safety and permanency of our own institntions; the other to the freedom and happiness of mankind.

Our republican institutions originated with the people, and are to be supported by the people. They originated under the influence of the Bible and the gospel, and no other influence is adequate to sustain them. Put away the Bible, the Sabbath, the Church, the gospel ministry and ordinances, from this land, and consign it over to Popery, infidelity, and heathenism, and how long would our free institutions remain? How long, before thick darkness would settle down upon the minds of the people, the public conscience would be seared, religious restraints would be taken away, and our forms of government, so free and yet so effective, would be given to the winds? The Bible, I repeat, is the palladium of our country's liberty. With this, believed and obeyed by the great body of our citizens, we can never be enslaved. Without it, we cannot long be freemen. Enthusiasts may point to their favorite schemes; but no scheme, whether of society or government, can long save us, without the Bible. Aspiring demagogues may boast of their patriotism; but he is the best patriot, who best studies, loves, and obeys the Bible. He is the best patriot, who best exemplifies its Divine influence upon himself, and who labors most assiduously to extend its influence all over the land, and over the world.

The Bible does not permit us to live for ourselves, or to consult chiefly even for our country's good. We are to live for mankind. We are to consult the highest virtue and happiness of the race. And how can this object be promoted, but by engaging, as we are able, in the great and glorious enterprise of giving the Bible to the nations? Without the Bible, the dark portions of the earth can never be enlightened, or civilized, or Christianized. They can never be prepared for the enjoyment of rational liberty and happiness. We owe it, then, to the benighted nations; we owe it to that Savior who has died for them, and has commanded us to seek their good; we owe it to our own soul's welfare, to unite, to the extent of our means and influence, in sending the gospel to the destitute portions of the earth, that so the blind may see, and the deaf may hear, and the spiritually dead may be revived, and live forever.

ARTICLE V.

AIDS TO CLASSICAL STUDY.

By E. D. SANBORN, Professor of Languages, Dartmouth College, N. H.

WE often hear scholars lamenting the decline of classical learning, while the facilities for the study of the dead language sare daily increasing. The press literally teems with text-books and commentaries for the use of students. Lexicons, grammars, annotations, scholia, keys, and translations, are as numerous as autumn leaves. Every year yields a rich harvest of "aids" to the critical study of the classics. If the numerous editions of standard authors, with notes and emendations, which so often claim the attention, and call forth the eulogies of literati, are, in any degree, true indices of the popular taste, we may, with great confidence, affirm that classical literature is reviving. Within a few years, nearly half a score of Greek lexicons, with English definitions, have been published in England and America; while in Germany, works of the highest merit in philology, succeed each other as rapidly as the pictures in a showman's box. In the department of Latin philology, the press has been far less prolific, still there are not wanting sufficient helps for the thorough mastery of this language. The complete separation of the Latin and Greek languages in the lexicography of the latter, and the substitution of English for Latin definitions of Greek words, have brought the study of Latin into comparative disesteem. Consequently, the Greek language has gained popular favor, while the Latin has fallen somewhat into disrepute. At least, such is the testimony of English scholars. "No person," says Mr. Donaldson,' "who is conversant with the subject, will venture to assert, that Latin scholarship is at present flourishing in England. On the contrary, it must be admitted, that while we have lost that practical familiarity with the Latin language, which was possessed some forty years ago, by every Englishman with any pretensions to scholarship, we have not supplied the deficiency by making ourselves acquainted with the results of modern philology, so far as they have been brought to bear upon the language and literature of ancient Rome."The Latin language has now ceased to be the only medium of communication among scholars. The cultivation of the vernacular tongues of Europe, has contributed more than all other causes, to cast down the Latin from its Varronianus, p. 6.

throne in the literary heavens. After the revival of learning in Europe, as well as during the thousand years that preceded it, the Latin language was, by general consent, the language of students. It was at once, the depositary of all their literary treasures, and the only vehicle of new thoughts. Learned men wrote and conversed in this tongue. No text-book was written in the vulgar dialects. It was the pride of scholars to acquire a classic style, and to emulate the finished periods of Cicero and Livy. To depart from these approved models, in the use and collocation of words, subjected the writer to the reproach of ignorance and barbarism. Hence, a thorough acquaintance with the Latin language became an indispensable requisite of literary success. The road to true distinction in learning, lay through the wilderness of etymology and prosody. It was fatal to the reputation of the young aspirant to desert it, or to linger by the way. The temple of truth was reared, if not upon the tombs, at least upon the tomes of the dead. Her responses were uttered in the language of the dead; and in the same changeless forms of speech, her votaries were compelled to enshrine their living thoughts. To the multitude, they seemed like the inhabitants of a distant sphere. Their mystic lore excited the wonder of the many, but gave them no new ideas. The Church employed the same medium of thought, both in its communications with earth and heaven. The Scriptures, the canons, and other authorities of the Church, and the regular liturgies were all written in the Latin tongue. The clergy offered their prayers in Latin, and in the Roman provinces, continued to deliver their homilies in the same language, until the numerous changes of the vulgar dialects, rendered pure Latin entirely unintelligible. The honors of earth, and the favors of heaven, were both imparted through the same medium. The Church claimed the right to bestow secular power, and to dispense the treasures of Divine grace. The magnitude of the gifts imparted, gave a factitious value to the airy medium through which they were received. The "winged words" which bore to curious minds the treasures of knowledge, bestowed on waiting monarchs the right to rule, and conveyed to sorrowing penitents the assurance of sins forgiven, acquired a degree of sacredness, such as ever attaches to the memorials of power and holiness in the minds of the ignorant.

When Dante wrote his Divina Comedia, he considered it a hazardous experiment to employ his native language in a composition so elevated. He deliberated long whether he should clothe his thoughts in Latin or Italian. He wisely chose the latter; and, by so doing, contributed more than all other writers to give character and permanency to his native tongue. When the Divina Comedia appeared, the English language could scarcely

be said to exist.' It was undoubtedly sufficient for the ordinary intercourse of life; but, as an instrument of thought, for the full and clear expression of ideas, it was very rude and imperfect; it had no established standard of orthography or style. Not until more than three centuries had elapsed, and the translation of the Bible, together with the writings of such men as Milton and Shakspeare had given form and beauty to the crude and heterogeneous materials of which it is composed, can the language be said to have acquired an authorative standard of "use." During this period of transition, while both the English language and the dialects of the continent were maturing, the Latin retained its ascendency in the literary world. When driven from the pulpit, it fled to the altar; and when a reformed Christianity had expeled it from the chancel, as a heathen usurper, it still found a congenial home in the universities. When scholars continued to speak and write in the Latin tongue, a thorough acquaintance with this language was the only passport to literary distinction. Not to understand it betokened unlettered ignorance. Hence students prided themselves upon a thorough acquaintance with the minutia of the grammar and rhetoric of this language. A liberal education implied not merely an ability to read and speak Latin with accuracy, but to write it with classic purity and elegance. To know how Cicero compounded his sentences, where he placed the leading and where the dependent verb; to point out the exact position of each particle that served in the marshaled hosts of memory; to define the times, modes, and figures in which these winged warriors were arrayed for action, was the crowning excellence of the young student's "Humanities." This veneration for ancient authors, not only for their thoughts, but for the most trifling peculiarities of the dress in which they were clothed, was, for ages, transmitted to successive generations of learners by the very esprit du corps of literary society. This spirit has not yet wholly disappeared. In many instances, the study of Latin is advocated on precisely the same grounds as in centuries past. Men who thus defend a truly liberal and useful study, forget the radical changes which time has wrought in the literary as well as in the political world. The Latin language has ceased to be the store-house of all knowledge, and is no longer the only "circulating medium" through which an exchange of thoughts can be effected. New sciences have been developed which now claim the attention of the scholar. The field of know1 Only two centuries ago, an English poet thus complained of the instability of the English tongue :—

"Poets that lasting marble seek,

Must carve in Latin or in Greek:

We write in sand, our language grows,
And like the tide our work o'erflows."

ledge and inquiry has been indefinitely enlarged. The boundaries of the old sciences have advanced. What was terra incognita to the scholars of past ages, has been successfully explored, and to some branches of learning we may apply the words of Tacitus; "dispecta est et Thule quadam tenus." The thoughts of men now flow in new channels. All knowledge is not ancient. Much of it has not yet attained to the age of man. Every gene

ration now adds to the common stock of ideas. The human mind has broken the chains of authority. The fathers in the church and the university do not now speak with authority. To the couched eye of modern discovery, they sometimes seem to drivel and to doat. The infirmities of age are upon them. The new generation of thinkers claims to stand upon a more exalted eminence, and to command a more extensive prospect. They affect to rise into a purer atmosphere, and enjoy a clearer vision. The mists of prejudice have vanished, and the sunlight of reason shines upon the field of research. The departments of liberal study have been so multiplied, that the ordinary life of man is not sufficient to master them. The seven liberal arts, the trivium and the quadrivium of the schoolman have become almost seventy times seven. Gius and research are daily adding to the stores of human thought, and enlarging the field of study. The "seven years" of toil that once mastered the whole circle of sciences, now scarcely introduces the young philosopher into the temple of truth. In that period he can only learn the elements of the several departments of study. If he would be a general scholar, he must be content with a very imperfect knowledge of many important branches. Men excel, generally, only in single departments of literature or science. He who attempts to be proficient in all, will be perfect in none. It seems, therefore, to be the dictate of true wisdom, to "divide and conquer," to allow each man to choose his post of duty. Although there is, as Cicero asserts, a "commune vinculum," between all the branches of a liberal education, and a partial acquaintance with all is essential to complete success in one, yet the scholar who wishes to advance any branch of learning, and to make new discoveries in it, must devote his energies principally to that alone. But in every sholar's life, there must be a period of training, a period of discipline, when the mind acquires dexterity, vigor, and power of intellectual action. The design of education is, first to give the mind capacity, then to fill it, to develop and store it. It is more important to originate thoughts, than to acquire them from others. Mental strength ought to be sought in preference to mental stores. Men should learn rather how to think, than what to think. The great object of the young student, therefore, is, to expand and invigorate the mind, to promote the harmonious development of its powers; to improve the memory, control the attention, give