in its welfare arises from considerations pertaining to literature and religion. They believe that the Baptists of the United States, comprising a membership unequalled as to numbers except by the membership of one other communion, and embracing a fair share of social consideration, wealth, and intellectual culture, owe with their fellow-Christians a common debt to the cause of Christian letters,―a debt which it is difficult to discharge without the aid of such a journal as the Christian Review. Its pages, as from the first they have done, will contribute to the formation and development of a literary taste among us, will take especial pains to introduce and examine the books which proceed from Baptist writers, and, it may be hoped, will stimulate the use of an increasing number of pens within the range of our broadly extended fellowship. We do not mean that none but Baptist writers will contribute to our pages; from them we expect to receive the large share of our contributions, but we hope likewise to engage on many themes the aid of gifted writers without the Baptist pale. The themes within the range of our common Christianity, like those within the range of our common literature, are numerous and attractive, and as we hope to present a journal whose pages shall be agreeable to readers of other ecclesiastical connections, so we hope to furnish a medium through which writers of those connections will be pleased to communicate their thoughts.

At the same time, however faithfully we may hope to see the Christian Review fulfilling its obligations to the common cause of Christian letters and science, it will never consciously be overlooked that it is primarily and essentially a Baptist journal. It will explain and defend the Baptist faith, it will survey the Christian world, agitated as it now is, and will be until the simple truth in Christ reigns, by questions of rites and ceremonies, of priestly power and laical submission, of relations to society and the State, from the Baptist stand-point,—it will (such is the design and the hope) recall our PAST, the illustrious annals through which our fathers developed and vindicated the peculiar doctrines of their "soul-liberty" in Christ, and show the inworking and triumph of their principles in the progress of religious and civil freedom. They have borne a noble part in the drama of history, and it is time their names and deeds were rescued from the odium cast upon them by unfriendly annalists.

It is not necessary to define with great particularity the range of topics which will be discussed upon the pages of the Christian Review. It will contain articles in the depart

ments of Philology, Theology, Ecclesiastical Polity, Science, History and General Literature; it will examine Books, especially such as awaken interest and influence opinions,Questions, especially such as agitate society,-Events, such as mark the times and are destined to work upon those who come after us. In a word, appropriating the sentiment and nearly the language of the first and ever-lamented editor of this journal, we shall feel it to be a duty to discuss in the spirit of genuine freedom and independence all proper and useful topics, avoiding as much as possible those which would cause discord rather than promote union, holiness, and Christian efficiency. "We must however reserve the right to judge what these topics are; and we can give no pledges, except the general assurance of a' conscientious endeavor to please our Lord and advance the prosperity of his cause.'

On these plans and purposes we invoke the blessing of God, without whose blessing human devisings and labors are vain. We invoke likewise the steadfast and cordial co-operation of our patrons and friends. The importance of the Christian Review to the Baptist denomination is understood to be settled; but the Christian Review in order to be sustained must have subscribers and writers. These we ask, not for the sake of the publishers or for our own sake, so much as for the sake of the Review itself and of the aims which it proposes. These we hope will be found, East, West, North and South, as well as at our own doors, and the period speedily arrive when the permanent establishment of the Review shall cease to be a problem.

To prevent the possibility of misconception on that point, we would say at the outset, that we are not to be understood as responsible for every shade of opinion which may be expressed by our contributors. Ours is a more general responsibility,—that the articles published shall be suitable to our pages, not that they shall coincide with our personal views. Truth is better elicited where a reasonable latitude of opinion is allowed.

A Copious and Critical English-Latin Lexicon, founded on the GermanLatin Dictionary of Dr. Charles Ernest Georges. By the Rev. JOSEPH ESMOND RIDDLE, M. A., of St. Edmund Hall, Oxford, Author of a Complete Latin-English Dictionary, &c.; and the Rev. THOMAS KERCHEVER ARNOLD, M. A., Rector of Lyndon, and late Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge. First American Edition; carefully revised, and containing a Copious Dictionary of Proper Names, from the best sources, by CHARLES ANTHON, LL. D., Professor of the Greek and Latin Languages in Columbia College. New-York: Harper & Brothers. 1850.

It is a grateful indication of the flourishing condition of classical education in the country, that this English-Latin Lexicon, containing nearly eight hundred octavo pages, the exclusive object of which is to aid students in writing Latin, has found an American editor and publisher, and been issued in a handsome volume, within a very short period of its first appearance in England. This fact furnishes conclusive and, to us, most welcome proof, that the practice of writing Latin, an exercise of immense value to the young student, as well for the discipline of the mind, as for the successful study of the Latin language, is gradually gaining in frequency and in extent in our schools and colleges. We have not time nor room at present for an extended review of this Lexicon, but we take the earliest occasion to record, in the pages of this journal, the fact of its publication, and to call to it the attention of our classical readers, as a book which marks an epoch in the history of Latin Lexicography in the English language; being, so far as we know, the first instance of a work of the kind in English, prepared on an extended plan, and of sufficient compass and size to require its publication as an independent volume, and to entitle it to the name it bears, of "A Copious and Critical English-Latin Lexicon."

For many years, the only existing help in writing Latin, accessible to American pupils, was the very imperfect manual of Ainsworth. A great advance was made by the English-Latin Lexicon, published as an accompaniment to the Latin Dictionary of the late Mr. Leverett, a gentleman whose personal virtues, and rare skill and ability as a teacher, have a cherished place in the memories and hearts of very many, who were once his pupils, and whose eminent services to Latin Lexicography are acknowledged by all American scholars. That English-Latin Lexicon, however, though "prepared to accompany" Mr. Leverett's work, and modestly designated as such on the title-page, without any name appearing, was not prepared by Mr. Leverett himself. For its preparation, the classical public were indebted to Mr. H. W. Torrey, a former pupil of Mr. Leverett, and a person eminently qualified for the task by his accurate and extensive attainments as a scholar, and his habits and experience as a teacher. Superior as that work was to everything of the kind before existing, and good as it was in itself, it still left much to be done, much even unattempted; and no one was so sensible of its imperfections as the editor himself, nor so much regretted the necessity of their existence. Most unfortunately, owing to the limited time allowed him by the publishers, and still more, we may add, from the failure of the editor's eyesight, occasioned by unwearied devotion to his labors, the plan of the work was finally restricted to an improvement upon Ainsworth. Had

L

Mr. Torrey been able to go on with his labors on the plan which he had projected, and in part executed, and prepared a work on the basis of Georges' German-Latin Lexicon, we doubt not that it would have superseded for very many years the need of any new labor in this field of classical learning. As it was, Mr. Torrey's Lexicon won its way to general adoption, very soon after its publication, and has ever since been in- use in the schools and colleges of the country. It has done in its day a most excellent service; and we must confess, that after an acquaintance with it of some years' standing, in which, in the routine of professional duty, we have been wont to turn to its pages, we are conscious of something of a fond regret, like that which one feels in parting with an old friend, as we think of exchanging the worn, flexible volume, for this brand-new, stiff-looking stranger, that now claims our regards.

The Lexicon, the title of which stands at the head of this notice, is the joint production of two English scholars, whose names are well known in this country. In some very obvious and most important respects, Mr. Riddle and Mr. Arnold were admirably fitted for the task which they undertook. They are both distinguished classical scholars, and men of experience and tried character as teachers, and of rare tact and skill in the preparation of books designed for use in schools and colleges. Mr. Riddle has for many years been a busy laborer in Latin Lexicography, and has published three Dictionaries, adapted to different stages of the student's progress. Mr. Arnold is generally known by his series of Greek and Latin books, which has been republished in this country, by the Messrs. Appleton, and is perhaps more extensively used than any other similar series. In the preparation of the extended vocabulary and the Antibarbarus, in the Second Part of his Latin Prose Composition, he had also well performed a task of no little magnitude, which directly fitted him for the more extended labors of a lexicographer. Besides, Mr. Riddle and Mr. Arnold were furnished for their work with an accurate and thorough knowledge of German, a qualification indispensable for the editor of a Latin Lexicon in our times, and, indeed, we may add, to the editor of any work in ancient literature, and to the Latin or the Greek scholar who aspires to any distinction. They were familiar with all that had been done by German scholars in Latin Lexicography and its kindred departments of study; and were able to avail themselves of all such special labors, and, in general, to gather whatever was needful for their use from the vast stores of classical learning, which are treasured up in the German language. We observe, that, in alluding in their Preface to the sources whence they have taken their materials, they mention fourteen works, all of which are the productions of German scholars.

This Lexicon is founded on the third edition of the same work which Mr. Torrey had intended in his original plan to make the basis of his Dictionary, the German-Latin Lexicon of K. E. Georges. The first edition of Georges' work, published in 1831-33, was far superior to the earlier works of Scheller and Lünemann, and also of Kraft and Wüste mann, and the third edition, published in 1845, is acknowledged to be the best book of the kind in the German language. What are the absolute merits of this English-Latin Lexicon can of course be correctly determined in detail, only after frequent, long-continued use in the practical business of teaching; but, from a notice of the ends which the editors proposed to themselves, and the method which they adopted, and from a careful examination of particular portions, we readily discover that it is a work of superior merit. It has attempted, and, we doubt not, done well, more than any work which has preceded it; and in the compass of its plan, and its whole character, it stands quite by itself in the literature of English-Latin Lexicography. It is characterized by a clear and orderly

arrangement, and by fullness of detail, in union and harmony with just principles of selection; the phraseology is nice and choice, and frequently attended by references to classical writers; the distinctions between synonymes are given, upon the best authority, and with great care and exactness; and the pupil is constantly aided by remarks and cautions, warning him against expressions which offend against the purity of the Latin idiom, and pointing him to those which have the sanction of the best writers. We have observed with special satisfaction the unusual extent to which synonymes are discussed. The distinctions are given briefly and clearly, so that when there are several words which correspond in general to an English word, the student can scarcely fail to discover, on a little reflection, which is the right one for his immediate purpose. In many instances, are set down pairs of words, of kindred meaning, especially of adjectives, on the authority of good writers, who employed them together, to express their ideas with more force and fullness. We should have been glad to see more frequently appended to the names of the writers, the name of the particular work, and the place in it, where the given expression occurred. Such a course the English editors ought certainly to have pursued, at least wherever the passage was fully cited in Georges' work. We happened to notice under the word Old age, a mere reference to Ovid as authority for a phrase, though Georges gives the work of Ovid, and the line in which the phrase occurs. Under the same word, however, the expression cruda ac viridis senectus is ascribed to Virgil in the English work, though Georges, in our edition, (the second,) does not mention Virgil. The English editors might have gone farther, and added the passage, Een. 6, 304, and also referred to Tacitus, as he has the same expression in the Agricola, c. 29. Messrs. Riddle and Arnold have, we doubt not, for the most part, successfully performed the work of translation from the German. Such, at least, we have found to be the case, in a comparison of several pages with Georges. But we find under Antiquity an expression which fails to give the German with point and exactness. The English is-" bears about it evident marks of antiquity;" but the German word for those we have italicized is Gepräge, and the English should read—the stamp "of antiquity." Under Ability, we find in explanation of ingenium, "Connate mental power," a bad English expression, whatever the German might be; but the German is Angeborene, and means inborn, innate. But we may be thought captious in touching upon these blemishes in an extensive work, generally so excellent; and perhaps we ought to bear in mind the charitable rule of criticism, given by Horace :

"Verùm operi longo fas est obrepere somnum."

What we have now said, applies of course to the original English work. The Messrs. Harper have republished it in the American edition in handsome form and style, on good paper, and in clear, excellent type; the whole under the careful editorial supervision of Dr. Anthon and Prof. Drisler. Dr. Anthon has added an Index of Proper Names, made expressly for the purpose, and on the basis of the best authorities. In his Preface, Dr. Anthon says: "What will be found, however, to give the American edition a decided advantage over the English work, is the Dictionary of Proper Names, which is wanting in the latter." This remark is certainly correct, as the Index is a good one, and enhances the value of an English-Latin Lexicon; but it seems to imply that the English editors had overlooked this part of their task, whereas they state in their Preface, that "a copious Dictionary of Proper Names, to complete the work, will be published separately." The Dedication-page, we