Over
the years I've seen my Lodge and other Masonic bodies deal with
members who don't pay their dues in a variety of ways. It seems there
has been a progression of sorts requiring less and less of a
financial effort for a Brother to return. Years ago I recall the NPD
Brother had to pay the dues for each year missed, plus the current
year's dues, to become a member in good standing once again. Then
there was a period when the member in arrears had to pay just last
year's and current year's dues. Now, for one of the bodies where I am
a member, a Brother can re-join just by paying the current year's
dues. If
things keep going this way I guess we'll have to pay them to come
back.
Of
course, these men are our Brothers and we do, in fact, want them
back; and there are good reasons why some don't pay — hardship and
illness being at the top of the list. Every Masonic body I belong to
always takes that into consideration and I have seen many meetings
where understanding members remit the dues of a Brother who simply
cannot pay.
Still, I think we're pretty lenient with NPD. My personal opinion is we probably should be. I mean, how many times have we heard it... "It's easier to keep the members you have than to go out and get new ones."
With all that in mind, I ran across something that really made me do a double-take — make that a triple-take.
I was going through records kept by a 19th century Grand Secretary in Missouri when I came across a list of suspensions for Missouri Lodge No. 1. The first half dozen entries were for a group of Brothers suspended July 2, 1868, for non-payment of dues. The first line made note that Brother William Stewart was suspended NPD for a period of five years.
Still, I think we're pretty lenient with NPD. My personal opinion is we probably should be. I mean, how many times have we heard it... "It's easier to keep the members you have than to go out and get new ones."
With all that in mind, I ran across something that really made me do a double-take — make that a triple-take.
I was going through records kept by a 19th century Grand Secretary in Missouri when I came across a list of suspensions for Missouri Lodge No. 1. The first half dozen entries were for a group of Brothers suspended July 2, 1868, for non-payment of dues. The first line made note that Brother William Stewart was suspended NPD for a period of five years.
"Wow,"
I thought, "five years — that's pretty stiff."
No,
it turns out Brother Stewart got off easy. The next four entries were
for members suspended for periods of 20 or 25 years. Twenty-five
years for NPD! Now, that sends a message.
The
sixth entry was for Brother Maximilian Eller, suspended for a period
of 10 years. This line also contained a note that Brother Eller came
back after the 10-year suspension ended and paid his dues.
In
those records there were other Brothers suspended for 25 years, which
seemed to be more or less the standard; but beginning in 1872, with
only two exceptions, NPD suspension penalties were: "until
paid."
So
apparently, "until paid" became the new standard. One of
those original six Brothers, Charles Eager, may have heard about
this. Originally suspended for 20 years, the records indicate he
returned in 1876 and made restitution. It's not too much of a stretch
to imagine he went back to Missouri No. 1 and said, "Hey, look,
I got a pretty harsh suspension for NPD but today you're letting guys
off the hook if they just pay up. How about cutting me a little
slack, too?"
I
doubt he used that exact phraseology but they did, in fact, let him
back in.
I
have to conclude somewhere along the way Missouri No. 1 decided its
penalties for NPD were excessive, and backed off. It's also possible
the Grand Lodge somehow stepped in with different standards. Whatever
the case, at that point those standards became more closely aligned
with those we have today. We may never know why they made that change
but it's possible they, too, discovered "it's easier to keep the
members you have than to go out and get new ones."