The Builder Magazine

THE FAITH THAT IS IN THEM---A FRATERNAL FORUM

Edited by BRO. GEO. E. FRAZER, President, The Board of Stewards

CONTRIBUTING EDITORS

Henry R. Evans, District of Columbia.

Harold A. Kingsbury, Connecticut.

Dr. Wm. F. Kuhn, Missouri.

Dr. John Lewin McLeish, Ohio.

Joseph W. Norwood, Kentucky.

Francis W. Shepardson, Illinois.

Silas H. Shepherd, Wisconsin.

Oliver D. Street, Alabama.

S. W. Williams, Tennessee.

Contributions to this Monthly Department of Personal Opinion are invited from each writer who has contributed one or more articles to THE BUILDER. Subjects for discussion are selected as being alive in the administration of Masonry today. Discussions of politics, religious creeds or personal prejudices are avoided, the purpose of the Department being to afford a vehicle for comparing the personal opinions of leading Masonic students. The contributing editors assume responsibility only for what each writes over his own signature. Comment from our Members on the subjects discussed here will be welcomed in the Correspondence column.

QUESTION NO. 1-- Shall Masonic Lodges encourage the formation of local Masonic social clubs and the establishment of Masonic club rooms dedicated to amusements and social meetings?

A Positive "No."

No. The stated and special communications the Lodge should meet all such demands. We need more brains and less mediocrity in candidates. Let us have less of the eternal grind in the ritual, but more study and investigation, less formality in the lodge room but more fellowship. Wm. F. Kuhn, Missouri.

Personal Experience.

The National Federation of Masonic Clubs I think has done a great work in creating more social interest. I was instrumental in founding one club in Lexington that now has more than 1,000 members and is the only one in Kentucky that belongs to the National Federation.

Also most lodges in Louisville where social clubs are attached, have made wonderful improvement in social intercourse. We need this department of Masonic of life almost more than any other, as of course, in the lodges there is little time to give to anything save conference of degrees. J. W. Norwood, Ky.

More Especially in a Smaller City or Town.

I believe that the maintenance of a Masonic club in connection with a Masonic lodge a most desirable thing, more especially in a smaller city or town where such opportunities may be limited. The spirit of comradeship which is thus developed and the opportunity which the club rooms afford for social meetings to which the wives and friends of Masons may be invited, is particularly appealing to me. I think such club rooms may be wisely conducted without the slightest suspicion of any advertising motive which might be counted directly antagonistic to all the principles of the fraternity. Francis W. Shepardson, Ill.

Yes. Masonry Must Grow as the World Grows.

My answer to your question regarding the formation of Masonic Social Clubs is emphatically Yes. If Masonry is to fill a position in the life of the World such that it is to be worth the while of any man to devote even the least iota of his time and interest to the support of Masonry then Masonry must grow as the World grows. Year by year and decade by decade, as civilization has advanced, the World has come to place a higher and yet higher value on clean social intercourse. Masonry owes it to the World and to itself to recognize and to promote this trend of public feeling. It is a trend that should be encouraged. An organization that does not fill a real world-need--that does not give of its best for the uplift of the World-- is useless, decaying, and a thing that should be eradicated to make a place for some worthwhile organization. A great need of the World today is better opportunities for the exchange of ideas--better opportunities for you to find out the other fellow's point of view and for him to find out your point of view, in order that each may see what is bad in the ideas of the other and what is good, and then mutually eliminate the bad and join forces to promote the good. The corner grocery with its cracker barrel and its redhot stove that formerly formed the rallying place for the men of the community is being eliminated. Something must take its place. Masonry has the organization. Let it do the work ! But few men will deliberately meet for the sole purpose of discussing everyday affairs--there must be a "drawing card." Let that card be the billiard table, the bowling alley, the card table, and the reading room--the interchange of ideas will come of itself. On "lodge night" in many a lodge the "lobby lodge" marshalls more members than does the lodge room lodge. Why? Because-thousands of Masons are starving for that sociability on which their lodges barely lift the veil. Masonry does not canvass for applicants. But if the institution is to survive it must add members. There very recently came to my attention the case of a fine chap, practically a total stranger in the city in which he had come to work some few months before. He decided to join either the Masons or the Odd Fellows in order (1) to identify himself with the right life of the community and (2) to put himself under good influences. So far as he could judge the two organizations were, apparently, one as good as the other in connection with the two points stated. He also wanted sociability- -a place to spend his evenings and to "get acquainted." The Odd Fellows had a Club, open every night and providing social opportunities and, on weekday nights, billiards, pool and cards. The Masons did not. He joined the Odd Fellows. Think it over! Yours fraternally, Harold A. Kingsbury, Conn.

* * *

Draw the Ties that Bind Two Million Men.

Masonry is one of the most important factors in the homogeny of our country. Nearly one-fiftieth of the entire population of the United States are members of the Order. This great Army of nearly 2,000,000 men are bound together by the most solemn ties for the development of ALL the people along lines that make for STRENGTH-- -morally, physically and spiritually--each brother working according to his opportunity and ability. Social organizations within our Lodges can but draw the ties that bind us, one to another, tighter and make it easier for us to see just where we can be of use to our brother-man. Here would be the benefit-- closer association in the various paths of life; more intimate knowledge, not only of each other's virtues, but of each other's faults; and a better chance to know where a proper application of some one or more of the "Five Points of Fellowship" can be beneficially applied. Care must be taken, of course, "Not to turn the hours of refreshment into intemperance and excess"--hence it might be well to make the Jr. W. an Ex Officio Officer of the proposed Club.

Conducted along the proper and healthy lines that are taught within the Lodge, such organizations ought to make for broader and nobler ideals in life. We cannot get into too close touch with our brethren; we cannot, without benefitting ourselves, aid them in the hours of pleasure, recreation, and pain; we cannot fail in good works when, through more intimate association, we learn to know each other's virtues, as well as faults--then we are better armed for the battle of Life --better PREPARED; and PREPAREDNESS is the note of the Hour.

"Man is a social being and was not designed to pass his life in solitude with all his thoughts concentrated upon himself; hence, in the social capacity, men should endeavor, by kind and friendly acts, to promote the happiness of one another."

This excerpt from the E. A. Charge in the Tennessee Craftsman, it seems to me, is most appropriate --and points the way. Fraternally yours, S. W. Williams, Tennessee.

* * * Favors the Club Under Lodge Control.

There is an all-too-increasing tendency nowadays among the craftsmen to forget that Masonry is a serious institution. More and more a lighter note has crept into the lodgeroom, and in the conferring of "the fourth degree" making its appeal through post-prandial platitudes, the real business of the lodge in seeing that its newly-made brethren are duly and truly prepared, is often overlooked. Many a brother comes to lodge only when he reads upon his announcement the, to him, welcome news, "The stewards will serve refreshments." In the larger lodges of the urban communities there is ordinarily quite enough of the social side of Masonic life rendering unnecessary any subsidiary lodge organization. In smaller or suburban communities, where a Lodge through purchase of property, the erection of a temple, or other contingencies has incurred an indebtedness a subsidiary social organization or club can help materially in devising entertainments and other means of lesgening lodge obligations.

For the average city one large central Masonic Club should meet every need, this too mainly for the accommodation and headquarters of visiting brethren.

In any event, the executive control of any organization attached to any particular lodge should be vested in the Master and other officers of that lodge, to assure the fact that the parasitic attachment should not eventually absorb the body upon which it had fastened. To interest the younger brethren, and afford a chance for social intercourse with the wives and sisters and daughters of Masons a Masonic club makes its appeal.

Always to my mind however with the restriction of absolute control by officers of the older and main body. The Lodge always comes first to the true Mason. Jno. Lewin McLeish, Ohio.

* * *

Club Rooms, But Not a Club for the Few.

As a means of promoting sociability, and consequently of its members finding congenial recreational pursuits, Freemasonry has been, in the past, a passive rather than an active agent. As a personal opinion I do not believe the Lodge should advocate the formation of local social clubs or establish Masonic club rooms for a particular part of the membership of the Lodge. As a. Lodge its interests are concerned in every member alike; each has the same things in common. Any attempt to bring a certain form of recreation or amusement under the protection of the Lodge might be quite consistently construed as favoritism.

We are reminded of a "Lodge Bulletin" which reads more like the baseball section of the "sporting extra" than a publication authorized and paid for by a Masonic Lodge.

There are innumerable ways in which the Lodge can promote the social life of its members which will be of benefit to all. Why try to promote a club which will be of benefit but to few?

If the Lodge desires to have "club rooms" let them be for all the members and have them equipped with adequate facilities to provide for a quite diversified t taste. The Lodge itself should have control and not delegate it to a "club."

These opinions are expressed with the most earnest desire that they be not construed as minimizing the value of the development of the social nature, of which I am an earnest advocate, but with the wish that the Fraternity strengthen its fraternal nature and carefully guard against anything which would tend to bring diverse interests within the portals of the Lodge. Silas H. Shepherd, Wis.

* * * Is the "Club Habit" Wholesome?

This is an important question and one whose importance is growing each day. It is my opinion that they should not. I believe the "club life" or the "club habit" on the whole not productive of wholesome results. A club styling itself Masonic and yet not subject to the absolute control of some regular Masonic body is liable to bring a reproach and discredit upon the Craft for which the latter is in no wise to blame and which it is powerless to prevent. If Masons desire to form clubs whose membership is restricted to members of the Craft very well, but do not allow them to appropriate the name Mason or any derivative thereof and do not give them offlcial endorsement. If then loafing and idleness and absentation from home and gambling and drinking grow up in such clubs, as they have so often done and are so likely to do, no blame or responsibility can attach to the fraternity. Suitable amusements and recreations can and should be occasionally provided by the lodge for its members and their families, but no separate organization for this purpose is necessary. Every lodge that is financially able and is so situated that it can should have a library supplied with good Masonic books and literature and an attractive, comfortable reading room, and every encouragement should be given the brethren to make full use of them. All the necessary "club life" can be obtained elsewhere. That the "Masonic Club" is pregnant with dangers must be obvious to all thinking Masons. O. D. Street, Alabama.

Where the Function of the Lodge Ends.

Masonry is a system of fraternalism in moral principles. Masonry teaches truth and exemplifies its meaning by organized rituals. It is the function of Masonry to educate its members to the highest possible standards of moral truth so that each member may contribute his share to the progress of civilization in his own day and generation. To this end it is proper that Masons should build and furnish temples in all beauty that Masonic truth may be taught efficiently. To this end it is proper that Masons should read Masonic literature and attend Masonic lectures, study clubs, schools of instruction, and governing conventions.

It is the province of Masonry to exemplify morality and truth. It is the privilege and duty of the individual Mason to carry this truth into all the phases of his life. The good Mason is a good family man, a good business man and a good citizen. So should he also be a good church man or a good club man, if he finds his place in these activities. There is a definite place for the Mason in politics, but the thought of a Masonic political party is abhorrent. There is a place for the Mason in the church of his choice, but there is no place in Masonry for the Masonic Church. What I have learned in Masonry has led me to place a high value on family protection such as is afforded by life insurance, but I, for one, have not the slightest intention of patronizing a "Masonic life insurance company." And I do not expect any Masonic lodge to serve me either as a commercial association or as a social club.

It is the right of Masons, as individuals, to organize social clubs and to restrict membership in such clubs as they see fit. The Masons comprising the membership of, say, The Craft Club, have the same right to refuse membership in their club to a brother Master Mason as members of the Knights Templar have to refuse membership in their Commandery to a Brother Mason.

- Geo. E. Frazer, Illinois.

----o----

JUSIPRUDENCE STUDIES

BY BRO. W. E. ATCHISON, ASS'T SEC'Y

IV. DIMITS

State	To whom dimit may be issued	When request for dimit is received by Lodge, may same be issued immediately or must request lie over? How long?	How Issued	Vote necessary to admit to membership a brother holding a dimit
Alabama	Master Mason 1	Immediately	By majority vote of Lodge	Unanimous
Arizona	Master Mason	Immediately	By majority vote of Lodge	Unanimous
Arkansas	Master Mason	Immediately	By majority vote of Lodge	Unanimous
California	Master Mason	Immediately	By majority vote of Lodge 2	Unanimous
Colorado	Entered Apprentice, Fellow Craft or Master Mason 3	Request must lie over to first subsequent regular meeting	By order of Master	Unanimous
Connecticut	Master Mason	Immediately	By majority vote of Lodge 4	Unanimous
Delaware	Master Mason	Immediately	By majority vote of Lodge	Unanimous
District of Columbia	Master Mason	Immediately	By order of Master	Unanimous
Florida	Master Mason 5	Immediately	By order of Master	Unanimous

Georgia	Entered Apprentice, Fellow Craft or Master Masons 6	Immediately 7	By unanimous vote of Lodge by secret ballot	Unanimous
Idaho	Master Mason 8	Immediately	By majority vote of members present	Unanimous
Illinois	Master Mason	Request must lie over to first subsequent regular meeting	By order of Master	Unanimous
Indiana	Entered Apprentice, Fellow Craft or Master Mason 9	Immediately	By majority vote of Lodge	Unanimous
Iowa	Master Mason	Immediately	By order of Master	Two-thirds of members present and voting by secret ballot
Kansas	Master Mason	Immediately 10	By majority vote of Lodge	Unanimous
Kentucky	Entered Apprentice, Fellow Craft or Master Mason	Immediately	By order of Master	Unanimous
Louisiana	Master Mason	Immediately	By consent of Lodge	Unanimous
Maine	Master Mason	Immediately 11	By majority vote of Lodge	Unanimous
Maryland	Master Mason	Immediately	By order of Master	Unanimous
Massachusetts	Master Mason	Immediately	See footnote 12	Unanimous
Michigan	Master Mason	Immediately 13	By majority vote of Lodge	Unanimous
Minnesota	Master Mason	Immediately	By order of Master	Unanimous

Mississippi	Master Mason	Request must lie over to first subsequent regular meeting	By consent of Lodge	Unanimous
Missouri	Entered Apprentice, Fellow Craft 14 or Master Mason 15	Immediately	By majority vote of Lodge	Unanimous
Montana	Entered Apprentice, Fellow Craft or Master Mason	Immediately	By majority vote of Lodge	Unanimous
Nebraska	Master Mason	Immediately	By order of Master	Unanimous
Nevada	Master Mason 16	Immediately	By consent of Lodge	Unanimous
New Hampshire	Master Mason	Immediately	By majority vote of Lodge	Unanimous
New Jersey	Master Mason	Immediately	By majority vote of Lodge	Unanimous
New Mexico	Master Mason	Immediately	By order of Master	Unanimous
New York	Master Mason	Immediately	By consent of Lodge	Unanimous
North Carolina	Master Mason	Immediately	By order of Master	Unanimous
North Dakota	Master Mason 17	Immediately	By order of Master	Unanimous
Ohio	Master Mason	Immediately	By majority vote of Lodge	Unanimous 18
Oklahoma	Master Mason 19	Request must lie over to first subsequent regular meeting	By order of Master	Unanimous
Oregon	Master Mason 20	Immediately	Bay consent of Lodge	Unanimous
Pennsylvania 21
* Rhode lsland	Master Mason	Immediately	By consent of Lodge	Unanimous
South Carolina	Master Mason	Immediately	By consent of Lodge	Unanimous
*South Dakota	Master Mason	Immediately	By consent of Lodge	Unanimous
Tennessee	Master Mason	Immediately	By order of Master	Unanimous
Texas	Master Mason	Immediately 22	By unanimous vote of Lodge	Unanimous
Utah	Master Mason	Immediately	By consent of Lodge	Unanimous

Vermont	Master Mason	Immediately	By majority vote of Lodge	Unanimous
Virginia	Master Mason	Immediately	By order of Lodge or Master	Unanimous
Washington	Master Mason	Immediately	By order of Master	Unanimous
* West Virginia	Master Mason	Immediately	By order of the Lodge	Unanimous
Wisconsin	Master Mason	Immediately	By consent of Lodge	Four-fifths of members present
Wyoming	Master Mason	Immediately	By consent of Lodge	Unanimous

*Referred to Grand Secretary for confirmation but no reply received up to time of going to press.

The application for a dimit must be made at a regular meeting (stated communication) of the Lodge; in some jurisdictions may be made either orally or in writings in others it must be made in writing; the applicant must be "clear of the books," i.e., he must have paid all dues and assessments against him to the date of the issuance of the dimit, and not under charges of unmasonic conduct, etc.

Mackey holds the word "dimit" to be a modern Americanism and a wholly indefensible corruption of the technical word "demit," and other authorities have written at length upon the subject; Some favoring "dimit" and others "demit." Notwithstanding Mackey's statement that "dimit" is incorrect, we find that out of the forty-nine Grand Jurisdictions in the United States but eight adopt the "e," the other forty-one spelling it "dimit."

(1) An Entered Apprentice or Fellow Craft, in good standing, may be granted a "certificate of dismissal." Such certificate is in the nature of a dimit and the holder thereof may apply upon it for advancement in another Lodge.

(2) Dimit without recommendatory certificate may be issued by Secretary without action of Lodge.

(3) An Entered Apprentice or Fellow Craft in good Standing, who permanently removes from the jurisdiction of his Lodge, shall he entitled to a dimit upon the terms provided for Master Masons. Provided, that if an objection has been made to the advancement of such Entered Apprentice or Fellow Craft, the Lodge shall not grant him a dimit.

(4) Lockwood's "Masonic Law and Practice" adopted by the Grand Lodge of Connecticut "so far as it does not conflict with the Constitution, etc., of the Grand Lodge," contains this provision:

"Any member of a Lodge, except an installed officer and those under Masonic charges or in arrears to the Lodge, has a right to dimit, provided his withdrawal will not materially impair the efficiency of the Lodge." (Chapter XI, sec. 2.)

"Such dimission is effected by the passage of a resolution, by majority vote, granting dimission." (Chapter XI, sec. 3.)

But the Regulations of the Grand Lodge of Connecticut state that a Brother is conditionally entitled to a dimit. Hence, if a Lodge refuses the same without good reason, he can enforce his demand for a dimit through the Grand Lodge. This seems to abrogate the Lockwood provision as to "majority vote."

A Brother stricken from the roll, and under no charges, has a right to receive a certificate from the Lodge upon payment of his dues, to the effect that he was a Mason in good standing; that he was stricken from the roll for non-payment of dues, and that his dues have been paid, and he is free and clear of the books. Such a certificate answers all the purposes of a dimit. A dimit cannot be granted upon payment of dues in such case because the Brother has already ceased to be a member.

(5) A regulation permitting the issuance of dimits to Entered Apprentices and Fellow Crafts was rescinded at the last Annual Communication of the Grand Lodge of Florida in January, 1917.

(6) When an Entered Apprentice or Fellow Craft removes from the jurisdiction of his Lodge he may be issued a certificate entitling him to receive the remaining degrees. The application for such certificate shall be made at a regular meeting and lie over to the next regular meeting and the certificate shall then only be granted upon an unanimous secret ballot.

(7) Every member in good standing and clear on the books is entitled to dimit upon application. A secret ballot must be had upon the request for dimit and if one or more blackballs appear the matter rests until the next meeting, when if no charges are preferred the Secretary issues the dimit without further action by the Lodge.

(8) No Lodge can grant a dimit to an Entered Apprentice; but in case of removal beyond the jurisdiction of the Lodge in which he was initiated the Lodge may furnish him a certificate setting forth the fact of his regular initiation. - G.M. Kennaly, 1873.

The word dimit simply means to send away, to let go; consequently a certificate of withdrawal, either with or without a recommendatory certificate, is a dimit. - G.M. Stevenson, 1877.

(9) An Entered Apprentice or Fellow Craft, free from charges, may, upon written application and a unanimous vote, dimit from a Lodge. At the time of granting such dimit to an Entered Apprentice or Fellow Craft, one-third of the total fee paid shall be returned for each degree which he has not received.

(10) Provided, that if on the presentation of such application any member shall give notice of the desire to prefer charges against the applicant action shall be deferred, not exceeding thirty days, to allow full opportunity for filing charges.

(11) Or a member may give notice at a regular meeting that at the next he shall apply for a dimit and at that time, if his dues are paid and no charges have been filed, it is the Secretary's duty to give him a certificate of honorable discharge from membership. The Lodge may also vote him such recommendation as it sees fit.

(12) A Master Mason, being square upon the books, is entitled to a dimit as a matter of right. The application is read in open Lodge for record. No one has any right to object.

(13) No member shall be permitted to dimit from his Lodge until he shall present a certificate from some Lodge that he has petitioned for membership and been elected therein. On presentation of such certificate and his own written request, the Lodge may issue a certificate of dimit, and transmit the same to the Lodge electing the Brother to membership. The dimit issued becomes operative when the Brother has consummated his membership in the other Lodge by signing the by-laws thereof.

(This refers to members affiliating with other Michigan Lodges, only. When a Brother has acquired a residence in another Grand jurisdiction he shall be granted a dimit upon application therefor.)

(14) Dimits granted to Entered Apprentices and Fellow Crafts only upon removal from jurisdiction of Lodge.

(15) No Master Mason who has been raised in a Missouri Lodge since 1908 and who has not passed a satisfactory examination on the lecture of the Third Degree can be granted a dimit.

(16) No member shall be permitted to dimit from the Lodge of which he is a member until he shall present a certificate from some warranted Lodge that he has petitioned for membership therein. Provided, that when any member shall be or become a resident of another Grand Lodge jurisdiction, a dimit may be granted to him direct and without a compliance with the foregoing provision.

But any member of a Lodge against whom charges are not pending, and whose dues and indebtedness to the Lodge are paid, may withdraw from membership by presenting a written application therefor at a stated communication. The Lodge shall grant the request of the Brother by dropping his name from the rolls, and his membership shall thereby be terminated, and he shall be subject to the disabilities of an unaffiliated Master Mason.

(17) Special dimits may be issued to Entered Apprentices and Fellow Crafts removing without the jurisdiction.

(18) Except in the case of a Brother applying to a Lodge which granted his dimit if he has not joined another Lodge within three years, when he may be reinstated by a three-fourths vote of the Lodge.

(19) A Master Mason who has not passed an examination upon his proficiency in the lecture of the Third Degree shall not be granted a dimit.

(20) Dimits shall be issued only to Master Masons, members in good standing in Lodges in this jurisdiction, who have removed from the jurisdiction.

(21) Extract from the digest of decisions of the Grand Lodge and Grand Masters, Ahiman Rezon, Pennsylvania, p. 186:

The words dimit and withdrawal card have no place in Masonic Law and practice. A dimit, strictly speaking, is a letter of dismissal from one body to another - as from one church to another church. In Freemasonry, instead of letters dismissory, dimits, or withdrawal cards, we have Lodge Certificates, which are preceded by resignations of membership. A Brother desiring to change his membership from one Lodge to another, on payment of his dues in full, may resign his membership, when the officers of the Lodge must give him a Lodge Certificate, stating that he has regularly withdrawn, and recommending him to the Fraternity. Or, if a Brother, having been suspended for non-payment of dues, should pay his dues in full and be restored to good Masonic standing, he would then be entitled to receive a similar certificate, stating that he has ceased to be a member of the Lodge, and is in good Masonic standing. It must be given to him, on his application by the Master and the officers of the Lodge. They are not privileged to refuse it.

The Lodge has nothing to do with granting a Lodge Certificate, erroneously galled a dimit. All that the Lodge has to do in the matter is to act upon the resignation. Failure to comply with the law in this respect, has been the cause of requiring Lodges to pay dues for Brethren after they had intended to resign, but had not regularly done so; the minutes of a Lodge simply showing that a dimit or withdrawal card was granted, which, as said before, is not the work of the Lodge, and has no place on its minutes.

(22) When application for dimit shall be made and dues paid, and no charges are pending, the Lodge may proceed to grant the dimit at once by ballot; and if unanimous the same shall be entered on record; but if not unanimous the application shall stand over for one month; and if no charges be preferred an order for a dimit shall be entered on record.

FREEMASONRY is so closely interwoven with the History of Ancient Architectural Societies that it would be almost impossible to deal fairly with the subject before us, were we to exclude the important Factor Architecture. Our Ancient Brethren considered Geometry and Masonry as synonymous terms. Without a thorough knowledge of the science of Geometry, Architectural Societies in their very perfection could not have existed. We are therefore brought face to face with the pointed and important question. Were the Jews ever promoters of Architecture or Geometry, one of the liberal arts and sciences? If it can be historically shown that they were, then the advocates of the Temple Origin might have something substantial on which to support their theory; but we have to deal with a question of fact, not one of sentiment or tradition, and therefore, under the first heading, we will consider the characteristics of the Jewish people and their legitimate connection with the First and Second Temples.

From the Scriptures and Josephus we gather that the Jews, as a nation, were pastoral in habits and inclination, warlike by force of necessity. The ruins of antiquity disclose no trace of anything that would warrant the opinion that, as a nation, they were skilled in architecture. Their sojourn in Egypt was that of bondage in some of its very worst phases; and in so far only as being labourers, had they any connection with the erection of the Temples, public works and other buildings, for which Egypt was then so renowned. No individual Jew is referred to as having excelled in the mysteries of architecture, or of having been initiated into the mysteries of Egypt; and if perchance Moses, who is said to have been learned in the wisdom of the Egyptians (and in which might have been included the knowledge of architecture, taught him by the Priests) was the exception, yet, his sojourn for so long in the plains of Midian as a shepherd, and his subsequent wanderings in the wilderness with the Israelites, could have afforded neither the opportunity for him to have instructed them, nor for them to have learned and practiced the art of building, as known by, and so thoroughly understood and practiced by the Egyptians. As therefore they could have learned nothing from Moses, by whom could they subsequently have been instructed, and presuming that they had instructors, what opportunities had they to avail of them, and benefit thereby?

Under their Judges, they had to hold their own at times by exterminating the surrounding nations and tribes, and were in turn held in subjection by others, and what could have been more demoralizing and preventative to architectural pursuits, than the wholesale slaughters recorded in the Jewish Scriptures ?

Under Saul and David they experienced somewhat a repetition of the period when Joshua ruled. Incessant warfare, resulting in such close contact with the idolatrous nations by whom, at times, they were conquered and held in subjection, afforded them many opportunities of witnessing their false worship, and thus forgetting the God of Israel. When He saw them adopting the idolatrous habits and customs of their neighbours, we would be justified in presuming that He deemed it advisable that they should have a building in which to worship Him--a building and a ceremonial which would be attractive to the senses and tend to preserve for Him that worship and adoration which, as the true God, was His due. To accomplish this, and further check their idolatry, we may further presume that He put it into the heart of David, who had a most wonderful conception of the attributes of the Most High T. G. Geometrician of the Universe to build for Him a temple, one which would be a worthy tribute from the Jewish nation, then so powerful, and as vastly superior to anything which the world had then seen, as the Great I Am, the Alpha and Omega was superior to the Gods of the Heathen--a temple whose ornate ritual and appointments should transcend those of the mysteries of Adonis, Osiris, &c., &c., as had been practiced by and amongst them. David was privileged to conceive the idea of a building to the God of Israel, but to our traditional Grand Master, Solomon, was afforded the opportunity of carrying it into execution.

Had the Jews at that period possessed architects or Architectural Societies, surely David would have availed of them, in preference to seeking aid from the heathen ?

His correspondence, and that subsequently by Solomon with Hiram, King of Tyre, prove conclusively that, without the Tyrian's aid, nothing could have been done on the scale that was accomplished. Referring to I. Chronicles, 22nd chap., 2-4 verses, we find thus: "And David commenced to gather together Strangers that were in the Land of Israel, and he set Masons to hew wrought stones and build the House of God, also cedar trees in abundance, for the Sidonions and they of Tyre brought much cedar wood to David." Compare also Kings v. chapter, 6th verse.

The Tyrian architects were known as Dyonisiacs, and one of their peculiarities of construction was "to have the timber and the stones hewn and prepared in the quarries and forests, so that they could be readily fitted together when carried to the locality where the building was being erected"; and therefore, after carefully comparing the Scripture and other accounts of the building of the temple, the only correct conclusion we can arrive at is, that to Solomon, King of Israel, personally can be accorded no credit, save and except for carrying out his father's wishes, and for supplying the funds and costly jewels.

He knew no more of architecture than the meanest of his subjects, and in this respect was no wiser than his father David. We have no record of Solomon having visited Egypt, or that he had been initiated into the mysteries of that country, although, from I. Kings, 3rd chapter, 1st verse, we learn that he "took to wife the daughter of Pharoah, King of Egypt."

For him to have been conversant with architecture, and thus qualified to have been one of the Grand Masters, and one of the three only who possessed the alleged Master Mason's word, he must necessarily have been thus instructed by the Priests; but nowhere do we gather, even by inference, that he was addicted to the Egyptian superstitions--as at times he had been to those of the surrounding nations, from whom he had taken many of his wives-- therefore we may safely hold the opinion that architecture with its peculiar mysteries was a subject not included in the wisdom of Solomon.

We ask ourselves, therefore, this other equally important question: Why do the First and Second Temples form such prominent factors in the system of Freemasonry?--and why is King Solomon claimed as one of the first three Grand Masters ? Of the trio, two were Tyrians-- the one a King, the other the most skillful artist and worker in metals. They were worshippers in the rites of Bacchus or Dyonisus-- certainly not worshippers of the God of Israel.

As therefore Solomon's Temple could not have been built, but with the assistance of the Dyonisiacs, supplied by Hiram, King of Tyre, and superintended by Hiram Abiff, and as Solomon himself knew nothing of architecture, and all that the Jews had to do with the construction of the Temple was merely in the capacity of overseers or superintendents of the labourer, as labourers, for felling the trees in the forests of Lebanon, and in excavating the stones from the quarries nigh to Jerusalem--in carrying to Jerusalem the prepared materials--leaving it to the skilled Tyrian workmen to complete from the foundation to the cope stone. On what ground can Jewish Masons of today claim that from their ancestors of the temple period are to be traced the origin of speculative Freemasonry?

Did the labours of the Dyonisiacs and of Hiram Abiff cease with the completion of the temple? We know to the contrary, for from Scripture we learn that Solomon built palaces for his wives and that his reign was noted for the magnificent public buildings at Jerusalem and elsewhere, which were erected under the superintendence of Hiram Abiff, whose death did not occur until several years subsequent. Josephus refers to him as Abdemon, and tells us that he returned to Tyre, where he died at a good old age. We thus ascertain that Hiram Abiff did not die at Jerusalem--so much therefore for the legend of the 3rd degree which, to be applicable to such a system as speculative Freemasonry, and thoroughly appreciated byus, can only be accepted as a most beautiful allegory-- introduced with the view of inculcating that important Masonic doctrine, that man's body is as immortal as his soul.

At King Solomon's death, the kingdom having been split up into the contending factions led by Rehoboam and Jeroboam, we can here readily reconcile the decadence of architectural pursuits and the departure of the foreign architects and workmen from the midst of civil warfare.

The subsequent history of the Jewish people until their captivity into Babylon, was one of warfare, civil and otherwise, and even admitting that during Solomon's reign the Jews had been instructed by the Dyonisiacs in the mysteries of architecture, the wars subsequent to his death, and the period of their captivity, left them no opportunities for co-operation and keeping intact as an association, the principles which they might have learnt from those whom Hiram of Tyre had originally sent to them. To a certain extent, Scripture is silent as to their occupation when in bondage. They might, or they might not have assisted the Babylonians in the erection of the buildings and other works of that period for which that city was so famous; but, granting that they had the advantages practicing with the Babylonians that which they may have learnt from the Tyrians, they must have, at a later period felt themselves sadly deficient in essentials, and incompetent alone to undertake the erection of the Second Temple, for we learn from Ezra (chap. iii.) that Zerubbabel, the last of the kingly race, and Joshua, the Priest anno mundi 3468, before the foundations were yet laid, "gave money also unto the Masons and to the Carpenters, and meat and drink and oil unto them of Zidon, to them of Tyre, to bring cedar trees from Lebanon to the Sea of Joppa, according to the grant that they had of Cyrus, King of Persia;" and if we compare Ezra vi. chap. 3rd, and 4th verses, it will be found that to Cyrus were the Jews indebted not only for permission to build the Second Temple, not only for means to purchase materials and defray the expenses of the hired foreign labour (Tyrian), but they were indebted to him for the general plan, both as to size, and stability.

Consequent on the Samaritan's obstruction, they were compelled to cease for a time, and we note that it was not until A. M. 3484, or 16 years after, that Scripture makes any reference to the Prophets Haggai and Zechariah, therefore A. M. 3468, when the Jews had returned from Babylon, and the rubbish of the First Temple had been cleared away for the foundations of the second, we note that, as a Scriptural historical fact only, Zerubbabel and Joshua, the one the descendant from the kingly line, the other the priestly, took part, the conjoint action of four inclusive of Haggai and Zechariah (the Prophets), so that the three orders, kingly, priestly, and prophetical, should be simultaneously represented, was not, until A. M. 3484, when Darius had forbidden all opposition to them; and if we but note from II. Chron. chap. xxxiv vers. 8, 11, 14, that it was in Anno Mundi 3381 that Josiah, the King, set about repairing the First Temple, and that in so doing, Hilkiah, the priest, then found "a book of the Law of the Lord given to Moses." I would ask my Masonic brethren of a higher degree: how is the discovery of the Law at the erection of the Second Temple reconcilable with Scripture? Here we have another legend, but which I leave for the present.

I have advisedly gone somewhat lengthily into det ails connected with the First and Second Temples. The historical facts connected therewith differ so materially with the Masonic legends, is it reasonable to suppose that to the Jewish nation Freemasonry is indebted for the construction of the Craft Degrees ? Had the Jewish doctors originated the system, or anything similar thereto, for the purpose of teaching morality and inculcating certain doctrines, surely they would have perceived the gross inconsistency (1) of claiming for King Solomon and their ancestors credit for architectural qualifications, knowing full well that the history of their race, from the days of Abraham, is a direct contradiction thereto--(2) of framing a degree based on the discovery of the Sacred Law by Zerubbabel, Hagg