The object of legal compensation should be to place the injured person as nearly as possible in the situation in which he would have been but for the injury. In the law of England the two historical systems of common law and equity viewed this problem from two different points of view. The principle of the common law was that the amount of every injury might be estimated by pecuniary valuation. The object of equity was to place the injured party in the actual position to which he was entitled. This difference comes out most clearly in cases of breach of contract. The common law, with a few partial exceptions, would do no more than compel the defaulters to make good the loss of the other party, by paying him an ascertained sum of money as damages. Equity, recognizing the fact that complete satisfaction was not in all cases to be obtained by mere money payments, compelled the defaulter to specifically perform his contract. Again, in those injuries which do not fall under the head of breach of contract, equity, on satisfactory proof that a wrong was contemplated, would interfere to prevent it by injunction; while at common law no action could be brought until the injury was accomplished, and then only pecuniary damages could be obtained. Common law and equity are now so far fused by the Judicature Act of 1873 that the appropriate remedy can be awarded in any of the divisions of the High Court of Justice.

The assessment of damages is peculiarly the business of the jury, and the court will only interfere with their decision on strong cause being shown. Thus a verdict may be set aside on the ground that damages are excessive, or that they are palpably insufficient. And if it appear that the result was arrived at by mere hazard, as, for instance, by each juryman naming a sum and an average being struck, that would be an impropriety which would invalidate the verdict. There are, moreover, certain principles according to which the damages must be ascertained.

To take, first, cases of breach of contract. Here, it is said, the motive of the defendant is an irrelevant consideration. He has broken his contract, and all that has to be done is to fix the amount of the loss occasioned thereby. So wherever there has been a breach of contract, some damages, though they should be merely nominal, are recoverable. And when the contract was for a payment of a fixed sum of money, the damages recoverable for a breach thereof would be that sum with interest. Where, in other cases, the parties themselves have fixed the sum which should be due as damages in case of the contract not being fulfilled, such sum will be the proper damages to be awarded by a jury On this point, however, the cases run rather fine. When a contract provides that a fixed sum shall be payable for breach, the law will ask whether it has been fixed as a penalty or as liquidated (i.e., ascertained) damages. In the former case it will not allow the fixed sum to be awarded, but will require evidence to show what the amount of loss actually was. In Kemble v.

Farren (G Bingham, 141), a contract between a manager and an actor provided that for a breach of any of the stipulations therein the sum of £1000 should be payable by the defaulter, not as a penalty, but as liquidated and ascertained damages. Yet even here, the court observing that under the stipulations of the contract the sum of £1000, if it were taken to be liquidated damages, might become payable for mere non-payment of a trifling sum, held that it was not fixed as damages, but as a penalty only. On the other hand, when the damage caused by a breach of contract is of its own nature uncertain, and the parties have positively fixed a sum as liquidated damages, that sum will be the proper damages. Where no such arrangement is made, the general rule for the assessment of damages is that the aggrieved party is to be placed in the same position, so far as money can do it, as if the contract had been performed. Thus, in a contract for the sale of goods when the vendor makes default in delivery, the proper measure of damages is the difference between the contract price and the market price of the goods on the day when they ought to have been delivered; so that if the price has not risen in the interval, the vendor can only get nominal damages. If he has in the meantime resold the goods to a sub-vendor, he cannot claim against his own vendor any damages which the sub-vendor may recover against him for breach of contract, because he ought to have gone into the market and purchased other goods. Again, if a buyer refuses to accept the goods when tendered to him, the measure of damages will be the difference between the contract price and the market price at the time of his refusal, if the latter is lower than the former. But in such cases the trouble and expense of finding a new purchaser or other goods may be taken account of in assessing the damages. It has been held that in a breach of contract to replace stock lent, the measure of damages will be the price of the stock on the day when it ought to have been delivered or on the day of trial, at the plaintiff’s option. Where goods inferior in quality to those contracted for are delivered, the difference between the value at the time of delivery of the goods contracted for and the value of those actually delivered will be the proper damages. The controlling principle, in fact, is that compensation should be determined by the amount of the actual loss. In an American case, where a person had agreed with a boardinghouse keeper for a year, and quitted the house within the time, it was held that the measure of damages was not the price stipulated to be paid, but only the loss caused by the breach of contract. In contracts to marry, a special class of considerations is recognized, and the jury in assessing damages will take notice of the conduct of the parties. The social position and means of the defendant may be given in evidence to show what the plaintiff has lost by the breach of contract.

It is not every loss caused by the act or default complained of which can be taken in estimating the proper amount of damages. The remoteness of the consequences is a bar to their being recognized in the assessment, and it is a question of no little difficulty what damages are and what are not excluded for remoteness. The leading English case on this point is Hadley v. Baxendale (9 Exch., 341), in which damages were sought for the loss of profits caused by a steam mill being kept idle, on account of the delay of the defendants in sending a new shaft which they had contracted to make. The court held the damage to be too remote, and stated the true rule to be that

“Where two parties have made a contract which one of them has broken, the damages which the other party ought to receive in respect of such breach of contract should be either such as may fairly and substantially be considered as arising naturally, i.e., according to the usual course of things, from such breach of contract itself, or such as may reasonably be supposed to have been in contemplation of both parties at the time they made the contract, as the probable result of the breach of it”

So also in cases of trust, the general rule is that the damages must be restricted to the “legal and natural consequences of the wrongful act imputed to the defendant.” In an action by the proprietor of a theatre, it was alleged that the defendant had written a libel on one of the plaintiff’s singers, whereby she was deterred from appearing on the stage, and the plaintiff lost his profits; such loss was held to be too remote to be the ground of an action for damages. The line of remoteness cannot probably be drawn with much greater precision than in the rule in Hadley v. Baxendale quoted above, vague and ambiguous as the language may seem to be. A subsequent case shows the limitations of the rule on the other side. In Smeadv. Foord (1 Ellis and Ellis, 602), the defendant contracted to deliver a thrashing-machine to the plaintiff, a farmer, knowing that it was needed to thrash the wheat in the field. Damages were sought for injury done to the wheat by rain in consequence of the machine not having been delivered in time, and also for a fall in the market before the grain could be got ready. It was held that the first claim was good, as the injury might have been anticipated, but that the second was bad. When, through the negligence of a railway company in delivering bales of cotton, the plaintiffs, having no cotton to work with, were obliged to keep their workmen unemployed, it was held that the wages paid and the profits lost were too remote for damages. On the other hand, the defendant having failed to keep funds on hand to meet the drafts of the plaintiff, so that a draft was returned dishonoured, and his business in consequence was for a time suspended and injured, the plaintiff was held entitled to recover damage for such loss. The great difficulty of framing a rule which shall meet all cases is acknowledged by judges and legal writers. One judge declared that no rule could be made in the matter. Another declared that the rule in the majority of cases could have no application, because parties never contemplate the consequences of a breach of contract. The cases probably do not go beyond this, that, when from facts known to everybody, or from special facts proved to be known to the defendant, he ought to have anticipated the consequences of the breach of contract, he will be liable for them.

The rule that the contract furnishes the measure of the damages does not prevail in the case of unconscionable, i.e., unreasonable, absurd, or impossible contracts. The old school-book juggle in geometrical progression has more than once been before the courts as the ground of an action. Thus, when a man agreed to pay for a horse a barley-corn per nail, doubling it every nail, and the amount calculated as 32 nails was 500 quarters of barley, the judge directed the jury to disregard the contract, and give as damages the value of the horse. And when a defendant had agreed for £5 to give the plaintiff two grains of rye on Monday, four on the next Monday, and so on doubling it every Monday, it was contended that the contract was impossible, as all the rye in the world would not suffice for it; but one of the judges said that, though foolish, it would hold in law, and the defendant ought to pay something for his folly. And when a man had promised £1000 to the plaintiff if he should find his owl, the jury were directed to mitigate the damages.

Interest is recoverable as damages only when an agreement that it should be paid can be proved or inferred (as in the case of bills of exchange), and under the statute 3 and 4 Will. IV. c. 42.

In American law interest is in the discretion of the court, and is made to depend on the equity of the case. In both England and America compound interest, or interest on interest, appears to have been regarded with the horror that formerly attached to usury. Lord Eldon would not recognize as valid an agreement tt> pay compound interest. And Chancellor Kent, aud American lawyers generally, hold that compound interest cannot be taken except upon a special agreement made after the simple interest has become due. See Interest.

In actions of tort the discretion of the jury is not so strictly limited as in cases of breach of contract. The cases we have referred to show a general tendency to make the amount of damages a matter of legal certainty, and the jury can do little more than find the facts. If they travel beyond the contract the court will revise their verdict. But in estimating the damages for a civil injury, matter of aggravation may be taken into account. This position was strongly asserted in the cases arising out of the celebrated “General Warrants” in the time of Lord Camden, who is reported in one case to have said, “damages are designed’ not only as a satisfaction to the injured person, but as a punishment to the guilty, and as a proof of the detestation in which the wrongful act is held by the jury.” In another case he mentioned the importance of the question at issue, the attempt to exercise arbitrary power, as a reason why the jury might give exemplary damages. Another judge, in another case, said, “I remember a case when the jury gave £500 damages for knocking a man’s hat off; and the court refused a new trial.” And he urged that exemplary damages for personal insult would tend to prevent the practice of duelling. The right of the jury to give exemplary or vindictive damages has been repeatedly confirmed in recent cases, and the same doctrine prevails generally throughout the United States. In Scotch law the distinction between compensation and punishment has been more carefully maintained. In Baillie v. Bryson (1 Murray’s Reports), Lord Chief Commissioner Adams said that Lord Kenyon had “introduced into cases of this sort a principle as to damages extremely dangerous in its consequences. He considered such questions not merely as calculated to repair the injury done to the one party, but as a punishment of the other, and as intended to correct the morals of the country. The morals of the country have not been improved, and I am afraid its feeling has been much impaired. A civil court in matters of civil injury is a bad corrector of morals; it has only to do with the rights of parties.”

When both parties are in fault, if the plaintiff’s conduct has contributed to the injuries, his claim for damages will not be sustained. This has been carried so far that it has been held that, when a person in one carriage receives injuries from the management of another carriage, he cannot recover damages if any negligence, either on his own part or on the part of the owner or managers of the carriage in which he was, has contributed to the accident. (See Negligence.) In the Court of Admiralty, where the question constantly arises in cases of collision, a different rule has been adopted. When both vessels are in fault the whole amount of loss is divided between them. And by a section of the Judicature Act, 1873, the Admiralty rule in such cases is to be adopted in all the courts.

In the old action of criminal conversation, exemplary damages might be given, and now the petitioner in a divorce suit may be awarded exemplary damages by the jury against a co-respondent. In this case, however, the disposition of the sum awarded as damages is in the discretion of the judge, who may apply it to the maintenance and education or otherwise to the benefit of children of the marriage.

Damages are said to be either general or special. The former are given for loses implied by law as the necessary consequences of the wrongful act. The latter are not implied by law, but are compensation for such loss as may be proved to have been in fact caused by the wrongful act. Thus, in an ordinary slander, special damage must be alleged and proved to entitle the plaintiff to pecuniary compensation. But if a slander touches a person in the way of his trade, the law will presume that it caused loss to the plaintiff, without calling on him to show what the loss actually was.

When a person was injured by the negligence of another, and died, the benefit of an action for damages did not survive to his representatives. But by the 9 and 10 Vict. c. 93 (commonly called Lord Campbell’s Act), it is enacted that wherever the wrongful act is such as would have entitled the injured person to recover damages (if death had not ensued), the person who in such case would have been liable “shall be liable to an action for damages notwithstanding the death of the person injured, and although the death shall have been caused under such circumstances as amount in law to felony.” Every such action shall be brought for the benefit of the husband, wife, parent, and child of the deceased. “Child” includes grandchild and step-child, but not illegitimate child.

Loss caused by an act which is not wrongful {damnum absque injuria) cannot be the ground of an action for damages; e.g., if A’s business is injured by his neighbour B starting the same business, this is not an actionable loss.

Reference may be made to Sedgwick on The Measure of Damages, or Mayne on the same subject.

DAMASCENUS, Nicolaus, a Greek historian and philosopher, born at Damascus, from which he is named. He flourished in the time of Augustus and Herod the Great, with both of whom he was on terms of friendship. He enjoyed the intimate confidence of Herod, who studied philosophy along with him, and employed him on an important political mission to Augustus. Nicolaus survived Herod, and it was through his influence that the succession was secured for Archelaus; but the date of his death, like that of his birth, is unknown. Of his principal work, a universal history in 144 books, composed at the request of Herod, only a few fragments remain. He wrote also an autobiography, of which a good deal has been preserved, a life of Augustus, a life of Herod, and several philosophical works, which are known to us only through a few extracts in other writers. The first edition of the fragments of Nicolaus in a Latin version appeared at Geneva in 1593. The standard edition is that of Orelli (Leipsic, 1804) with a supplement (1811). The volume published in 1804 contains a notice of the life of Nicolaus by the Abbé Sevin.

The view of Damascus from the crest of Antilibanus is scarcely surpassed in the world. The elevation is about 500 feet above the city, which is nearly two miles distant. The distance lends enchantment to the view; for while the peculiar forms of Eastern architecture do not bear close inspection, they look like an Arabian poet’s dream when seen from afar. Tapering minarets and swelling domes, tipped with golden crescents, rise above the white-terraced roofs; while in some places their glittering tops appear among the green foliage of the gardens. In the centre of the city stands the Great Mosque, and near it are the gray battlements of the old castle. Away on the south the eye follows a long suburb, while below the ridge on which we stand is the Merj, the Ager Damascenus of early travellers—a green meadow extending along the river from the mouth of the ravine to the city. The gardens and orchards, which have been so long and so justly celebrated, encompass the whole city, sweeping the base of the bleak hills, like a sea of verdure, and covering an area more than 30 miles in circuit—not uniformly dense, but with open spots here and there. Beyond this circuit are large clumps of trees, dotting the plain almost to the horizon. The varied tints of the foliage greatly enhance the beauty of this picture.

The population of Damascus is estimated at 150,000. Of these about 19,000 are Christians, 6000 Jews, and the rest Mahometans. Of the Christians 8000 belong to the Greek or Eastern Church, and an equal number to the Catholic; and there are besides small communities of Syrians, Maronites, Armenians, and Protestants. In the plain round Damascus, watered by the Abana and Pharpar, there are 140 villages, with an aggregate population of 50,000, of whom about 1000 are Christians, and 2000 Druzes.

Until the capture of the city by Ibrahim Pasha of Egypt, in 1832, no foreign consul was permitted to enter it, and no Christian or Jew was suffered to ride through the streets. The massacre of 1860 showed that the spirit of the people had not changed, and was only kept in check by Turkish troops. A few of the Mahometans, however, are now more enlightened, and have gained a high position as merchants. The Christians are enterprizing and industrious, and a large proportion of the trade of the city is in their hands, Until the massacre they were rapidly advancing in numbers, wealth, and influence; but that event gave a fatal blow to their prosperity. The Jews are the leading bankers and money-dealers. Both Christians and Jews occupy distinct quarters of the city.

The manufactures of the city consist principally of silks, which are exported to Egypt, Baghdad, and Persia; coarse woollen cloth for the abbas, or cloaks, worn by the peasants of Syria; cotton cloths, chiefly for home use; gold and silver ornaments, arms, and household utensils. An extensive trade is carried on with the Bedouins of the Arabian desert. The bazaars are always crowded; and on Friday, the market day, it is difficult to pass through them. On the arrival of the great pilgrim caravan, in going to or returning from Mecca, the city presents a gay and animated appearance. Vast multitudes of Persians, Circassians, Anatolians, and Turks throng the streets, and each pilgrhn is a merchant for the time being, buying or selling as the case may be.

The bazaars have long been celebrated, and are among the best in the East. They are narrow covered lanes, with ranges of open stalls on each side. Each department of trade has its own quarter or section, where may be seen Manchester prints, Persian and Turkish carpets, French silks, Sheffield cutlery, amber mouth-pieces for pipes, antique China, Cashmere shawls, Mocha coffee, Dutch sugar, Damascus swords, and tobacco from Lebanon and Baghdad.

The khans of Damascus are spacious, and some of them splendid buildings. They are public marts where the leading merchants meet, and expose their wares for sale. The largest is Khan Asad Pasha, situated in the Bizuriyeh, or “Seed Bazaar.” It was erected about 125 years ago, and bears the name of its founder. The gate is a noble specimen of Moorish architecture. The interior is a quadrangle, with a gallery, and a domed roof supported on massive piers. Round it are ranges of small chambers, like cells, in which the goods are stored. All the khans are upon the same plan.

The private houses are the admiration of every visitor. No contrast could be greater than that between the exterior and interior; the rough mud walls give poor promise of splendour within. The entrance is usually by a low door, and through a narrow winding passage which leads to the outer court, where the master has his reception room. From this another winding passage leads to the harem, which is the principal part of the house. The plan of all is the same—an open court, with a tesselated pavement, and one or two marble fountains; orange and lemon trees, flowering shrubs, and climbing plants give freshness and fragrance. All the apartments open into the court; and on the south side is an open alcove, with a marble floor, and raised dais round three sides, covered with cushions; the front wall is supported by an ornamented Saracenic arch. The decoration of some of the rooms is gorgeous, the walls being covered in part with mosaics and in part with carved work, while the ceilings are rich in arabesque ornaments, elaborately gilt. A few of the modern J ewish houses have been embellished at an enormous cost, but they are wanting in taste.

Antiquities.— Although Damascus is one of the oldest cities in the world, its antiquities do not present such a striking appearance as those of many other places of far less note. This is in some measure owing to the fact that the old materials have been largely used in the erection of modern houses. The walls which inclosed the old city are about three miles in circuit, and their foundations are probably of the age of the Seleucidae. Some of the Roman gateways are in tolerable preservation. Through the centre of the city, from the east to the west gate, ran the Via Recta, “the street called Straight,” lined on each side with a double colonnade. It is now mostly built over, but many fragments of columns remain in situ.

The castle, which stands at the north-west corner, on the bank of the river, is a quadrangle 280 yards long by 200 wide, surrounded by a moat. The exterior walls are in good preservation, but the interior is a heap of ruins. It is not easy to determine the date of its erection, or to say whether Romans, Byzantines, or Saracens contributed most to it. The foundations are not later, and may be earlier, than the Roman age. A few vaults beneath the exterior battlements are used as magaziues, and contain some pieces of old armour, with bows, arrows, and. other weapons.

The Great Mosque is the most important building in the city. It stands near the castle, and is now, unfortunately, so closely hemmed in with bazaars and houses that its exterior is concealed from view. It occupies a quadrangle 163 yards long by 108 wide, facing the cardinal points. Along the north side is an open court surrounded by cloisters, resting on pillars of granite, marble, and limestone. The mosque itself extends along the whole southern side, and its interior dimensions are 431 feet by 125 feet It is divided into three aisles of equal breadth, by two ranges of Corinthian columns 22 feet high, supporting round arches. In the centre is a dome resting on four massive piers. Underneath is said to be a cave in which the head of John the Baptist is preserved in a golden casket. The mosque has three minarets, one of which is 250 feet high, and upon it, according to Moslem tradition, Jesus will descend on the day of judgment.

The style and workmanship of three periods are distinguishable in the building. There are the massive foundations and exterior colonnades of a Greek or Roman temple. There are next the round-topped windows and ornamented doorway of an early Christian church. Over the door is an inscription in Greek to the following effect:—“Thy kingdom, O Christ, is an everlasting kingdom, and thy dominion endureth throughout all generations.” Then there are the minarets, dome, and arcades of Saracenic origin.

Round the mosque are traces of a court, 1100 feet long by 800 feet wide, encompassed by colonnades similar to those of the temple of Herod in Jerusalem, and the temple of the sun at Palmyra. It seems highly probable that this was the site of the temple of Rimmon, mentioned in 2 Kings v. 18, and that it became in .after times the seat of the worship of Jupiter. In the 4th century it was converted into a church, and dedicated to John the Baptist; and in the beginning of the 8th century it was seized by the Mahometans.

There are many other mosques in the city, some of them large and beautiful. Among them are the Telciyeh, on the bank of the Abana at the western end of the city, founded by Sultan Selim, in 1516, for the accommodation of poor pilgrims, the graceful dome of which, flanked by two slender minarets, is seen from afar, and the Senaniyeh, in the centre of the city, distinguished by a minaret coated with green tiles, for the manufacture of which Damascus was once celebrated. It was built by Senan Pasha in 1581, and has a splendid cloistered court. There are also small and richly decorated chapels, connected with the tombs <<f Saladin, Bibars, and some other great princes. Among the traditional holy places of Damascus are the sanctuary of Abraham, at Burzeh, three miles north of the city; tl.e house of Naaman. now a leper hospital; the scene of Paul s conversion, near the east gate; the house of Ananias; and the spot where the apostle was let down from the wall.

The Ilaj, or pilgrim caravan, is one of the great sights of Damascus. It starts for Mecca each year on the 15th of the month Shawall. The muhmil, a canopy of green silk containing the new covering sent by the sultan for the Kaabah, is carried on the back of a dromedary, and is followed by the pasha, and great dignitaries of the city, escorted by the military. The streets and house-tops along the line of the procession are crowded with people. The caravan returns after an absence of four months. It is rapidly declining in numbers and importance.

The history of Damascus reaches far back into the mists of antiquity. Josephus says the city was founded by Uz, the son of Aram; and the name of its territory, as given in the Bible, namely, Aram Dameslc (2 Sam. viii. 6), is almost identical with its modern Arab name, which means “Damascus of Syria.” It was already a noted place in the days of Abraham, whose steward was “Eliezer of Damascus” (Gen. xv. 2). Some centuries later, it became, under the rule of the Hadads, the rival of Israel (1 Kings xv., xx., and xxii.). During that period it was the scene of the romantic story of the leper Naaman (2 Kings v.). A change of dynasty took place in the time of the prophet Elisha, when Hadad was murdered by Hazael (2 Kings viii.); but it was soon afterwards captured by Tiglath-pileser, and its people carried away to Assyria (2 Kings xvi. 9; Isa. xvii. 1-3). Colonies from Assyria were then placed in the city, and it continued for many centuries a dependency of that empire. It was taken by Alexander the Great, and after his death was attached to the kingdom of the Seleucidae. In 64 b.c. the Romans under Pompey captured it, and under their rule it remained till 37 A.D., when Aretas, king of Arabia, taking advantage of the death of the Emperor Tiberius, seized and held it during the time of St Paul’s visit (2 Cor xi. 32; Acts ix.).

Christianity appears to have spread rapidly in and around Damascus, as its metropolitan, with seven of his suffragans, was present at the Council of Nice in 325 a.d. About seventy years later the great temple was converted into a Christian church. In 634 the city fell into the hands of the Mahometans; and a few years later it became for a short period the capital of the Mahometan empire. The caliphs who ruled it adorned the city with many splendid buildings, and changed the cathedral into a mosque. A stormy period of four centuries now passed over Damascus, and then an unsuccessful attempt was made to capture it by the crusaders under Baldwin. The reigns of Noureddin, and his more distinguished successor Saladin, form bright epochs in the history of the city. Two centuries later came Tamerlane. Arab writers call him “the Wild Beast,” and he deserves the name. After the city had surrendered to him, and every male had paid the redemption money which he himself had assessed, he urged his soldiers to an indiscriminate massacre. Never had the city so fearfully experienced the horrors of conquest. Its wealth, its stores of antiquities, and rich fabrics were seized; its palaces were pillaged and left in ashes; its libraries, Idled with the literature of the period of the caliphs, and with the writings of the fathers of the Eastern Church, were destroyed. Tradition says that of the large Christian population only a single family escaped.

A century later Damascus fell into the hands of the Turks under Sultan Selim, and has since acknowledged their supremacy. In 1832 it was taken by the Egyptians under Ibrahim Pasha, the celebrated general and son of Mehemet Ali, and this conquest is chiefly remarkable for the effect it produced on the inhabitants. The city was then opened for the first time to the representatives of foreign powers. The British consul entered it mounted, and in full costume, escorted by Egyptian soldiers; and the first effectual check was given to Moslem fanaticism. In 1841 the Egyptians were driven out by the English, and Damascus with the rest of Syria reverted to the direct sway of the Sultan.

A Protestant mission was established in Damascus in 1843, and has succeeded, chiefly by its schools and the distribution of books, in greatly advancing the cause of education in and around the city.

The only incident worthy of record since that time is the massacre of 1860. The Moslem population, taking advantage of disturbances among the Druzes in Lebanon, rose against the Christians on the afternoon of Monday the 9th of July, and on that and the two following days burned the whole Christian quarter, and massacred in cold blood about 3000 adult males. But no estimate of the numbers actually murdered can give any adequate idea of the terrible results of the massacre. Thousands who escaped the sword died of wounds, or famine, or subsequent privation. The Christian quarter has been mostly rebuilt, but many of the most eminent and enterprizing Christian merchants removed to Beyrout and Egypt. Yet notwithstanding the fanaticism of its people, and the misgovernment of the Turks, Damascus is progressing. Schools have been established; the streets have been cleared of rubbish, and widened; sanitary regulations are enforced; and the fine new road recently made by a French company over Lebanon to Beyrout has given a great impetus to trade and manufacture. (j. l. p.)

Linen damasks, which are employed principally for table-cloths, napkins, and towels, are manufactured at Dunfermline, Kirkcaldy, and some other places in Fifeshire, Scotland; at Lisburn and Belfast, in Ireland; and in Holland, Belgium, and Russia. The fabric is usually woven in from four to eight leaf twills, that is with the weft intersecting the warp from every fourth up to every eighth thread; and the pattern is produced by varying the intersections on principles which will be explained under Weaving. Cotton damasks, in imitation of the linen manufactures, are now much woven and used for toilet covers and for similar purposes. Colours are frequently introduced in cotton damasks, manufactured in Glasgow and Paisley for dress purposes, and sent to the Indian and West Indian market. Silk damasks are manufactured for curtains and for other upholstery uses in all the great silk-weaving centres.