Is "Making Masons At Sight" A Grand Master's Prerogative ?

IS " MAKING MASONS AT SIGHT" A GRAND MASTER'S PREROGATIVE ?

BY BRO . JACOB NORTON . MACKEY , in his " Masonic Jurisprudence , " enumerated twenty-five Masonic landmarks , which landmarks aro irrepealable and unalterable , like " the laws of the Medes and Persians . " Anions ; these , he claims , that a Grand Master has an inherent rio * ht to make Masons

at sight . I shall first give his argument , and afterwards expose his fallacies . 1 st . LANDMARK FOURTH . — " Many persons ignorantly

snpposo that tho election oF a Grand Master is held in consequence of a law or regulation of the Grand Lodge . Snch , however , is not tho case . The office is indebted for its existence to a Landmark of Hie Order . Grand Masters

are to he found in tho records of the Institution long before Grand Lodges were established . * * * In fact , although , there has been a period within the records of history , and indeed of very recent date , when a Grand Lodge was unknown , there never has been a time when the Craft did not have their Grand Master . "

2 nd . LANDMARK FIFTH . — " The prerogative of a Grand Master * * * is , in consequence of this law , derived from ancient usage , and not from any special enactment . " 3 rd . LANDMARK SIXTH . " The statutory law of Masonry

requires a month * * * to elnpse between the presentation of a petition and the election of a candidate . But the Grand Master has the power to set aside or dispense with this probation , and allow a candidate to be initiated at once . "

4 th . LANDMARK SEVENTH . " The prerogative of the Grand Master to give Dispensations for opening and holding Lodges is another landmark . He may grant in virtue of this , to a sufficient number of Masons , the privilege of

meeting together and conferring degrees . The Lodges thus established are called " Lodges under Dispensation . " They are strictly the creatures of the Grand Master , created by his authority , existing only during his will and pleasure , and liable at any moment to be dissolved at his command .

5 th . LANDMARK EIGHTH . "The prerogative of a Grand Master to make Masons at sight , is a landmark which is closely connected with the preceding one * * * It is not to be supposed that the Grand Master can retire with

a profane into a private room , aud there without assistance confer the degrees of Masonry upon him . * * * The real and only mode of exercising this prerogative is this : The Grand Master summons to his assistance not less than

six other Masons , convenes a Lodge , and without any previous probation , but on sight of the candidate , confers the degrees upon him ; after which he dissolves the Lodge and dismisses the brethren . Lodges thus convened are called " Occasional Lodges . " This is the only way in

which any Grand Master within the records of the institution has ever been known to make a Mason at sight . The prerogative is dependent upon that of granting Dispensations , to open and hold Lodges . If the Grand Master has the power of granting any other Mason the privilege of

presiding over Lodges working by his dispensation , he may assume this privilege of presiding to himself ; and as no one can deny his right to revoke his dispensation granted to any number of brethren at a distance , and to dissolve tbe Lodge at pleasure , it will scarcely be contended that

he may not revoke his dispensation for a Lodge over which he himself has been presiding , within a day , and dissolve the Lodge as soon as the business for which he assembled it is accomplished . " This inherent prerogative cf the Grand Master , Dr .

Mackey traces to the Emperor Carausius in the third century , who granted the Masons a charter , and ordered Saint Alban to preside over their meetings as Grand

Master ; all which reads very logical , and I confess that I once believed in the Masonic Doctor ' s jurisprudence . But now I have some things to say against Dr . Mackey ' s reasoning .

1 st . It is true that four Grand Masters in the last century assumed the right of conferring the degrees upon high personages in temporary unwarranted Lodges , known as " occasional Lodges . " But as the Constitution ordained

that before a Lodge can confer the degrees it must first have a charter , and then it must be regularly consecrated , hence , the said " occasional Lodges" were certainly illegal , and the mere fact that the law was several

Is "Making Masons At Sight" A Grand Master's Prerogative ?

times violated , did not make it less binding before it was regularly repealed or modified . * A Grand Lodge has indeed the right of conferring upon its presiding Officer whatever power it pleases . But a Grand Lodge has also the right of diminishing tho Grand Master ' s powers . One thing

only neither Grand Lidge nor any other legislative body cannot do , viz . : that of enacting an irremovable and unre . pealable Landmark . True , theMedos and Persians have enacted irrepealnble laws , but where aro those laws nowj and how long were Ihoy obeyed ? The fact is , wherever

and whenever a reform was proposed to remove unjust laws , the selfish ones , who derived a benefit from the said unjust laws , for the want of a better argument , havo always pleaded about the " wisdom of tho ancients " and " ancient landmark . " But a little reflection will show ,

that the laws which may have suited thestato of barbarism in the middle ages , are unsuitable for enlightened comma , nities , and the same rule is equally applicable to our fraternity ; and hence the phrase " ancient Masonic Landmark , " is from every standpoint simply a Masonic absurdity .

Let us now take r \ retrospective view of the Masonic laws . Wo have now about , fifty pre-1717 Masons' codes of laws or Constitutions , all of which were designed for operative Masons In not ono of these Constitutions can we find the phase ' * Ancient landmarks , " and consequently the

regulations or laws m all of them differ more or less . But when the old organization ceased to be useful for the purpose ifc was originally intended , the Constitution was completely changed ; there is not a law in the thirty-nine sections of Anderson ' s Constitution which bears any resemblance to

the laws in the pre-1717 Constitutions . Truej " Freeborn " and " Sound-limb , " were left in the preface to Anderson ' s Constitution . But even these notions , -which Dr . Mackey calls landmarks , have been discarded in many jurisdictions .

Dr . Mackey reasons that the office of Grand Master is older than the Grand Lodge , and the Grand Master ' s prerogatives were derived from the charter granted by Carausius to Saint Alban in the third century . But in the first place no one knows what that charter was .

Second , who conferred on Carausius the power to endow all future Grand Masters with unrepealable prerogatives P Third , Saint Gildas in the sixth first wrote the story of the martyrdom of Saint Alban in the third century . But modern critics doubt not only the existence of such a

personage , as Saint Alban , bnt even doubt the existence of Saint Gildas . Fourth , neither the Chronicle ascribed to Saint Gildas , nor any other subsequent Monkish Chronicle , mention or allude to either the Masonry or the Grand Mastership of Saint Alban . And fifth , no intelligent

Masonic student believes now that the Masons anywhere had either a Grand Lodge or Grand Masfer before 1717 . If , therefore , the office of Grand Master is of so modern an origin , how can we call his prerogatives ancient landmarks ? To show , however , that Grand Masters were

always regarded as mere creatures of the representatives of the Lodges who elected them , and that they were as much subject to ordinances of the Constitution as any other member of the Craft , the reader will find in Anderson ' s Constitution , Section XXIX , as follows , viz ., previous to the election of Grand Master .

" The Grand Master and his Deputy , the Grand Wardens or the Stewards , the Secretary , the Treasurer , the Clerks , and every other person shall withdraw , and leave the Masters and Wardens of the particular Lodges alone , n order to consult amicably about the election of a new Grand Master . "

We see by the above , that the representatives of Lodges " alone , " were privileged to choose a Grand Master , and to show still further that a Grand Master could nob violate the Constitution with impunity , Section XIX . ordains : " If a Grand Master shonld abuse his power , and render