ted to writing, the number of verses which the memory must necessarily retain was almost incredible.

"But," says the sceptic, "where is the necessity of secrecy now? If your institution be laudable, as you describe it, why not reveal it for the benefit of mankind?" I should as soon look for a star to fall from the firmament, as for a caviller against Masonry to be satisfied, even with a mathematical demonstration. The benefits of Masonry can only be enjoyed by their union with secrecy. Lay these secrets open to the world, and the charm would cease to operate. They would become familiar as the growth of a plant, and, like that incomprehensible phenomenon, would be neglected, and perhaps despised. At the reformation of our Church from the errors of popery, what could exceed the curiosity of mankind to read and investigate the hidden stores of the Bible, which had been a sealed book for many centuries? and though it contains secrets of far greater importance than those of Masonry, yet, curiosity being gratified, the rage is over, and it is regarded with as much indifference by the mass of mankind, as though it contained nothing affecting man's temporal or eternal welfare. So Masonry, were it made public, would probably be neglected, because the stimulus would be wanting from which it derives its chief popularity, if not its principal importance. The secrets of Masonry are open to the inspection of the worthy and the good in every class of mankind. The page is displayed before them, and if they refuse to read, it is too much to hear them complain of ignorance, and to revile a science which they want the inclination or capacity to understand.

It is further objected, that the use we make of the implements of architecture, as vehicles of secrecy, is frivolous, and unworthy the dignity of human beings.5 These implements are of no further benefit to us than as they convey a series of the purest precepts of morality

5 What number was amongst the Pythagoreans, geometrical symbols are amongst Masons. "It led," says Pythagoras, "to the knowledge of things divine and human; the meditation of death; setting the mind at liberty, without which none can learn or perceive any thing solid or true, by the help or benefit of sense, for the mind, the divine part of the soul, seeth all things, and hears all things; all things else are deaf and blind." (Stob. Serm. Hieron. adv. Rufin.)

In

and the most useful instruction for the regulation of our conduct in every circumstance and situation of life. these emblems our secrets are chiefly concealed; and the valuable lessons they contain, elevate them froin the character of mere instruments of labour, and they become jewels of inestimable value.

5. ON SLANDER.

The fifth point teaches us to support a brother's character when he is absent, and consequently unable to defend himself from the tainted breath of defamation. It forbids us to retail slanders derogatory to our brother's reputation, which is a sacred deposit, and, if once wounded, ten thousand words in vindication will scarcely be sufficient to repair the mischief which ten words have occasioned.

Masonry inculcates this lesson in every part and point of every degree; aware that the evil consequences of slander are innumerable, whether by giving false testimony in a public cause, or by injuring our brother by private defamation. This practice is the vilest of all robberies. Injure his property, and you may make him reparation; wound his body, and the physician may heal the wound; but if his sacred reputation be touched, if his good name be taken away, it can never be restored, but may pursue his offspring after death, may descend to his children's children, and blast their prospects to the latest posterity.

Defamation is always wicked; the defamer is always despised. And what gratification can be found in a practice which elicits universal contempt? Can it be found in the lust for evil speaking, and cutting up reputation, as with a sharp razor? Can any gratification proceed from the practice of private scandal at the expense of another's character and honest fame? Does such a practice add to the slanderer's peace of mind or importance amongst his acquaintance? does it confer a dignity not to be procured by other more innocent means? A negative answer may be safely given to these inquiries; and it is rather to be feared that every honest and upright man will regard him with the scrutinizing eye of jealous suspicion, and shun him as a public

nuisance. His deeds are baser than those of the assassin, in proportion as a man's unsullied fame is dearer to him than life. The assassin kills the body of his enemy, and there the mischief ends; but the slanderer attacks the immortal part of man, and inflicts a stab in the hope of blighting his fame for ever. None can be safe where slander finds admittance. The virtues wither round him, and fade and die before his baneful touch. His practices are made up of fraud and artful treachery. He dares not to bring the bold and open accusation, but looks and whispers death. To misconstrue motives; to place trifling incidents in contemptible points of view; to insinuate by mysterious signs and broken sentences, that "more is meant than meets the ear," are his study and delight. They become, by the force of habit, as necessary as the food which affords him nourishment, and this for no other purpose than the selfish aim of depriving his acquaintance of that estimation from which he can derive no benefit, and which can scarcely be restored by all the united efforts of charity and benevolence: for evil reports spread with unaccountable facility, and extend to distant parts, where the evidence of their falsehood will never be heard, and thus the record is handed to posterity in all the decoration of unrefuted truth.

But it must be observed, on the other hand, that we are not bound to applaud the character and conduct of bad men, merely to avoid the imputation of illiberality. If the actions of a brother betray baseness of heart, though it may not be commendable to magnify his vices, or make them a perpetual topic of conversation, yet it would be equally injudicious to praise him, or bear a testimony to virtues which he does not possess. "None but a good man deserves to be loved or praised by any one. He who says of a bad man, whom he knows, and whom all that know him know, to be a bad one, I have reason to speak well of him, for he has been kind to me, utters a detestable falsehood, and discovers a base disposition." The course to be adopted, under these circumstances, is faithfully prescribed in those lectures which form the subjects of discussion at our meetings. "Always speak of a brother as well in his absence as in his pres

• Fawcett.

ence; and even more particularly so, because, when present, he has an opportunity of defending himself. Never defame him yourself, nor suffer him to be defamed by others, if in your power to prevent it; and if his conduct be so dishonourable that you unfortunately cannot speak well of him, adopt the distinguishing virtue of our science, silence, or secrecy.'

If a brother be calumniated falsely, it becomes a paramount duty to defend him in the face of the world. He who stands boldly forward to rebut a deliberate slander upon another's reputation, I regard in the light of something more than a common friend: he reduces to practice the dignified theories of Masonry; his benevolence is pure and unsullied by human passion, and he richly merits the obligations of gratitude in this world, as he is in the hope of receiving the approbation of his Judge in the world to come.

Speak, then, no evil of your brother. If he have virtues (and surely all have some), let them be the theme of your discourse; if he have faults (and who is free from them?), mention them not; but, in all your commerce with your brethren or the world, "supply the wants and relieve the necessities of your brethren to the utmost of your power and ability; on no account wrong them or see them wronged, but timely apprize them of approaching danger; and view their interest as inseparable from your own."8

CHAPTER X.

CONTAINING FOUR HUNDRED AND EIGHTY-SEVEN YEARS.

View of Masonry from the Deliverance to the Dedication of King Solomon's Temple.

IN every society, however constituted, some form of government is necessary to preserve a spirit of subordination amongst its members; and to prevent it from degenerating into contempt or oblivion. In this respect, also, Masonry supports it claim to respect and veneration. An argument, favourable to its beneficial tendency, may be deduced from the exellence of its government, which is founded upon a pattern the most pure and perfect, the government of the Jewish and Christian churches.

In the early ages of the world, every head of a family united in his own person the threefold office of priest, prophet, and king; and it was not until the Mosaic dispensation was revealed that the concerns of religion were conducted by three distinct officers or orders of men.

At the Flood, there is an appearance of something like a regular government, consisting of three distinct officers, who unitedly formed the head of the establishment, when organized in DUe form. But it was not until the erection of the Tabernacle that our Craft was reduced to the perfect form which it has ever since retained. Moses, when, by the revelation of God, he was dividing the priesthood into three distinct heads, modelled Masonry after the same fashion; himself being Grand Master and Bezaleel and Aholiab grand wardens.1

The false religions, which, indeed, were originally but perversions of the true, acknowledged the same form of government; because the ingenuity of man could not discover any form more firm and permanent than that which had been revealed from heaven. Hence, Thoth, the great founder of idolatry, after the Flood, was surnamed Ter Maximus; because he was Philosophus maximus, Sacerdos maxi mus, and Rex maximus.—(Alex. Neapolit., 1. 2. c. 6.)