Classical Theology.

demonstration . It is as absurd for an ordinary person to pretend to "disagree with the computations of tho best astronomers " as for the outer world to make strictures on Freemasonry . The best works for non-mathematicians to road on Astronomy are Airey ' s Ipswich Lectures and Herschel ' a Outlines Abridged . They aro intelligible to any good capacity , and

explain how the sizes and distances of the heavenly bodies ¦ can literally be measured with a foot rule . Referring to them for details , I will try , in as few words as possible , to indicated the method . The first thing to be found is the size of the earth ; till this is done we cannot stir a step . The next thing Avill be the distance ; and the last , the size of any heaA'enly body .

In the days of Newton , the earth was not properly measured ; but since then it has been done , over and over again , with a care and accuracy inconceivable to those unfamiliar Avith scientific mensuration . The way is to find the exact length of a degree of a meridian by trigonometrical surveying . That length x 180 ives the semi-circumferenceand thence tho diameter

g , can bo easily calculated . The result is as given in " Vesta , " 8 , 202 miles , ivithin a few miles . ' Next , for the distance of any body , the moon for instance . This is found by means of parallax . The moon ' s horizontal parallax is the angle under which the earth ' s semi-diameter would be seen at the moon . The angle A M E hi Fig .

To find this , the way , rudely described , is to put two telescopes at distant stations on the earth , and notice ( by help of the fixed stars ) , the exact difference of direction in which they point . Suffice it to say that , after much attention . paid to this subject , the parallax has been repeatedly Avell ascertained by many different methods , all leading to the same result , both for moon and sun .

The moment the angle A at E is knoAvn—since we know already the length of A E ( earth's semi-diameter)—we know ¦ all about the triangle iJH , and have the length , E JI , which is the distance of the body . " Vesta " is right in saying that the sun's parallax is very small , and , therefore difficult to compute accurately . It is precisely this smallness which proves the immense distance

of the sun . Were the sun " eminently less than 54 , 000 , 000 miles " from us , say 48 , 000 , 000 , the merest tyro in trigonometry ivould see that the parallax would amount to -eighteen seconds—an angle Avhich Avould offer no difficulty to perceive . It so happens , however , that tho true distance is eminently greater than in " Vesta ' s " list , being nearly 96 , 000 , 000 . It was the inaccuracy of that list which first caught my eye . The books I referred to , I believe , contain correct ones . I cannot conceive ivhere " Vesta " has found

the list he gives . The moon is , comparatively speaking , so near to us that her distance from the sun is the same as ours . The size of the bodies is of less importance , and is found from the measurement of their apparent diameters ; for , if Ave know how far a thing is , and how large it looks , we can easily calculate how large it really is . Yours fraternally , Trentham Hall , Nov . 4 th , 1860 . S .

[ Having submitted the above to the author of " Classical Theology , " he states that he agrees Avith our correspondent that , " If we knoAV how far a thing is , and hoio large it looks , -we can easily calculate hoAV largo it really is . " He thought , until he received the above , that the names of Neivton , Herschel , Struve , Ferguson , and Bailli were amongst the long list of the best astronomersHe ivould recommend

. to the non-initiated in the mysteries of astronomical science Bailli ' s Histories of Ancient ancl Modern Astronomy , in which it vyill be seen that " Vesta" does not differ with the computations of the best astronomers so much as they

Classical Theology.

differ amongst themselves . The works of Sir David Brewster appear more in unison with the meaning of "Vesta " than the works " S" appears to make his study . Perhaps when the author of "Classical Theology" has measured the planets , he will make his OAVU calculations of their distances . The planet Herschel is stated to be 1800000000 miles distant from the sunTho author of

,,, . / Classical Theology" adds , "In saying 'We may not entirely agree with the computations of the best astronomers' is not professing to be among the best , as ' S' assumes to be , Avhich is a proud eminence to claim till the Avorld has awarded the distinction . " —ED . ]

The Grand Master Of Canada.

THE GRAND MASTER OF CANADA .

TO THE EDITOR OF THE FREEMASONS MAGAZINE AND MASONIC MIRROR . SIB , —Your number of 29 th ult . contains some strictures on the conduct of the Grand Master of Canada , in relation to the " unpleasant contretemps , " Avhich I was very glad to see . When you are made acquainted with all the facts , I think you will seo still more cause why our Grand Master should be . censured for the course he took . The facts are as

follows : — In his annual address to Grand Lodge , delivered at the communication , held at Ottawa in . July last , the retiring Grand Master ( AVilson ) suggested that some Masonic notice should be taken of tho visit of the Prince of Wales . This address , as is usual , Avas referred to a committee , and the ansAi-er to it is understood to have been prepared by one of

Grand Master Harrington ' s staunchest supporters . The Committee reported that they did not esteem it proper for Grand Lodge to make any demonstration in regard to the visit to this colony of the Prince of Wales , as his Eoyal Highness was not a Freemason , and for other grave reasons . The report was received and adopted , and it was understood that nothing was to bo done . Howevera change

, came over the spirit of the dream AvhenBro . Harrington was elected GrandMaster , aud then as much anxiety was felt in certain quarters that there should be a display , as there had previously been to tho contrary . Hiider what advice he acted , I know not , but surely our Grand Master assumed a very grave responsibility when he summoned Grand Lodge to meet the Prince at Ottawa , in the face of the adopted report

of the Gommittee to which I have alhided , and without consulting Grand Lodgo in any manner AvhateA'or . I maintain , Sir , that the Grand Master had no right to summons a Grand Lodge in the face of the solemnly recorded opinion of Grancl Lodge that no display AVUS advisable . Many brethren feel that the Craft has been slighted . I do not participate in those feelings , for I think that all the

blame of the blunder lies on the shoulders of the Grand Master , and on those of the brethren AVIIO elected so erratic and versatile a brother to the Oriental chair . Hacl ive a Masonic paper or magazine in Canada , I have no doubt but that the Grand Master ' s proceedings in this matter ivould be severely handled , and much dissatisfaction is prh'atcly expressed amongst the brethren . So sudden

Avas the move that the Grand Secretary was only notified by telegraph , there being no time to summons the distant lodges by mail . This is our Grand Master ' s first move since his assumption of the Grand Gavel of Canada . He has committed an enormous blunder ; will it be his last ? I fear not . I remain , yours fraternally , Canada , October leth , 1860 . E . G . C .

Masonic Halls.

MASONIC HALLS .

TO THE EDITOR OF THE FREEMASONS MAGAZINE AND MASONIC MIBEOB . DEAE SIR AND BKOTIIEK , — About two years since the Brighton brethren started a project for building a Freemasons' Hall . A committee , composed of members from the different loclges , ivas formed , and one or two meetings , I believe , took place . Is it not singular that such a long period should elapse without a report being brought up ? Yours fraternally , Brighton , Nov . 17 th , 1860 . PEOGEESS .