dently shows a preparation for the press. I have
compared this copy with the English edition, published in the same
year, and find that some of the {228}corrections were adopted; this,
however, but in a few instances, while in one, to be mentioned
presently, a palpable mistake, corrected in the MS. Latin notes,
stands in the translation. The English version differs very
materially from the Latin. The author says in his Preface:--

"This English version is the same in substance with the
Latin, though I confess, 'tis not so properly a translation,
as a new composition upon the same ground, there being
several additional chapters in it, and several new moulded."

The following are examples of corrections being adopted: P. 6. Latin
ed. "Quod abunde probabitur in principio libri secundi." For the
last word _subsequentis_ is substituted, and the English has
_following_. P. 35. "Hippolitus" is added to the authorities in
the MS.; and in the English, p. 36., "Anastasius Sinaiti, S.
Gaudentius, Q. Julius Hilarius, Isidorus Hispalensis, and
Cassiodorus," are inserted after Lactantius, in both. P. 37.
"Johannes Damascenus" is added after St. Augustin in both. P. 180. a
clause is added which seems to have suggested the sentence
beginning, "Thus we have discharged our promise," &c. But, on the
other hand, in p. 8. the allusion to the "Orphics," which is struck
out in the Latin, is retained in the English; and in the latter
there is no notice taken of "Empedocles," which is inserted in the
margin of the Latin. In p. 11. "Ratio naturalis" is personified, and
governs the verb _vidit_, which is repeated several times. This
is changed by the corrector into vidimus; but in the English
passage, though varying much from the Latin, the personification is
retained. In p. 58., "Dion Cassius" is corrected to "Xiphilinus;"
but the mistake is preserved in the English version.

JOHN JEBB.

* * * * *

SHAKSPEARE'S EMPLOYMENT OF MONOSYLLABLES.

I offer the following flim-flam to the examination of your readers,
all of whom are, I presume, more or less, readers of Shakspeare, and
far better qualified than I am to "anatomize" his writings, and "see
what bred about his heart."

I start with the proposition that the language of passion is almost
invariably broken and abrupt, and the deduction that I wish to draw
from this proposition, and the passages that I am about to quote is,
that--_Shakspeare on mor