The First Masonic Meeting In Damascus.

Besides this , the nearest lodges are those of Alexandria , in Egypt , and Smyrna , in Asia Minor The petitioners , although in good strength as to numbers and social position , and second to none in zeal and veneration for the Order , are thus

practically debarred from all enjoyment and advantage as Masons ; although united together by the most solemn and enduring covenants , they are almost strangers to each other ; although amongst the crowds of tourists who annually

throng Damascus are many competent to instruct them in their Masonic duties and obligations , yet , for ivant of organisation , that privilege is lost ; that Masonic charities languish from the same cause ; and that there is no city over which the

jurisdiction of the Grand Lodge of England extends in which the establishment of a lodge is so imperatively demanded , or ivhere a respectable circle of members could so soon be found as at

Damascus . " To all this I can heartily affirm , and Avould add that I never saw a company of Masons in which such large social , commercial , " and political interests ivere represented as the fifteen at Damascus . I cannot but hope that these facts

will have due Avei ght at head-quarters , and that ere the hot season comes on to put an end to Masonic labour a warrant ivill reach these shores and the organisation be effected . 'gin the garden of Bro . Rogers there is an ancient mosk that

seems to have been erected on purpose for a lodge-room ; and in this I trust to see King Solomon Lodge ( No . —) at Avork before my own fiftieth birthday comes round .

An Analysis Of Ancient And Modern Freemasonry.

AN ANALYSIS OF ANCIENT AND MODERN FREEMASONRY .

By Bro . WILMAM JAMES HUGHAN , W . M . 131 , Truro , Cornwall . { Continued from page 865 ) . CHAP . II . —MODERN FREEMASONRY .

Turning from a hasty sketch of the revival of Freemasonry , A . D . 1717 , and its consequences , ive now purpose glancing at the Royal Arch degree of England , its institution , character , and position in the Craft , and its several necessitudes , down to

the present time . Its origin has been a matter of dispute for more than a century : from its very commencement many of its votaries have claimed for it an antiquity far beyond the range of possibility , and , on the other hand , nearly all ivriters of

note declare the degree was established about A . D . 1740 . The subject of late has been referred to in the " Freemasons' Magazine by " A Masonic Student , " who has brought a considerable amount of research and intelligence to bear on the

question . The writer has been well known in the fraternity for many years , and therefore his statements are well Avorthy of consideration , especially as the brother is a fair representative of the few who still adhere to a belief in the traditional

antiquity of the third and Royal Arch degrees . He states " that we have numismatic evidence of the second part of the third degree , coeval with the operative lodge of York Masons , certainly in the fifteenth century , " and that the Royal Arch ,

as we have it , is identical m substance with the second part of the Master ' s degree . " In consequence , " A Masonic Student" expresses his firm belief that the Royal Arch degree is far more ancient than 1740 . NOAV , I freely admit that the

anonymous writer who has thus most fraternall y criticised the first part of my "Analysis , " for Masonic position and influence is considerably in advance of myself ; and now that he has privately revealed his name to me I frankly avow my

indebtedness in particular to him for his Masonic labours . Yet , still , I most emphatically demur to his propositions , on the ground that no evidence has been adduced to support them ; but , on the contrary , history and testimony generally concur in quite the reverse .

In the first part of the " Analysis" a considerable amount of evidence was presented , tending to prove that the system of ancient or operative Masonry ivas of a very simple character , and that neither any record , constitution , nor

other document ever made mention of three degrees of Masonry anterior to the eighteenth century ; that the minutes of operative lodges of the seventeenth century confirmed the fact of but two degrees , and no more , being ivorked at their

meetings ; and that , consequently , the Royal Arch , and all other degrees besides , were the production of later times . We are not aware of either of these propositions having been disproved in any Avay , ancl therefore Ave must make them the basis of the following considerations .

Although the Grand Lodge of England ivas established in 1717 , the limited Grand Chapter of royal arch Masons Avas not formed until one hundred years later , and in the interval between A . D . 1717 . and the first decade of the nineteenth