535 Morgan in the boat, three of the party went to the village and met a committee of two Canadian Masons, as agreed.

No official inquiry has ever brought out the names of these, and I shall ever be silent concerning them. We came back to the boat, the Canadian brethren bringing a lantern. Bruce called Morgan up the bank, out of the boat, and the party sat down together on the grass. Now Colonel King required of Morgan the most explicit consent to the movements that had brought him there. By the aid of questions from the whole party, Morgan admitted as follows:

"(1) That he had contracted with Miller and others to write an Exposition of Masonry, for which he was to receive a compensation.

(2) That he had never been made a Mason in any lodge, but had received the Royal Arch degree in a regular manner.

"(3) That Miller and the other partners had utterly failed to fulfil the terms of the contract with him.

**(4) That Whitney had paid him fifty dollars, as agreed, and he had agreed to destroy the written and printed work as far as possible and furnish no more, and that before leaving Batavia he had done what he promised in that way.

*** (5) That it was impossible now for Miller to continue the "Illustrations" as he [Morgan] had written them. If he published any book, it would have to be made from some other person's materials.

"(6) That he had been treated by Chesebro, Whitney, Bruce, and all of them with perfect kindness on the journey.

** (7) That he was willing and anxious to be separated from Miller and from all idea of a Masonic exposé; wished to go into the interior of Canada and settle down as a British citizen; wished to have his family sent him as soon as possible; expected five hundred dollars when he reached the place, as agreed upon; expected more money from year to year, to help him, if necessary.

(8) Finally expressed his sorrow for the uproar his proceedings had made, sorrow for the shame and mortification of his friends, and had "no idea that David C. Miller was such a d-d scoundrel as he had turned out to be."'

"We had ascertained at the village that the Canadian brethren would be ready to perform their part and remove Morgan westward by the latter part of that or the first of the succeeding week, but objected so strenuously to having him remain among them in the meantime, that it was agreed he [Morgan] should be taken to the American side until the Canadians should notify us they were ready.

"This was explained to Morgan, and he agreed to it. It was then understood that he was to remain in the magazine without attempting to get out until matters were arranged for his removal. The party then rowed back, and Morgan was left in the bomb-proof of the magazine.

"The party then left, breakfasted at Youngstown, and went up to Lewiston on the Rochester boat that passed up, with passengers for the Royal Arch installation that occurred there that day (Thursday, September 14th). There was quite a company of us there, and the intelligence was freely communicated that Morgan was in Fort Niagara, and the greatest satisfaction expressed at the news that the manuscripts and printed sheets had been destroyed, and that in a few days Morgan would be effectually separated from the company that had led him to his ruin. During the day it was reported to us at Lewiston that 'Morgan had gone into the theatricals,' and was shouting and alarming the people in the vicinity. Nothing would quiet him except rum, which was given him.

"Lawson, Whitney, and a few others remained in the vicinity until Sunday night (17th), when the two Canadian brethren came over, received Morgan, receipted to Whitney for the money ($500), and crossed to the west side of the river.

"They travelled on horseback, three horses in the party; Monday night, the 18th, they rode some thirty miles further to a point near the present city of Hamilton, where the journey ended. Morgan signed a receipt for the $500. He also signed a declaration of the facts of the case. "We supposed we could at any time trace him up. We felt that the Craft would be the gainer children to him, as agreed.

by our labors. We were prepared to send his wife and

"What a tremendous blunder we all made! It was scarcely a week until we saw what trouble was before us. It was not a fortnight until Col. King sent a confidential messenger into Canada to see Morgan and prepare to bring him back.

"But, alas, he who had sold his friends at Batavia had also sold us. He had gone. He had left the village within forty-eight hours after the departure of those who had taken him there.

"He was traced east to a point down the river not far from Port Hope, where he sold his horse and disappeared. He had doubtless got on board a vessel there and sailed out of the country. At any rate, that was the last we ever heard of him."

Such is the true account of the deportation of William Morgan as given by John Whitney.

Fraternally Yours.

Dene B. Authony.

DIVISION XII.

MASONIC JURISPRUDENCE.

A Comprehensive History of the Origin and Development of Masonic Law: The Relation of Governing Bodies to one another; the Relation of Grand Lodges to their Constituent Lodges, and to Individual Members of the Craft; the Relation of Lodges to one another, to their Members, and of Masons to one another; the Origin and Use of Public Masonic Forms and Ceremonies; and the Customs and Peculiarities of the Craft in general.

BY JOSIAH H. DRUMMOND, P.G.M.,

Past General Grand High Priest of the General Grand Royal Arch Chapter, United States, America; Past Grand High Priest of the Grand Chapter of Maine; Past General Grand Master of the General Grand Council, Royal and Select Masters, of the United States; Past Grand Master of the Grand Council of Maine; Past Grand Commander of the Grand Commandery of Knights Templar of Maine; Past M. P. Sov. Gr.. Com:. of the Supreme Council for the Northern Masonic Jurisdiction, United States, America, A..A..S.. Rite.

CHAPTER I.

HISTORY OF MASONIC JURISPRUDENCE, ETC., ETC.

Foundation of Masonic Law. - The wonderful growth of the Fraternity of Free and Accepted Masons, and the consequent multiplication of governing bodies, all peers and sovereigns over Masonic affairs within their respective territorial jurisdictions, have given rise to a jurisprudence peculiar to the Institution, and yet largely based upon general principles recognized by all civilized communities and associations as inherent rights, and necessarily growing out of the very existence of human beings destined to have relations with one another.

The recognition of immutable laws relating to the Institution, which the Fraternity itself cannot change and remain Masonic in character, imposes upon

the governing bodies the duty of seeing that "the Ancient Landmarks be preserved": this duty introduces into the Masonic system of jurisprudence a feature peculiar to itself.

The form of Masonic government, by which the sovereign body governs the individual chiefly through subordinate bodies created by itself, adds to its jurisprudence another feature little known to civil law.

The Masonic jurisprudence of the present day embraces the relations of governing bodies to one another, the relations between them and their subordinates, and between them and individual members of the Craft, the relations between subordinates and between them and their members and other Masons, and the relations of Masons to one another.

Like the common law, Masonic jurisprudence is now the product of the growth of many years; and like municipal law it springs from fundamental principles, from usage, and from the enactments of governing bodies.

While the law relating to all the departments of Masonry is similar in character, the history of Masonic Jurisprudence more properly appertains to the Symbolic degrees, and unless otherwise expressly stated this discussion will be limited accordingly.

The Relations of Governing Bodies with one another. The laws governing the relations of Grand Lodges to one another have comparatively more recently come before the Craft for consideration; but they seem naturally to come first in a sketch of the origin and growth of the whole system.

Without regard to their origin, Grand Lodges are conceded to be sovereigns and consequently equals in all their powers and rights. They are, to all intents and purposes, Masonic Nations. As they are equal, no one can enact law for another; and no one can decide for another what Masonic law is, neither as affecting their mutual relations nor in any other respect. Yet the moment there are two or more Grand Lodges fraternizing with each other, there must needs be some rules of conduct affecting their intercourse with one another, — to be first ascertained and declared as cases arise.

Naturally the laws affecting civil nations in their mutual relations were looked to in order to ascertain those appropriate to Masonic nations.

Some Masonic writers have erroneously assumed that all "laws of nations" are the result of concurrent enactment, and, therefore, that no Masonic laws affecting the relations of Grand Lodges can be said to exist, except such as have received the express sanction of all Grand Lodges, or, at any rate, can bind only those which have expressly given their sanction to such laws. But this is not true of civil nations; and the reasons, therefore, apply with greater force to Masonic nations.

It has long been held by writers upon International Law, or the Law of Nations, that there are four classes of that law :

(1) The voluntary law of nations, arising from their presumed consent. (2) The customary law, arising from their acquiescence or tacit consent.

(3) The conventional law, arising from express consent or actual agreement. And (4) The necessary law, arising from "the application of the law of nature" to states.

The history of the Institution shows the recognition of all these and their application to inter-Grand Lodge relations. But, as already stated, the foregoing distinctions have not always been recognized; but it has been assumed that all laws, applicable to the intercourse of Grand Lodges with one another, are binding upon any given Grand Lodge only by its express assent thereto. But this is not in accordance with sound principle, nor with the law observed by civil nations.

"We call that the necessary Law of Nations which consists in the application of the law of nature to nations. It is necessary because all nations are absolutely bound to observe it."

Nations are naturally free, equal, and independent of one another; each Nation must be left in the peaceable enjoyment of its natural rights; the government of a Nation is necessarily exclusive over all its territory; all rights on the part of foreigners are excluded, and no State has the smallest right to exercise any act of sovereignty in another State. These are among the "necessary laws of nations."

The first two of these have been always applied to Grand Lodges as a matter of course; the third has been sometimes disputed by Grand Lodges, which claimed no territorial jurisdiction, but undertook to exercise government over individuals alone; but such bodies would not now be recognized as regular Grand Lodges. The fourth has been more frequently contested by a few Grand Lodges, which have rightfully governed lodges in a territory in which, later, an independent Masonic government has been established and recognized, and which have claimed to govern such of those lodges as should choose to adhere to their former allegiance. If Great Britain had undertaken to exercise sovereignty over communities in the United States, which should have chosen to adhere to her after the recognition of independence, her claim would have been held to be preposterous, and her attempt to maintain it an outrageous violation of the Law of Nations: the same principle applies to Grand Lodges, and the very general consensus of opinion is now to that effect. The application of these laws to several important questions has been the occasion for considerable discussion by Masonic writers. Some Grand Lodges hold the law to be that when a candidate presents his petition to a lodge having jurisdiction, and it is received, he becomes, in Masonic language, "the work" of that lodge, and no other lodge can afterward interfere with this work. If the candidate is rejected, he remains perpetually under the exclusive jurisdiction of that lodge, even though he removes into another Grand Lodge jurisdiction. Other Grand Lodges hold that when a person, rejected in one jurisdiction, moves into another, he becomes subject to the laws of the latter, and freed from those of the former: so that it has often happened that a candidate has been rejected in one State, and subsequently moved into another and there been made a Mason, in spite of his previous rejection.