THE ARCANE SCHOOLS - Fort Myers Beach Masonic Lodge No. 362

as witnesses. Hence, the testimony of an atheist must be rejected;
because, as it has been well said, such a person cannot be subject to
that
sanction which is deemed an indispensable test of truth. But as Masonry
does not demand of its candidates any other religious declaration than
that of a belief in God, it cannot require of the witnesses in its
trials
any profession of a more explicit faith. But even here it seems to
concur
with the law of the land; for it has been decided by Chief Baron
Willes,
that "an infidel who believes in a God, and that He will reward and
punish
him in this world, but does not believe in a future state, may be
examined
upon oath."
3. Persons who have been rendered infamous by their conviction of great
crimes, are deemed incompetent to give evidence. This rule has been
adopted, because the commission of an infamous crime implies, as Sir
William Scott has observed, "such a dereliction of moral principle on
the
part of the witness, as carries with it the conclusion that he would
entirely disregard the obligation of an oath." Of such a witness it has
been said, by another eminent judge,[102] that "the credit of his oath
is
over-balanced by the stain of his iniquity."
4. Persons interested in the result of the trial are considered
incompetent to give evidence. From the nature of human actions and
passions, and from the fact that all persons, even the most virtuous,
are
unconsciously swayed by motives of interest, the testimony of such
persons
is rather to be distrusted than believed. This rule will, perhaps, be
generally of difficult application in masonic trials, although in a
civil
suit at law it is easy to define what is the interest of a party
sufficient to render his evidence incompetent. But whenever it is
clearly
apparent that the interests of a witness would be greatly benefited by
either the acquittal or the conviction of the accused, his testimony
must
be entirely rejected, or, if admitted, its value must be weighed with
the
most scrupulous caution.
Such are the rules that the wisdom of successive generations of men,
learned in the law, have adopted for the establishment of the
competency
or incompetency of witnesses. There is nothing in them which conflicts
with the principles of justice, or with the Constitutions of
Freemasonry;
and hence they may, very properly, be considered as a part of our own
code. In determining, therefore, the rule for the admission of
witnesses
in masonic trials, we are to be governed by the simple proposition that