remote period, to enable us to make any historical deductions on the subject.

The first historical notice that we have of the formation of a supreme controlling body of the fraternity, is in the "Gothic Const.i.tutions"[4]

which a.s.sert that, in the year 287, St. Alban, the protomartyr of England, who was a zealous patron of the craft, obtained from Carausius, the British Emperor, "a charter for the Masons to hold a general council, and gave it the name of a.s.sembly." The record further states, that St. Alban attended the meeting and a.s.sisted in making Masons, giving them "good charges and regulations." We know not, however, whether this a.s.sembly ever met again; and if it did, for how many years it continued to exist. The subsequent history of Freemasonry is entirely silent on the subject.

The next general a.s.semblage of the craft, of which the records of Freemasonry inform us, was that convened in 926, at the city of York, in England, by Prince Edwin, the brother of King Athelstane, and the grandson of Alfred the Great. This, we say, was the next general a.s.semblage, because the Ashmole ma.n.u.script, which was destroyed at the revival of Freemasonry in 1717, is said to have stated that, at that time, the Prince obtained from his brother, the king, a permission for the craft "to hold a yearly communication and a general a.s.sembly." The fact that such a power of meeting was then granted, is conclusive that it did not before exist: and would seem to prove that the a.s.semblies of the craft, authorised by the charter of Carausius, had long since ceased to be held. This yearly communication did not, however, const.i.tute, at least in the sense we now understand it, a Grand Lodge. The name given to it was that of the "General a.s.sembly of Masons." It was not restricted, as now, to the Masters and Wardens of the subordinate lodges, acting in the capacity of delegates or representatives, but was composed, as Preston has observed, of as many of the fraternity at large as, being within a convenient distance, could attend once or twice a year, under the auspices of one general head, who was elected and installed at one of these meetings, and who, for the time being, received homage as the governor of the whole body. Any Brethren who were competent to discharge the duty, were allowed, by the regulations of the Order, to open and hold lodges at their discretion, at such times and places as were most convenient to them, and without the necessity of what we now call a Warrant of Const.i.tution, and then and there to initiate members into the Order.[5] To the General a.s.sembly, however, all the craft, without distinction, were permitted to repair; each Mason present was ent.i.tled to take part in the deliberations, and the rules and regulations enacted were the result of the votes of the whole body. The General a.s.sembly was, in fact, precisely similar to those political congregations which, in our modern phraseology, we term "ma.s.s meetings."

These annual ma.s.s meetings or General a.s.semblies continued to be held, for many centuries after their first establishment, at the city of York, and were, during all that period, the supreme judicatory of the fraternity.

There are frequent references to the annual a.s.semblies of Freemasons in public doc.u.ments. The preamble to an act pa.s.sed in 1425, during the reign of Henry VI., just five centuries after the meeting at York, states that, "by the _yearly congregations_ and confederacies made by the Masons in their _general a.s.semblies, _ the good course and effect of the statute of laborers were openly violated and broken." This act which forbade such meetings, was, however, never put in force; for an old record, quoted in the Book of Const.i.tutions, speaks of the Brotherhood having frequented this "mutual a.s.sembly," in 1434, in the reign of the same king. We have another record of the General a.s.sembly, which was held in York on the 27th December, 1561, when Queen Elizabeth, who was suspicious of their secrecy, sent an armed force to dissolve the meeting. A copy is still preserved of the regulations which were adopted by a similar a.s.sembly held in 1663, on the festival of St. John the Evangelist; and in these regulations it is declared that the private lodges shall give an account of all their acceptations made during the year to the General a.s.sembly. Another regulation, however, adopted at the same time, still more explicitly acknowledges the existence of a General a.s.sembly as the governing body of the fraternity. It is there provided, "that for the future, the said fraternity of Freemasons shall be regulated and governed by one Grand Master and as many Wardens as the said society shall think fit to appoint at every Annual General a.s.sembly."