Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1867-08-03
mAsONIC LAW.

] The Comm q. on For. Correspondence
of the Gr' Lodge of Louisiana say, OF
I the proceedings OF 1865 of the Gr.'.
/ Lodge Of Alabama:
The Committee on Appeals made sew
/ eral reports, one Of which we think quite
! interesting, inasmuch as it seems to take
| the power Of inflicting punishment for
/ Masonic offeDses out of the hands of the
/ Lodge, and vesting it in the Master, a
! proceeding we must protest against, as
/ reversing all known Masonic law and
| usage on the subject. Charges and spec
! idcatons were preferredlagainsta Brother
| "To which be plead guilty, and for
/ which the Lodge voted TO reprimand
I him; the w Master refused to do So
I because the punishment to be inflicted
was not equivalenttot the crime. 3
I We are of opinion that the w. Master
was csrrpct in his refusal to reprimand,
/ and recommend that he be sustained,
and that he proceed TO infiict adequate
/ punishment"
Which recommendation was cOncurred
in by the Grand Lodge, and is now law
go far as that particular case is concerned,
and the Masonic destiny of one Of the
Brethren has been mercilessly confided
to the whim or caprice of a single man,
who differs from the majority Of his
Lodge on the extent Of the penalty to
be inflicted. We shsuld not like
this to happen To ourselves, or to be
long to any society wherein we might at
any time be condemned by any single
voice; in fact, we believe that it is
wrong for the prosecution to be allowed
to appeal at all, and think that the right
should be vested solely in defense, for if
the Lodge to which Brother belongs de-
clare him not guilty, or pass a sentence
which be is willing to submit, the mat
ter should be allowed to rest, and further
prosecution simply become persecution,
and is reprobated by every principle of
Masonry. We have, therefore, to differ
with our Alabama Brethren on this
point, and indeed, TO protest against
such action. But they present another
case in their decision, in which we can
not too heartily concur:
"a person may be convicted by the court Of
a cri 70 inal ofienke very uujusliy. The hnoing
OF Jury and the sentence OF a court are, by no
means, conclusive upon the Lodge that the per
son charged il guilty. To determine his guilt
as a Mason, the l. dge Is the sole tribunal. and
his guilt cen b. ascertained only by a legal Ma
sou tri4l. Uneer the cirrumstances stated, Il
becomes the duty Of the Lodge to investigate
the charges and, II Necessary, prefer charges,
try the mcmbe and assess such punishment as
the offense m y merit or declare his innocence
as The case may be This decision should b
made under jus apur. citation Of the duty OF
the Lodge TO the member accused Rrd its re
sponsl biiity 20 soi " and he prime pl OF Ma
sonny Ifauer such an Investigation and trial
the Brother should b. -oundinT ocant, Il wi 1 he
the duty Ol the Lodge and the Brethren TO stick
more closely 10 him n his distrs S."
The Louisiana Committee also say, in
reviewing the proceedings of the Grand
Lodge of California in the October Com
munieatioD, 1865: NJ. W. Gilbert h.
Claiborne, Grand Master, presented an
able and effective address, in which he
notices, smOng other matters, a COM
plaint OF the Grand Lodge of Nevada
against one OF the Subordinate Lodges Of
California, for conferring the degrees
upon one who had been formerly rejected
i'm the sister jurisdiction. Grand Master
Claiborne details that upon receipt of the
complaint, he, in person, visited the
offending Lodge, inquired into the mat
ter, and finding the charges well-fonnded,
and that deception had been practiced by
the candidate, caused charges to be pre-
ferred against him, which resulted in his
expulsion. 1t is a case Of speedy justice,
highly gratifying to all concerned, and
an example we should be pleased to see
universally followed. The Committee of
Grievances, before whom the matter
came on appeal, reported in favor Of con-
frming the proceedings and sentence,
anu lnflF ftbDluliDn was duopteOs We
cannot too fully indorse the deductions
to which they arrive, and quote the fol- !
lowing:
1" When an applicant presents bis petition TO /
become n Mason, he must come before the /
Loo & IN per ect good faith and most Implicit 7
siacerity. Their must e no false suggestion IN ]
his petition. nor fraudulent, wilful, or negli- 4
gent coucealment OF material facts. His petit /
tion stands as the basis o. the contract between
him and the Lodge and II it is false materially /
whether The falsehOOd proceed from culpable |
negl geuce or int ntiOnal fraud, in proof OF I
that fact the l. dee would be entitled, II so de-
sired, 10 rescind the contract on It's part and 1
expei or otherwise discipline the offending |
party
The same Committee says, reviewing I
the proceedings Of the Grand Lodge Of /
Indiana:
The committee on grievances submit /
ted several lengthy reports, reviewing q
great many cases Of Masonic discipline, |
and we note among other OF their de- !
eisiOns adopted, one which reverses the |
verdict Of Lodge dcQltitting one Of its
mem bers, and orders it to coRUict him
and eIpel him. This proceeding is
almost TOO horrible to contemplate, and
Tor the reason assigned IN a similar case,
in another part of this report, we must
energetieally protest against such iDjus
tice. and such disorgsnizing interference
in the affairs of Subordinate Lodges.