The Admission Of Visitors.

THE ADMISSION OF VISITORS .

THE question of the admission of visitors into our Lodges recently attracted some attention , nnder circumstances which do not often occur . As recorded in these coinmns , a foreign brother , last week , made application for relief at the Confidence Lodge of Instruction , held at Masons' Hall ,

Masons' Avenne , Basinghall Street . The brother came unprovided with any official evidence of his being a Mason . He had merely , as our reporter describes it , " a scrap of paper , about four inches square , containing some recommendation . " Under these circumstances , we are not

surprised at learning that it was determined not to afford the relief requested . " Scraps of paper about four inches square , " even though they may appear to contain " some recommendation , " are not much in the way of trustworthy evidence . It is quite possible the applicant was a member

of our Craft . We do not , indeed , for a moment imagine he would have urged any claim which he did not consider just and proper . Equally certain are we , however , that the refusal to recognise his claim was , under the circumstances , as just as it was expedient . But a further question arose .

The foreign brother finding his application for relief brought with it no solatmm , claimed admission to the Lodge as a brother Mason . This also was refused , on grounds which none , we fancy , will question the wisdom of . In the opinion

of competent judges , the foreign brother was not properly vouched . He brought with him no satisfactory evidence—that is , of a character likely to commend itself to men of common sense—that he was what

he declared himself to be , a Free and Accepted Mason . His " scrap of paper , about four inches square , " had no virtue in the eyes of those whose duty it was to determine its merits . Hence the second rejection to admit him as a Craftsman following upon the first ., —to afford him the relief

prayed for . We are sorry the incident occurred , and it is just possible , had " due examination by one of the present brethren " been made , the question at issue—Craftsman , or no Craftsman . —would have been set at rest , beyond the possibility of doubt . All this , however , it was clearly

competent for the responsible officer of the Lodge to determine . He elected in favour of rejecting the visitor , and we know of no authority that can justly question the discretion thus exercised . We are sorry if a worthy brother has been kept outside the precincts of one of our

Lodges , but in justice to those who were suddenly required to determine a point of value , we cannot say they exceeded the bounds of prudence or discretion . In fact , what they did was done in strict accordance with the Constitutions , and we think those who acted thus resolutely are entitled to the thanks of the whole Masonic community .

The virtue of discretion in a matter of this kind cannot be too seriously urged upon the attention of the Craft . We cannot be too circumspect as regards stransre brethren . We do not believe that English Masons are less prone to help the indigent visitor than Craftsmen of other countries .

The brethren in this country are not without virtue as beneficent fellows . But rules are rules , and our Constitutions are sufficiently explicit in this case . As Bro . Gottheil pointed out , the law lays it down abso l utely that " no visitor shall be admitted into a Lodge unless he he

personally known , recommended , or well vouched for , after due examination by one of the present brethren . " The applicant for admission was not personally known to any member of the Lodge then present . He brought with him no sufficient recommendation , nor with his scrap of paper .

The Admission Of Visitors.

was he , it seems , held to be properly vouched for . We

have said that due examination might have been made , but the antecedent shortcomings appear to have been sufficient . The applicant , therefore , was denied admission as a bro ' , her as he had previously been refused relief , on grounds which , considering the facts as reported , fully commend themselves

to our judgment . The Ancient Charges , as publisher , ! in our Book of Constitutions , and quoted in Oliver ' s Masonic Jurisprudence , point strictly to an examinntion : " are cautiously to examine him , " that is , a foreign broihor or stranger , " as prudence shall direct , " for the very obvious

reason " that you mav not be imposed upon by a pretender . " Further on , Dr . Oliver says : " No visitor can be admitted unless he be known or vouched for by some member of the Lodge , or ( if he be a perfect stranger ) produce

his Grand Lodge certificate , and submit to the usual examination . " Pursuing the same subject , we find tho following passage , which shows the custom in the United States , the passage being taken from Bro . Dr . Mnckey ' s Masonic Law : — "But manv brethren who are desirous of

visitiner are strangers and sojourners , without either friends or acquaintances amongst the members to become their vouchers ; in which case they may still be admitted by certificate , examination , or the aid of the sacred volume , commonly called the Tyler ' s obligation , which , in the

United States , runs in the following form : — ' I , A B ., do hereby and hereon solemnly and sincerely swear that I have been regularly initiated , passed and raised to the sublime degree of a Master Mason in a just and legally constituted Lodge of such ; that I do not stand suspended or expelled ,

and know of no reason why I should not hold Masonic communication with my brethren . ' And this is all that Masonry needs to provide . " This , then , inclines us to the belief that

it would have been wiser , perhaps , to have instituted the pxamination prescribed by our Constitutions . At the same time we are averse from questioning the propriety of what was done . A W . M . is bound to exercise discretion in such

a case , and no doubt the Grand Master s edict , to which Bro . Gottheil referred , and which provides that visitors shall not be admitted without legal certificate , fortified the W . M . in ruling as he did against the stranger ' s admission . It were well , perhaps , if the Grand Secretary expounded the

law absolutely , for the subject , as we have already pointed out , is of the very greatest importance . We know Bro . Rudderforth , who was the W . M . of the evening on which this incident occurred , as a right skilful Craftsman . We know , too , there are Bro . Gottheil and other Masonic

luminaries in the Confidence Lodge of Instruction . But all brethren in office are not as well fitted as those we have enumerated to settle this kind of question . In the exercise of their discretion , their action might prove very indiscreet . They would certainly give their best decision , according to

the light that was in them , but that best might turn out , unfortunately , disastrous . A carefully defined law , requiring the production of certain evidence , and the examination of the visitor as well , would probably meet all oases that are ever likely to arise . A visitor who is not

admitted cannot , or at least ought not , to feel offended . The absence of the legal voucher , due to no matter what cause , is his fault or misfortune , not that of the officer , who , in the exercise of the authority by law vested in him ,

rules that without such voucher admission cannot be granted . It is far better our Lodges should be made as secure as human foresight can make them against the intrusion of cowans , even though , as a result of such extreme care , occasionally a true brother may be denied admission ,

than that for tho sake of tho careless , imprudent , or