SECTION IY.

THE RIGHT OF AVOUCHMENT.
I have said in the preceding section that an exa- mination may sometime^ be dispensed with, when a Brother who is present, and acquainted with the visitor, is able and willing to vouch for him as a Master Mason in good standing. This prerogative, of vouching for a stranger, is strictly one of the rights of a Master Mason, because neither Entered Apprentices nor Fellow Crafts are permitted to exercise it, in reference to those who have attained to their respective degrees. But the right is one of so important a nature — its imprudent exercise would be attended with such evil consequences to the institution — that Grand Lodges have found it
RIGHT OF AVOUCHMENT. 217
necessary to restrict it by the most rigid rules. The Grand Lodges of Iowa* and Mississippi,! for instance, have declared that no visitor can be per- mitted to take his seat in a Lodge, on the strength of being vouched for by a Brother, unless that Brother has sat in a Lodge with him.
Under ordinary circumstances, it would undoubt- edly be the safest plan to adopt such a regulation as this, and to require that the avouchment should be founded on the fact of the voucher's having sat in a Lodge with the visitor. But it cannot be de- nied that there are occasions in which an intelligent and experienced Mason will be as competent, from his own private examination, to decide the Masonic qualifications of a candidate for admission, as if he had sat with him in the communication of a Lodge. This subject of vouching does not, indeed, appear to have been always understood. Many Masons suppose that the prerogative of vouching is inherent in every Brother, and that if A shall say that he vouches for B, and that he has sat in a Lodge with him, the assertion should be received with all re- spect, and B admitted. But in how many cases
* " Whereas, the editors of some Masonic journals have decided that a Mason may vouch for a Brother when visiting a Lodge, without having sat in open Lodge with him, resolved, that this Grand Lodge would enjoin upon the brethren of this jurisdiction not to tolerate such a practice." — Resolution of G. L. of Iowa, 1853. Proceed, p. 470.
f " In the opinion of this Grand Lodge, no visitor can be permitted to take his seat in a Lodge, on the strength of being vouched for by a Brother, unless that Brother has sat in a Lodge with him. otherwise he must be regu- larly examined by a committee of the Lodge." — Resolution of G.L.of Mis- sissippi, 1856. Proceed, p. 94.
10
218 EIGHT OF AVOUCHMENT.
may not A. from ignorance or inexperience, be liable to be deceived ? How are we to know that. A him- self was upt in a clandestine Lodge, which had been imposed npon his ignorance, when he sat with B ? How are we to be sure that his memory has not been treacherous, and that the Lodge in which he saw B was not a Fellow Crafts7 or Entered Apprentices7, instead of being a Masters7 ? Why, only by know- ing that the Masonic skill and experience, and the general good sense and judgment of A are such as not to render him liable to the commission of such errors. And i£ we are confident of his Masonic knowledge and honesty, we are ready, or ought to be, to take his vouching, without further inquiry as to its foundation ; but if we are not, then it is safer to depend on an examination by a committee than on the avouchment of one in whose ability we have no confidence. A Masonic avouchment is, in fact, in the nature of a mercantile or legal security. Its whole value depends on the character and attain- ments of the one who offers it ; and it would be better, I imagine, if a positive rule is to be laid down, to say that no visitor shall be admitted into a Lodge except with the avouchment of a well known and skillful Mason, or upon examination by a committee.
Still, it must be confessed, however humiliating the confession may be, that a very large number of Masons are too little skilled in the mysteries which have been communicated to them, to be enabled to pass a stranger through that ordeal of strict exa*
EIGHT^DF AVOUCHMENT. 219
mination, which alone can prove a friend, or detect a foe, and an ingenious impostor would often find it a task of but little difficulty to deceive such an un- skillful examiner. Thus imposed upon himself, the deceived brother unwittingly might extend his error, by vouching for one who has no claims upon the fraternity. The vouching of such brethren, de- rived from their private examination, should of course be considered as of no value. But, on the other hand, there are many Masons so well skilled in the principles of the craft, that no danger of im- position need be feared when we depend on the information which they have derived from an exami- nation, conducted as they would of course do it, with all the necessary forms, and guarded by all the usual precautions. The avouchments of such brethren should be considered as perfectly satis- factory.
I am inclined, therefore, to believe that the spirit of the law simply requires that a Master shall per- mit no visitor to be admitted without previous ex- amination, unless he can be vouched for by a Brother who has sat with him ' in open Lodge, or, if the avouchment be made in consequence of a private examination, unless the Brother so vouching be kuown to the presiding officer as a skillful and ex- perienced Mason.
But, if we admit this to be the true interpretation of the law of avouchment, then it becomes necessary that we should inquire more closely into what are to be the governing principles of that private ex
220 EIGHT OF AVOUCHELENT.
animation from which the authority of the avouch- ment is to be derived, and into the nature of the competency of the Brother who ventures to give it.
In the first place, the avouchnient thus given is, it is understood, to be founded on some previous private examination. Therefore it follows, that the Brother who undertakes to vouch for a visitor on these grounds, must have been thoroughly compe- tent to conduct such an examination. There must be no danger of his having been imposed upon by an ignorant pretender. And consequently the Mas- ter of a Lodge would be culpable in receiving the avouchnient of a young and inexperienced, or of an old and ignorant Mason.
But again : there may be sometimes an avouch- ment at second hand. Thus A may be enabled to vouch for C, on the information derived from B. But in this case it is essential to its validity that the avouchnient should have been made when the whole three were present. Thus it is not admissible that B should inform A that a certain person named C, who is then absent, is a Master Mason. A can- not, upon this information, subsequently vouch for