Our Forefathers In The Lodge Room.

OUR FOREFATHERS IN THE LODGE ROOM .

WE propose to sketch out in a brief way Lodge Rooms as they were in the long ago . Being historical in nearly all points , these articles are culled from various compilers of Masonic history , and as no history can in any true sense be original , so we claim herein little or no originality .

Purity was enjoined in the most strict sense of the word ; members were liable to expulsion who enticed or allowed women whose reputation was soiled to approach either Lodge Room or work-shop . All sacred days were respected and no labour therein allowed . If any Brother worked therein ,

he was liable to ecclesiastical censure and was denied access to the Lodge of Instruction , over which the Master presided , till he had repented . Diligence was enjoined . The old saying , " Who works not eats not , " was carried out to the full among mediaeval Masons , and a stonecutter absent from daily toil without leave was allowed no wages for the time he

was away . Guizot , in his history of civilisation in France , refers to an ancient charter bestowed on the Weavers at the town of Etampes , in which it seems that the labour and trade associations of our day were in vigour at that distant period ,

another proof of what is said in the sacred book of Ecclesiastes that " there is nothine new under the sun , " for even then a solemn agreement was made giving the guild power , and that supreme , to regulate the hours of daily labour , and that all of the Brethren should begin daily toil at such and such an hour and not worK beyond such and such an hour .

Any member of these ancient Masonic Lodges could leave his own and seek work elsewhere , but no one might get his " demit " unless , he had parted without anger from his Brethren and had left no Fraternal obligation unfulfilled , and if free of these matters he had a right to insist on a certificate of membership to facilitate his way among strange Masons .

No aid , for a mere payment of money , could be received by one Fellow-Craftsman from another ; the aid must originate in love only . And to provide against quarrels , which were in the order ol the day in these old times , no

Mason might bring into the Lodge Room a knife or other weapon over half of an ell in length , nor could such be allowed at a feast or banquet , which were very common things to our ancestors—the beef and ale were in demand weekly .

When actually engaged in architecture , each separate piece of work came under rigid scrutiny by the Brother appointed to oversee all work of his Brethren , who , could properly adjust elegantly wrought stones . Yet even here , and it is worthy of remark how the ancient landmark was

preserved , no such overseer was allowed to come into direct contact with his Brethren , either m the way of censure or praise ; Ls duty was to report directly to the Master , and it was by him and him alone that the operative was reproved for want of care or praised because of skill . Neither could

any worker receive wages behind the Master ' s back . No one could leave a Lodge Room which was at the time a working Lodge , unless leave was given by the Master . All Brethren through illness unable to attend to work were nourished by the Lodge , and when well repaid the Lodge ' s expenses caused thereby .

The ordinances of the year 1254 , by royal concession , recognised the supreme authority of the Master over all Craftsmen , and in France he was allowed to inflict corporal punishment , provided in doing so no blood was drawn . ( See Lacroix " Les Moeurs et usages au Moyen Age , p . 314 . ) If

a Brother was rebellious and obstinate his working tools were taken away , and , if still obstinate , the civil power of the provost of his town could be invoked , and he could be incarcerated in the jail . In 1275 , Rudolph I ., then Emperor of Germany , conceded to the Lodge of Strasburg a right to administer justice among its members .

Among our Brethren of the Middle Ages two systems of judicature prevailed , i . e ., the greater and the lesser . The smaller , presided over by the Lodge Master , was held within the Lodge enclosure , while the larger settled disagreements ( if any existed ) among all Masonic Masters , though frequently

these came before the Supreme Grand Lodge . But under no circumstances could the members of any Lodge , in session or not , call the Master to account for what he ' did

The complainer ' s duty was to at once withdraw from the assembly . Neither was any Fellow Craft Mason allowed to punish an Apprentice ; this the Master alone could do . So that all along the line the supremacy of the Master was

Our Forefathers In The Lodge Room.

upheld to the highest point . Four times in each year the Master was obliged by Masonic law to ask the assembled Lodge whether any envy or hatred existed among them which might injure the building interests , in which they were

engaged . If so , he settled'the same by conversation and other means with the members at variance , and if any one refused to do what the Master ordered on the point , he was discharged from the work then on hand .

On each quarter day it devolved on the Master to ascertain from the architectural superintendents of the edifice being erected , if they knew of any Craftsman not faithful to his task or who was indulging himself in trivial amusements ; if so commensurate justice was inflicted .

There was by law a direction that all Masters of all Lodges should assemble once in each year to' dispose of all unsettled questions among the Craft ; eg ., sometimes one Master was said to have supplanted a Fellow Master about some building contract , and sometimes architects , complained

as to want of skill in a Master , and to elucidate matters evidence was taken before the Grand Lodge . To this end the Grand Lodge elected a chief justice and the Wardens elected associate judges , making up a judicial court of inquiry . Any disclosure of things sacred was in the Middle Ages

visited by terrible penalties , and it shows how credulitywhich has come down to our own day in believing that a wretch called Morgan was put to death by our Order in America—prevailed as far back as the year 1099 , when we

see a historian called Rebold telling of a Brother in Utrecht killing a resident bishop because he had wrung from his child the secret principles of Masonry ; like the case of Morgan , no evidence is furnished .

The mallet of the Masonic Master was a religious symbol in the Middle Ages , and was also used in the establishment of proprietary rights ; e . g ., it was thrown at full swing , and all the land it traversed in its journey was at once reduced to the possession of the thrower . Mediaeval cloisters possessed a

wooden one , which was continuously struck on some sounding substance when any monk was in the throes of death , and strange it is , but no less true , that in northern lands of Europe where the northern deities were worshipped , behind . the door of each residence where a family lived in common , there was

suspended a mallet , used only for the pious , yet in our view cruel purpose , of taking away what life was left in old and infirm relations . And down to modern times the mysteries of Hiram are celebrated with that murderous representation , the " setting maul . "—P . Cameron , D . C . L ., in " American Tyler . "

An Eloquent Defence.

AN ELOQUENT DEFENCE .

THE Rev . Keene Ryan , pastor of the Garfield Boulevard Presbyterian Church , of Chicago , a short time since , apropos of the reiterated antagonism of the United Presbyterians to Secret Societies , gave utterance to the following sentiments , which are worthy of reproduction :

I do not hesitate to say in defence of Secret Orders , that they have their place and work in the creation and economy of society as much as the church . The Masons and Oddfellows far outstrip the church in visiting the sick , relieving

the distressed , burying the dead , educating the orphans and lovingly and tenderly caring for the aged and infirm . In this one respect the Masons and the Oddfellows are more truly obeying the commission of Christ than is the church .

As long as a man or woman is well and happy , provided with clothes and food and fuel , the church is a good place for them to go to worship ; but let them become prostrate with sickness , get in prison or perchance die , and the church

become as soulless as the world . The church which tries to legislate Secret Orders from its communion , and unlike the Catholic church , provide some like secret society , will eventually destroy itself , and in no way interfere with the secret societies .

The Masons and the Oddfellows are no more " Christless and undeserving of recognition from the church , because they do not mention the name of Christ in the constitution

and bye-laws , nor demand allegiance to Him in their terms of subscription " than is the United States , for it nowhere mentions the name of Christ , nor demands of its citizens allegia ' nce to His name .

Let me say in conclusion , and in refutation of the charges brought against the Masons and the Oddfellows , that the most faithful members of the Garfield Boulevard Presbyterian church , the most spiritual and consecrated in their homes and