Take the very word which Walker selects to exemplify the contrary position to mimic. Now while we must, as he observes, retain the k in mimicking, we must omit it in mimical and mimically. So of the word politic, from which we have political, politically, and politician, all without the k. The same may be shown of almost every verb, noun, and adjective, once ending in ck, from which any formatives are made. The very argument then which Walker brings against the wisdom of dropping the k, is as complete as any majority of cases can make it in favour of the omission. It is the only way to produce regularity in these formatives.

It is to be remembered that Walker does not at all advise to the reinstatement of k in words where custom has dropped it. He only wishes the revolution may stop where it is. To this, so far as the construction of a present vocabulary is concerned, we can have no objection. Let Mr. S. only give us the present fashion of spelling, and it is all we ask; but for him to give us an obsolete one, is really as absurd as to publish for the laws of the land, a code long since repealed. It is surely worse than useless for a child to learn a mode of spelling not in common use, for he will have to unlearn it again, and to acquire the current mode, on penalty of being branded as old fashioned a penalty, by the way, which Mr. S. would deem absolutely insufferable in the article of pronunciation. Upon what principle it is that he would so zealously urge forward our children to adopt a new fashion in pronunciation, even before it is generally adopted in our community, and which in itself is no improvement, and at the same time drive them back to an old fashioned orthography, and beat them off from a real improvement completely established, I am at a loss to determine.

On the whole, should Mr. S. see fit, as I hope he will, in a subsequent edition, to give us a correct orthography, I believe his work would be immediately adopted into general use. But the error on which I have dwelt so long, is of so fundamental a character in a spelling-book, that I should advise the community to forego the other benefits of the book for a while, however highly I prize them; for some other author will soon come forth who will embody his improvements and avoid his obliquities, if he does not see fit to correct them.

Where the present edition is introduced in any school, I should advise the teacher to be at the trouble of dashing out from every copy the words in which an obsolete spelling is adopted. It will not be so much trouble as for the children to learn and then unlearn them and acquire a correct orthography. Or perhaps the better way will be, to omit the tables altogether, and to teach the pupils spelling from the reading lessons of almost any other book. One of the best items of advice which Lord Chesterfield, that philosopher on fashions, gave to his son, was, to acquire his orthography by observing the manner in which words were spelt in common books, and not in dictionaries. Then he would be in fashion; but if he had recourse to a dictionary, he would surely be behind it.

I should think it an additional improvement to the many which Mr. S. has already given us in his book, were he to introduce a well digested system of rules for the spelling of derivatives. These words are really the most perplexing to a writer of any in the language. He wants some rule, in participles for instance, to guide him when to omit the final vowel of the verb, or to double its final consonant. And what increases the necessity of such a system of rules tenfold, is the

fact that these derivatives are not inserted in common dictionaries, so that one is now left without any means at hand for deciding the orthography, in case he is not fortunate enough to recollect the manner in which he has seen it spelt in the course of his reading. Our language, notwithstanding its many anomalies, is sufficiently regular to render an extensive code of rules at once practicable and of great utility. I would also add, that I see nothing which bids so fair to preserve our orthography from innovation and to render it uniform. I believe too it would be a vast facility in the acquisition of orthography, for the youth, at an early period, to commit thoroughly to memory such a system of rules, illustrated by appropriate examples. It would supercede the great toil and burden to the memory now requisite for learning to spell in detail all the words we have to use. Such rules, to some extent, have already been given by different authors; but we should be glad to see them increased and better digested, and embodied as a leading and principal part of an elementary work.

I will here take occasion to remark that we manifestly need a primary book for children of much smaller dimensions than a common spelling-book, and of perhaps one fourth the price, for the purpose of teaching the alphabet and a very few of the first rudiments. It might perhaps be more adapted to the infant mind, and would certainly be a great saving of expense to the community, as it is an obvious waste for a child to destroy a large book, as is the common fact, in acquiring what is contained on a very few of its pages. Perhaps the Franklin Primer is the work we need.

My apology for having detained your readers so long on this article, is the importance of the subject. A spelling-book, however small in size, and humble in pretensions, and

destitute of interest to the mass of adult population, is still of vastly more importance to the coming generations than many a mighty tome which we patiently hear lauded through some fifty pages of a laboured review. Should these remarks contribute at all to render any future work of this kind better, or to prepare the community to appreciate any proposed improvements, I shall not regret the labour they have cost me.

The

I must still beg leave to make one more suggestion, though but remotely connected with the present subject. May there not be ultimately introduced into printed books, a system of stenography in which a single distinct character shall denote a syllabic sound, however differently that sound may now be spelt in different words? The benefits of such an improvement, if practicable, would compensate the labour of a hundred lives. immense labour now spent in the acquisition and practice of spelling, would be superceded-the pronunciation and notation of words, would stand a fairer chance to become permanent, as we are informed is the fact in some languages of India by their having no silent nor superfluous letters, nor any letter denoting more than one sound-and books might be reduced to half the price by the reduction in size. The obvious mode of effecting such a change, would be, first to construct with great care the requisite system of stenography; and then to print the bible and other common books in this character, with the requisite explanations of the notation at the beginning; and to rely on the reduction of price to give them currency. Once introduced, the system would then be taught in schools, instead of the alphabet, spelling, &c., and the toil of years would be reduced to months, and the time saved would be so much added to each one's life and use

nounce funeral orations on two archbishops; and his attempts on these occasions were attended with the most flattering success. Alarmed at his growing reputation, and dreading, as he said, the demon of pride, he resolved to escape him forever, and consigned himself to seclusion by becoming a monk in an abbey, where the strictest discipline was observed. It was not long, however, before he exposed himself again by a letter, which he was employed to address, on some particular occasion, to a dignitary of the church. The merit of the composition excited inquiry, and as soon as it was ascertained that he was its author, he was obliged to quit the habit and resume that of the Oratory.

Afterwards, while theological professor at Vienne, he delivered the funeral oration of Villars, archbishop of that city. On this occasion he seems to have given brilliant promise of his future celebrity. In consequence of his rising reputation, he was called to Paris, where he charmed the most crowded audiences, by a style of eloquence peculiarly his own. Appointed, at length, to preach before the court of Versailles, he was received with undiminished favour. After the death of Lewis XIV, the regent nominated him to the bishopric of Clermont. Before retiring to his diocese, however, he was engaged to preach again at Versailles before the new king, then nine years of age. In the course of three months, he composed and delivered those discourses which are known by the name of Petit Careme. Of these it is remarked, that though not in the highest degree finished, and perhaps inferior to some of his great sermons, in pathos and vehemence, yet their eloquence is more insinuating and delicate, and they convey those simple and affecting lessons, which were calculated to penetrate agreeably as well as forcibly

the heart of the young monarch, for whom they were designed. About this time, he was elected member of the French Academy. But nothing could detain him longer from his flock. He sought in Clermont, a retreat from the great world where his talents had gained him the applauses of courtiers, and dedicated those talents to the instruction of a less splendid, but more humble and docile audience. The charges which he delivered from time to time to his curates, are placed high among his works. "He preached to them," says d'Alembert in his eulogy, "the virtue, of which he set an example, disinterestedness, simplicity, forgetfulness of himself, the active and prudent earnestness of an enlightened conviction, very different from that fanaticism which proves nothing but the blindness of zeal, and which makes its own sincerity very doubtful."

His charity to the poor was unbounded. His whole revenue was at their service. Says the same writer, "His diocese retain the remembrance of his benefits now, after thirty years, and his memory is

still honored by the most eloquent of all funeral orations, the tears of a hundred thousand people, whom his bounty made happy." Not content with devoting his fortune to the indigent, he employed his interest and his pen in their favour; and presented to the court such pictures of the misery he saw around him, as obtained either actual contributions for them, or a considerable abatement of their taxes. His letters on this subject are said to be master-pieces of eloquence and pathos, superior even to the finest of his sermons. He died in 1742 in the 79th year of his age.

Massillon, as an orator, enjoyed unrivalled favour in his day, and he has gained to himself a name which will not soon be forgotten.

To