distance, and in whom the natives probably thought that the horrible spectacle would excite less disgust than in his superiors, was not only an eye-witness to their eating the body, but was invited to partake of the repast. But we cannot bring ourselves to go farther into these repulsive and barbarous details.

We can, after this, easily credit the author's declaration, that all attempts to civilize these wretched savages have hitherto proved ineffectual. One of their chiefs, more intelligent than his countrymen in general, was asked why he did not turn the minds of his people to agriculture; but he affirmed that it was impossible, and added, in his own expressive phraseology, that " if you told a New Zealander to work, he fell asleep; but if you spoke of fighting, he opened his eyes as wide as a tea-cup; that the whole bent of his mind was war, and that he looked upon fighting as fun.” The efforts of the missionaries to devote the attention of the islanders to agricultural and mechanical pursuits have sometimes indeed borne an appearance of success; but the wild volatility of the people, and their violent prejudices, have prevented those prospects from being realized.

The account given by Major Cruise is sufficiently unpromising. The missionaries have been established six years, and not one convert has yet been made. On the contrary, the natives, knowing too well that the missionaries were wholly in their power, committed constant depredations upon them, and not unfrequently aggravated their extortion by acts of gross insult. The voyagers invariably found the tribes among whom our countrymen dwelt more troublesome than any others; and as these pious settlers were dependent on them in a great measure even for food, these natives refused to supply them except in exchange for arms. The most murderous weapons became therefore common; and in their arrogance, perceiving themselves better armed than their neighbours, they did not confine their violence to their own brethren, but extended it to the missionaries themselves, and to the Europeans who lived occasionally among them. Some of the missionaries found themselves so uncomfortably situated that they talked of embarking in the Dromedary, and leaving the country; " but the natives told them that though they might go away themselves, their property should not be removed; that they considered whatever was landed to be under their controul; and it was evident that they valued the missionaries only for the articles which they distributed among them.”

As a relief to this unfavourable picture of the ferocious and intractable New Zealander, it is, however, but just to observe, that Major Cruise adduces several traits of individual generosity and gratitude, which might seem to argue a capability of good feeling and future improvement. In the native women, who lived with our seamen, he mentions, in particular, some touching instances of affection to their white protectors. But for these, and for many highly interesting notices of the religious superstitions, and other customs of the people, we have no room; and we must be contented to refer our readers to the volume itself, in which there is little that will not repay the trouble of perusal.

M. T. Ciceronis De Oratore Libri Tres Ex Editione J. Aug. Ernesti,

cum notis Variorum. In usum studiosæ juventutis. Accessit Appendix ex notis Harlessii, Pearcii, Schützii et aliorum excerpta ni J. GRCENWOOD, M.A. Domus Petri apud Cantabrigienses nuper socio, et regü orphanotrophië Christi e præceptoribus. London. Whittakers. 1824.

A REPRINT, as its title indicates, of Ernesti's edition of this most valuable treatise. Ernesti, to use Coplestone's phrase, was always distinguished for giving what may be called practical editions of the classics, that is, without any attempt at the ostentatious display of critical acumen, or any ponderous waste of erudition, but comprehending every thing which could be deemed necessary for understanding the author on whom he was commenting; and in this edition he amply preserves his character. Mr. Greenwood has added a good, though rather voluminous sylva of notes, excerpted from Harles and Pearce, which a more judicious arrangement would have incorporated with the notes placed under the text.

In his preface he gives the review of Ernesti, from the Bibliotheca Critica, of Amsterdam, in the year 1779, which appears to us hardly to merit the title of “pererudita” here bestowed upon it. In the first passage quoted in it,

“ Nam, sive quem aliena studia delectant, plurima est et in omni jure civili, et in Pontificum libris, et in XII. tabulis antiquitatis effigies,—sive quis civilem scientiam contempletur, totam hanc, descriptis omnibus civitatis utilitatibus et partibus, XII. tabulis contineri videbit ; sive quem ista præpotens et gloriosa philosophia delectat, dicam audacius, hosce habebit fontes omnium disputationum suarum, qui jure civili et legibus continentur.”

- If any

Agreeing as we do with the reviewer's emendation of “ antiqua,” for “ aliena,” which affords a very strained interpretation, we do not perceive the necessity of altering the text, with Pearce and Ernesti, from " videbitis" to " videbit;" for we cannot see any impropriety of speech in saying, one be delighted with antiquarian investigations--if any one pursue the study of the science of civil polity, you see that they are contained in the laws of the XII. tables." The phrase is colloquial, and if altered at all we should prefer “ videtis ;" as in the beginning of this very chapter, "nonne videtis,” &c. And shortly after, for the same reason, for “ habet," we should suggest not “habebit,” but “ habetis."

Neque vero, si quis utrumque potest, aut ille consilii publici auctor ac senator bonus, ob eam ipsam causam orator est ; aut hic disertus atque eloquens, si est idem in procuratione civitatis egregius, aliquam scientiam dicendi copiâ est consecutus.”

In the sentence immediately quoted, for “ aliquam,” which is evidently nonsense, in spite of Pearce's defence, Manutius and Lambinus, followed by Ernesti, read “ illam,” in place of which the Amsterdam critic recommends" alienam," not a whit more sensible than the old reading. We should recommend “ civilem.” It is at all events intelligible and Ciceronian,

“ Reprehendebat igitur Galbam Rutilius, quod is C. Sulpicii Galli, propinqui sui, pupillum filium ipse pæne in humeros suos extulisset, qui patris clarissumi recordatione et memoriâ fletum populo moveret, et duos filios suos parvos tutelæ populi commendasset, ac se, tanquam in procinctu testamentum faceret, sine librâ atque tabulis populum Romanum tutores instituere dixisset illorum orbitati." C. 53.

On which the Dutchman tells us, that there is no definitæ sententiæ consecutio,” because the “ et” (after“ recordatione”) cannot join the different terms “moveret," and commendasset, which is true enough ; and, secondly, because it was C. Sulp. Gallus, who recommended his children to the protection of the people, while it was his little son, or Galba for him, who excited the popular sorrow. Therefore he reads “extulisset, ut patris clarissumi recordatione, et memoriâ fletum populo moveret, (qui. sc. pater.) duos filios suos,”. &c. This wise reading Harles adopts. Nothing can be more needless. The "et" joins not moveret and commendasset, but recordatione and memoria, and as the very context shews the subject of "commendasset," and the following "dixisset," as of " extulisset,” just before is not the dying father, but Galba. Rutilius


says, Cicero blamed Galba for bringing out Sulpicius's son on his shoulders to excite the tears of the people--for recommend ing his two young sons to their guardianship--and for saying, &c. The making the speech to the people, as the context proves, is the gravamen of the accusation. If the Dutch correction were right, the verbs should better be "commendaverat, dixerat.” Perhaps "populo" should be “populi."

Argumentum enim ratio ipsa confirmat, quæ simul atque emissa est adhærescit." C. 53. lib. 2. This the Amsterdam man wishes to change to cui and emissum, which shews that he has not read the chapter on which he is commenting, with any

How could an argument stick to a reason ? Nonsense. The “ratio” here is the “ ratio dicendi,” which moves the feelings, and which when it hits, the moment it is shot, (an obvious metaphor) is of vast assistance to an argument. So in a sentence or two above, “ cum in eam rationem ingressus sis," &c.

C. 78. “ Est spectandum” is proposed for "expectandum" -"nullo profectu," as the critics say:

The Amsterdam critic is wrong in saying, that Pearce in this sentence proposes " quod ferro decernitur,” for quo ferro decernitur." Pearce proposes “in quo,” adding “ Præpositio in a finalibus literis vocis præundantis potuit absorberi.” This is a queer mistake. We should recommend

quo,” These, however, are mere matters of taste, and detracting little from the merits of this valuable and scholar-like edition. The Greek parallel passages could, of course, be easily amplified. But enough of this. The edition here given is the best for its purpose, hitherto extant, and will be an acceptable present to our “ studiosa juventus.” An edition of Cicero is, however, still a desideratum.

" i. e.



carnassei Historiarum Libri IX., fc. Commodius Digessit THOMAS GAISFORD, A. M. 2 Vols. 8vo. London. Whittakers and Rivingtons. Oxford. Parker. Cambridge. Deightons. 1824.

The name of the celebrated Greek professor of Oxford is sufficient evidence to scholars of the care, and the critical ingenuity and elegance of this edition. As it is intended for a class book, it is unaccompanied by a translation, but it has copious notes and an index. The learned editor has re-collated the Sancroft MSS., and a considerable number of others; but in a brief preface mentions that he restrains himself from enlarging on the peculiarities of this edition, in consequence of his being about to give an edition on a larger scale, with the Wesseling preface and illustrations of his own views and improvements. All scholars will look forward to such a work with the impatience due to the Professor's high reputation; and to the interest of one of the most original, simple, and captivating writers of antiquity.

Our Village : Sketches of Rural Character and Scenery. By MARY

RUSSEL MITFORD. . 8vo. Pp. 300. London. Whittakers. 1824.

[ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]


HE poetical taste of our day has been complained of, as overwrought, as delighting but in the extremes and ferocities of human character, as tolerating and exciting no other than the darker and more repulsive passions, a sort of evil and outlawed spirit, rejoicing to summon round it shapes as gloomy as itself, and propagate its evil. It has been justly characterized as aristocratic, romantic, and disdainful of the more natural feelings and humbler scenes of human life.

It is, however, a curious literary phenomenon, that the spirit of our prose should present the direct contrast to that of our poetry. The dark spell has been strictly limited to one species of composition; and the more popular of our novelists and essay ists seem even to have been betrayed into something not far from an affectation of meekness. They are miraculously purified from all worldly gall, and cover their gentle pages with a perpetual cordiality, a sort of pastoral rapture with every

thing about them--an unwearied smiling and blandishment upon every imaginable object-low or lofty, opulent or poor, 'man or brute. One class of those make a profession of being enamoured of nature, and grow eloquent and insufferable in their delight at a blue sky, or a budding flower, “die of a rose in aromatic pain ;” another class feebly rove through fields and cottages for the perfection of beauty, virtue, and the graces, and find a sordid clown and his plump wife " the noblest work of God;" a third send their fancy in a "fine frenzy rolling" back into the last century, and discover in the Lady Bountifuls and

« ͹˹Թõ