The London publication of 1784 was only for boys; and we believe no young gentleman, arrived at years of discretion, and only such should be admitted at the univer-, sity, will need this castigated edition for the safeguard of his morals. The vulgarities of Horace are so disgusting, as to shock, rather than allure; and they are besides of infrequent occurrence, and difficult to be explained. It is indeed a poor compliment to the ingenuous minds of the students, and the omission may have the bad tendency of setting them to study in other editions the worthless, but mysterious passages, which, if found in their own, would be neglected and despised.

We regret too, that our alma mater, in adopting this schoolmaster's publication, has transcribed also his advertisement, and offered one of her own besides in the common language of a newspaper. Why did she not tax the talents of one of her many learned sons, and preserve us from the deep and lasting disgrace of an English preface to a Latin classick?

The first castrated edition, of which we find mention in any catalogue, (and often in catalogues alone will the poverty of our country afford the means of ascertaining the dates of literary works) is by Jos. Juvencius, a Jesuit, Paris, 1736, 3 vols. 12mo. ; and it has been several times reprinted. The London copy abovementioned, we have not been able to procure; but we have before us one printed at Rouen, 1757.

These editions are not common in our country, and we need not desire them. Should we admit the utility of expunging a few lines from our school editions of the classicks, we must blame that ferocious passion for decency, that

has unmercifully annihilated some of the finest passages, lines, that a virgin without blush might read.' In this Jesuit Horace more is omitted than in the 18mo. edition of Didot, examined by a correspondent in our Anthology for February last. The publisher was certainly infected with the madness of Jack, who, tearing off his embroidery, rent the cloth with it. Ah, good brother Martin,' said he, 'do as I do, for the love of God; strip, tear, pull, rend, flay off all.'

Of the omissions from this volume we may conclude by recollecting, that to have translated the. 9th Ode of Lib. 3 (one of the proscribed) was never imputed to bishop Atterbury as an insult to society, or an offence against religion. That version we could not easily procure; but we have one of the famous 5th Ode of Lib. 1, which will shew the ardour for reform in these castigated editions. Let any student of the university read from Milton's works, if he can without danger to his temporal and eternal interests, Quis multa gracilis te puer in rosa, rendered almost word for word without rhime, according to the Latin measure, as near as the language will permit.'

What slender youth bedew'd with liquid

odours

To whom thou untry'd seem'st fair. Me in my vow'd

Picture the sacred wall declares t'have hung

My dank and dropping weeds
To the stern God of sea.

Thus far, it will be seen, our objections are general to all the mutilated editions. The unhappy subject before us is thus far only culpable with others but he has also committed an offence in the solitary instance, in which his conduct differs from his predecessors. His sole claim to originality is founded on a fault, the banishment of colons. The lawful claims of this branch of the family of punctuation have often been opposed in America. A professor in the neighbouring University,whose talents, usefully employed for many years, we remember with gratitude, was inimical to them; and many of his pupils have perhaps thought lessly joined his banners in the warfare. A powerful auxiliary to the misocolon party has just appeared in the person of the philologist of Connecticut, of whom we can hardly discover, whether he is more ingenious in pursuit of novelties, or ardent in opposition to the ancient landmarks of language. The divided empire has been allotted, in imagination, partly to the semicolon, and partly to the period: but the colon's rights are not to be overthrown by such combatants, while he is supported by the whole host of the literati. This point, we know, is often improperly used, and may sometimes give way to the pretenders without injury to the sense; but in many cases its use is indispensable. Let any of these reformers of punctuation read two pages of Milton, and change the colon for the other stops in every instance, if they can. There is hardly a page

er.

After peace and hell, in this passage, some would have periods; but we think the sense and the sentence are better continued togethPunctuation is not arbitrary, as is sometimes said by those,who never studied it. Men may think in such an artificial manner, as to supersede the use of colons; but variety of style requires sentences of various length, and colons then become necessary.

What wild work has reformation made in the volume under review! Who will not see, that the colon is more proper in Od. 1. 17. Take a rule for the use of colons from modest Murray :'when a member of a sentence is complete in itself, but followed by some supplemental remark, or further illustration of the subject,' and apply it, in Od. 7. 31.

O fortes, pejoraque passi Mecum sæpe viri, nunc vino pellite cu

ras:

Cras ingens iterabimus æquor. Surely the antithesis between nune and cras forbids the period, used in the volume before us. When Od. 7 is quoted by us, the number refers to the perfect, not to the mutilated edition. Another instance of the horrour of colons is

Who does not prefer this one sen. tence, as it is, rather than cut up into five little ones, as he may find it in the subject of our review? Still worse is the punctuation at lines 4 and 6 of Epode 2. But in Lib. 4. Ode 5, which is the 4th Ode in this mutilated edition, the extreme of absurdity is gained. The sentence, composed of eight lines, beginning at the 17th, is divided into eight different periods by full stops at the end of each line.

Nor is it only of the want of colons, that we must complain. What is wanting on one side is most amply compensated on another. For a superfluity of commas we think the beginning of Ode 4. Lib. 3. is admirably ridiculous.

Descende *Cœlo, et, dic, age, tibia, Regina, longum, Calliope, melos, Now the printer's devil could have hardly done worse, had his master told him, he might put a comma, where he pleased, unless he had sprinkled them after every letter. Read those lines with a pause at each comma, and how does it sound. The word, et, has suddenly become very important, and figures away with its aids-de-camp commas, as proud as the first of the Muses.

Of such instances we might continue to quote enough to fatigue ourselves, and weary our readers. But we must turn to another lamentable labour, the examination of the notes. We rejoice indeed, that the Ordo' or interpretation is wiped away; yet at the bottom of the page we too often find that officious kindness, which, in the Delphini editions, greets us in the margin. On the very first page the first and second notes contradict each other, and both are wrong. Curriculum means the ground, and not the chariot. Was there ever a baby entered at the University, who wanted a note to inform him, that the Mediterranean sea is meant in Ode 3. Book 3:

Quà medius liquor Secernit Europen ab Afro. ?

See too in Ode 29. Lib. id. ver.44. occupato explained, tertia persona imperativi. The boy, who needs this annotation, should have his brain stimulated by an application to his rear. Much ingenuity is however exhibited in the improvement of Gesner's note on argutos, Ep. 2. Lib. 2. verse 90. G. says, argutos: sonoros, sublimes'; the Cam. bridge book, argutos; canoros; subtiles.' After stealing the boy,

* Good editions use a small letter, ' cœlo.'

'twas safest to alter the dress. In line 270. de Arte Po. Horace

says:

At nostri proasi Plautinos et numeros et Laudavere sales,

Who would have looked for an order of genealogy in the explanation of proavi? Est hic ordo, pater, avus, proavus, abavus, atavus,' and so on, all the way down the ladder, as well as up. Let the student examine his dictionary, and nine-tenths of his notes will be useless.

One other disagreeable occurrence has just struck us, the Art of Poetry is introduced by an English preface. Ohe jam satis !

The errours of the press also are abundant. Was not the anecdote, recorded by the Hon. Topham Beauclerk in his copy of the Glasgow Horace, known at Cambridge? This is an immaculate edition; the sheets, as they were printed, were hung up in the college of Glasgow, and a reward was offer-, ed to those, who should discover, an inaccuracy. This edition, the best of all by Foulis, we have before us, and could have been well contented, had our University reprinted it. Its size is not one third so large, as the work we are now reviewing, and its value-but gold and sand are not to be compared. If any other work is to be reprinted at Cambridge, we hope the language of Aldus, nearly three hundred years ago, may be recollected with effect: Etsi opere in magno fas est obrepere somnum (non enim unius diei hic labor est noster, sed multorum annorum, atque interim nec mora, nec requies) sic tamen doleo, ut si possem, mutarem singula erra

ta nummo aureo.'

Of punctuation we shall not note what may seem errours of Vol. IV. No. 7.

3A

the press, for we know not, that they are not produced by design, and thought to be justified by rule. Without such we can gather a plenteous harvest of errata.

LIB. I.

Ode 1. 25. jove for Jove.

35. inseres insenis in the *

best readings.

Ode 2. 2. pater-Pater; for look at 1. 15. and Regis has a capital, and shall the Father of Gods and men be without ?

.. 19. should have the first syllable of the next line.

Ode 4. 12. the best editions read agna and hado in the ablative.

.. 18. Horace wrote Nec regna,&c. but as the following lines are omitted in this book, the word was necessarily changed.

Ode 9. 14. fors for sors in the best criticks.

15. Camanas for amores. O the prudery of the Jesuits! Ode 10. 14. relicta for relicto, Ilion being generally neuter.

Ode 12. 8. rupes for silve, in all good or bad editions within our

reach.