tion is peculiarly adapted to political intrigue; and though, in our country, its influence may not have been perceived by any party, yet we see that in a sister Republic, so far from its being considered the duty of the fraternity to keep apart from politics, the parties whose dissensions distract the Commonwealth, are arranged under different masonic denominations. Scotch masons, and York masons, in that country, no less designate masons of different sects, than they do partisans of different politics. If lodges may be converted into secret political clubs, they ought to be feared in a free country.

It has often occurred to me as a little extraordinary, that in this republican country of ours, where we claim to be such pure democrats, there should be manifested in those who become masons, such a passion for finery, pageantry, dignities, and titles. One who affects to despise the blue or red ribband, the star and garter of an English lord, or the coronet of a foreign prince, clothes himself with the utmost complacency, in all the colors of the rainbow, and decorates himself with as many jewels and medals, as are worn by an Indian chief. He expects from the fellows of his community, to be addressed by the titles of Worshipful, Most Worshipful, Excellent, Most Excellent, Illustrious, and Most Illustrious, with as much certainty as the greatest despot in the world requires from his slaves a recognition of the rank he assumes. We see from the masonic notices daily published in our papers, that Knight, Prince, and even King, are familiar titles, by which those to whom they belong are always addressed by their brethren in their assemblies. "To his Most Illustrious Highness, Prince of the Royal Secret of the thirty-third degree," is a title which emblazons the name of many a good republican in this community. Foreigners must think we are not less fond of the show, and trappings, and titles of aristocracy and royalty, than any other people, when they see that we are so eager to adopt them, in the only way tolerated by our political constitutions.

It is true there is something of equality in this, inasmuch as every man, of every grade, and every complexion, may be invested with all the finery, and the magnificent titles of the order. All others, however, are rivalled by

the splendor of the Black Lodges of this city, headed by their Respectable and Worshipful Masters.

I have known many persons whose brains have been turned by their elevation from humble occupations to royal titles and imaginary thrones. Indeed, I have never known a very great mason, who was not a very great fool. I beg to be understood. I do not mean by very great masons, those who have stood highest in the estimation of the craft, and who have attained the highest masonic honors. I do not forget that the names of Washington, Clinton, Warren, La Fayette, Franklin, Robert R. Livingston, Jackson, and Marshall, are justly the boast of the fraternity; nor is it possible that I should ever forget that I have seen many venerated clergymen, sanctifying by their presence and their prayers the labors, as well as the refreshments of a lodge. But I mean by great masons, those who are proud of their pompous titles; who are fond of decorations; who persuade themselves that the affairs of the world turn upon masonry; that without it, society could hardly exist, or if it did, would be deprived of its fairest ornament, and most beneficial arrangement.

It may be asked, how it happens that I should have been so long a mason and not until this time expressed my disapprobation of the institution. It is true, it is nearly forty years since I became a member of the masonic fraternity, but I began to question its utility long ago. It must be fifteen or twenty years since I belonged to any lodge, and some eight or ten years that I have not been within the walls of a lodge room. During this time, I have not hesitated to express opinions in accordance with what I have now written.

When I was hardly twenty-one years of age, I was initiated in a lodge in New-York, which was distinguished for the respectability of its members. All of these I knew must have submitted to whatever would be required of me. My confidence, that they would not have done any thing wrong, induced me to pass through the required forms with very little too little consideration. A like deference for the example of others, led me from step to step, with the same inconsiderateness. It was not till the buoyancy of youth had passed, that I began to see the

vanity and folly, and, as I thought, the evil tendency of masonry. Morgan's fate has, I acknowledge, strengthened the unfavorable impressions I entertained previously to his murder. Since that event, I have thought the institution not only idle and useless, but this horrible catastrophe has evinced that its mysteries may engender infatuation that will stop at no crime. Since that event, I have believed it would be a relinquishment of a duty I owed to society, if I suffered my respect for those venerated men who have left the world to believe that masonry was approved by them, prevent me from expressing the convictions of my own mind of its merits. The example of the many who have stood as high in the ranks of masonry as in the estimation of the world, would have induced me to have buried my own thoughts in silence. I should have been awed by their opinions could I be sure that these patrons, of whom masonry so justly boasts, deliberately examined the merits of the institution; but when I reflect how many years of my life were passed before I gave the subject due consideration, I cannot but suppose that they, like myself, for a long time, may have been content to rest on the example of their predecessors, and that they have left their successors free to express their opinions. If these are unfavorable to masonry, no one can say that they are in opposition to what would have been the deliberate judgment of the persons whose great examples are considered of such authority.

I am happy that the letter I have had the honor to receive from you, affords me an opportunity to express, in such a manner as I presume will give them publicity, my sentiments on this subject. I have reason to believe they are in accordance with those of many good and respectable men who are masons; and who, I hope, will not by their silence, suffer their example in becoming masons to have an undue influence. I come forward the more readily at this moment, when I think no party or unworthy motive can be imputed to me; when the excitement occasioned by the murder of Morgan, has subsided into a just abhorrence of the guilty; and when the question is not whether every mason is not a bad man, but whether masonry is not a bad institution. I believe that it does no good that might not be accomplished by

far better means. Its secrecy and extensive combinations are dangerous. Its titles and trappings are vain, foolish, and inconsistent with our republican institutions. Its pretensions are absurd, fallacious and impious; and its ceremonies and mysteries are profane, and lead many to believe that they impose obligations paramount to the laws. However limited the influence of my opinions might be, I should be sorry to end my life, leaving it to be believed that I had lived and died the advocate of an institution of which I entertain such views.

REMARKS ON THE CHARACTER OF FREEMASONRY.

Extract from an Address by Rev. Moses Thacher, of Wrentham, Mass. on the occasion of his seceding from the Masonic Institution.

THE subject to which I desire to call your attention, is, the standing which I have retained for some time past, in relation to the masonic institution. Although I am a minister of the gospel, set apart to take the oversight of this church and people; yet, far be it from me to feel myself above making concessions and retractions, wherein I have done wrong. That I have done wrong in uniting myself to the masonic society, and given just occasion of offence to some of my Christian friends, I am now fully convinced. I am satisfied, by a knowledge of facts, which have recently been presented to my mind, and which have placed me beyond a reasonable doubt, that the institution is very different, in nature and utility, from what I anticipated when I first became a member. 1 then joined upon the assurance of others of its great antiquity, of the purity of its principles, and the many advantages which it would present to me as a minister of the gospel. Notwithstanding I verily thought, that I could depend upon those assurances; I have since found, to my sorrow and disgust, that I have been deceived and disappointed. By these remarks, I do not mean to cast reflections upon those who gave me such assurances, They were doubtless deceived; and I feel much more disposed to apply to myself the denunciation, "Cursed is the

man that trusteth in man;” than harshly to censure those, who were, perhaps, the innocent occasion of my folly.

With regard to the antiquity of the institution, I have found, by well authenticated facts, that it cannot be traced farther back than to the sixteenth century. I find that the first lodge of Freemasons ever instituted, was founded in London, and that the first, which emanated from this original stock, was as late as A. D. 1717. These facts are so authentic, that I feel myself warranted to say, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the institution is, comparatively, of recent origin. When therefore it professes to teach doctrines and facts by tradition, from before the flood, from the days of Solomon, or even from the commencement of the Christian era; it is evident that the institution is made to speak a lie; a lie too, which, more than almost any thing else, has been the means of infolding in the bosom of the society, the vast multitudes, who have devoted themselves to its interests.

In respect to the principles of the institution, it may be remarked, that this society, different from any other, holds two classes. The one class of principles, is, its costume, These or dress, in which it appears before the public. principles are, charity,* moral virtue, social intercourse, &c. all good in the abstract. The other class of principles consists in secrecy, secret signs and obligations, and secret doctrines. Upon these latter principles the whole institution is erected. This circumstance has doubtless

deceived many. It deceived me. For a considerable

time, I thought the institution was built upon those principles, which I now find to be merely external, designed for profession and show. The institution, instead of being built upon charity, and moral virtue, is built upon the secret principles, which I have mentioned; and these are principles by which genuine masons must be guided, however they may clash with other rules.

* It is not here admitted, that this is the charity which "seeketh not her own. All that masons, as such, ever bestowed, in what they call "charity," is bestowed precisely on the same principle that a mutual fire insurance company assist one of their own members in making up the loss which he has sustained by the devouring element. This is a "charity," which the sufferer has a right, in equity, to demand, in consideration of what he has already thrown into the common stock.