lish phrase the meaning of the numerous variations of Latin verbs, but it is monstrous to pretend that all such phrases are tenses of our own verb.

Have, shall, will, may and can, have words in English which mean the same thing, thus,

Will the lovers of numerous tenses allow that these synonymous phrases are also tenses of the verb love? We might amuse ourselves at the expense of the names of Mr. M.'s tenses, and moods, and their total inapplicability, but we shall content ourselves with merely remarking that there is no shadow of reason for any distinction of moods, and no other reason for even two tenses than can be found in a difference of termination which has no reference to time, we mean the addition of ed to the simple verb. What is called the present tense expresses future time as well as Mr. Murray's phrase does; and what is called the past tense does the same. We say as well as, because we believe that the verb of itself never expresses any time, but this must be looked for in the context. I sail now, or to-morrow, or always.

To be yesterday, to day, and forever.

Would he be satisfied if I went next week.
Will he be satisfied, if I go next week.
If I please next year I can visit you.

If I pleased, next year I could visit you.

I loved and other verbs in ed have been so long connected with words expressing past time, that we attribute this expression to the verb, but to I loved we may without impropriety add the strongest expression of present time, that words can convey, as, I loved this very instant, or this present moment; and the present tense will make good sense with the strongest expression of future time. I am, the very queen of present tenses, affords one of the best expressions of future time; as I am to go, I am to love, &c. Here we leave the verb, regretting that the want of room obliges us to leave so many other points untouched. We could bring the highest authorities for all we have advanced, but if these remarks cannot recommend themselves to the good sense of every intelligent mind, authorities will never force conviction.

Adverbs, prepositions, conjunctions and interjections remain to be considered. We shall be brief in our remarks upon them.

Adverbs.

'An adverb is a part of speech joined to a verb, an adjective, and sometimes to another adverb to express some quality or circumstance respecting it, as He reads well; A truly good man; He writes very correctly.'

Suppose, instead of 'He reads well,' we put ' He lies well.' Well, we are told, is an adverb and qualifies lies. Suppose then we put crooked or sick instead of well. No one pretends that they are adverbs, and yet they are just as much so as well is.

Truly, correctly, and all other adverbs ending in ly are compound adjectives, the ly being a contraction of like. This double adjective, when separated, reads thus, a good man like true (men.)' Very is an adjective and means true.

He very writes like correct (writers.)

However odd such a resolution of the sentence may seem, we believe, it will admit of no other, and even Mr. Murray allows that the ly, is a contraction of like. The other adverbs are either adjectives or contracted phrases, all of which are ingeniously explained in Horne Tooke's Diversions of Purley.'

Prepositions.

'Prepositions serve to connect words with one another and to show the relation between them. He went from London to York;' 'She is above disguise.' They are supported by industry.'

We venture to say that from this definition no body could pick a preposition from the mass of words which form our language. Prepositions connect words! He went from London;' from connects him with London. He went to York;' to connects him with York. Or perhaps he means that from and to connect London and York! 'She is above disguise,' and yet above fastens disguise to her. They are supported by industry.' They are supported without industry.' In these two cases no doubt by and without connect industry with them. From, above, and without, in the examples just adduced, show strongly that no relation exists between the nouns.

The fact is, all the prepositions, like the adverbs, may be found among the other parts of speech, retaining their original meaning. From is a noun and means beginning.

To is a noun and means end.

Above is an adjective qualifying she, or a noun meaning on top of. By is our verb Be, and the sentence above may be thus expressed. Be industry (or let industry be) they are supported.

Without means, leave out or be out.

So much for Mr. Murray's definition and illustration of preposi

tions. Those who wish for more information in regard to them may consult the author referred to under adverbs.

Conjunctions.

'Conjunctions are chiefly used to connect sentences or words.' Conjunctions then, we suppose, connect sentences as prepositions do, but show no 'relation between them.'

We are really puzzled to know in what this connection consists. In the case of prepositions, no connection of mere words or sentiments was expressed; and no sooner are we told that conjunctions connect, than we are told that they are divided into two sorts, copulative (that is connecting) and disjunctive (that is separating.)

The word and is the verb add, and add may always be substituted for it; thus, two and two are four, two add two are four. Hence Murray does well to give as an example of copulative conjunctions 'He and his brother reside in London.' His other examples are,

I will go if he will accompany me.'

'You are happy because you are good.'

If is the verb give (or grant) which was formerly spelled gif; and the sentence means 'grant he will accompany me, I will go.'

Be-cause means the cause be or is (for be was once used where we now use is.) The sentence would then be, 'You are happy, the cause is you are good:'

But, independent of the meaning of the words if and because, we need only transpose them to show that the connecting or disconnecting of sentences is no part of their business; for put the first clause of the sentence last, and the conjunction ceases to connect, thus,

'If he will accompany me,
I will go.'
'Because you are good, you are happy.'

'The conjunction disjunctive (happy contradiction) serves not only to connect and continue the sentence (as the copulative did) but also to express opposition of meaning in different degrees.' Of course this means that copulative conjunctions do not express opposition of meaning. The examples are,

Though he was frequently reproved, yet he did not reform.
They came with her but went away without her.

Let us substitute a copulative for these disjunctives.
He was frequently reproved, and he did not reform.
If he was frequently reproved, yet he did not reform.
They came with her and went away without her.

Yet is entirely unnecessary after though. It is another spelling of the word get; and though is a verb, meaning precisely the same as if, viz. grant or give.

But has two meanings exactly opposite. Sometimes it means except or leave out, and sometimes add. When it has the latter meaning, and may take its place. When it means leave out, without may be substituted for it. Murray does not appear to have known this fact, and therefore has given but to add or join, as an example of disjunctive conjunctions. But to add was originally spelled bot, and our verb to boot, that is to superadd, is the very verb.

We have not room to explain all the conjunctions in this manner; but we have examined his own examples in order to prove that Murray did not understand their nature or use.

Interjections.

Most of Mur

No word can properly be called an interjection. ray's interjections are verbs in what he calls the imperative mood, such as lo! (that is, look) behold! hush! hail! We cannot better express our sentiments than by transcribing the remarks of Horne Tooke on this subject.

"The dominion of speech is erected upon the downfall of interjections. Without the artful contrivances of language, mankind would have nothing but interjections with which to communicate orally any of their feelings. The neighing of a horse, the lowing of a cow, the barking of a dog, the purring of a cat, sneezing, coughing, groaning, shrieking, and every other involuntary convulsion, with oral sound, have almost as good a right to be called parts of speech as interjections have. Voluntary interjections are only employed when the suddenness or vehemence of some affection or passion returns men to their natural state, and makes them for a moment, forget the use of speech, or when from some circumstance the shortness of time will not permit them to exercise it.'

Thus we have finished our examination of Lindley Murray's Grammar, a work which, to the disgrace of both Americans and Englishmen, is almost the only text book used in their schools. If we have exposed its inconsistencies and errors so as to induce those who have taken them upon trust, to examine them more carefully, we may one day be rewarded for our trouble, by seeing a more rational system of grammar introduced into our seminaries of learning.

PROGRESS OF EDUCATION DURING THE YEAR 1826.

BEFORE entering on the preparation of another volume, it may not be improper to review the ground over which we have passed, within the last twelve months. From such a retrospect much encouragement may be afforded to minds interested in the progress of improvement, and useful instruction may be derived for the guidance of our own future efforts, in the undertaking on which we have entered.

Many facts highly important to the interests of education have been developed by the attempt to establish a periodical devoted exclusively to the subject; and not the least important among these is this, that the public mind seems fully prepared for the existence of such a work as the Journal. Many doubts were entertained on this point, by sincere friends to our undertaking. These may now be considered as fairly set at rest.—It is merely to state a fact of some consequence when taken in connection with the progress of public sentiment on the subject of education, that we mention the unexpected extent of the patronage which the Journal has received. If the subscription list of a periodical may be taken as a safe test of estimation, the reception of this work, during its first year, will appear more cordial than that of any which has hitherto laid claim to the patronage of the community.-The approbation with which our imperfect endeavors have been received, it would be ungrateful to pass without our best acknowledgements.

In this review of our progress, our chief object is to retrace the more important circumstances which have been developed in our successive numbers. Before entering, however, on such a review, it may be worth while to revert to the early stage of our work and the objects then proposed to our readers. The leading aim at the outset of the Journal was the collection of facts. A success commensurate to reasonable expectations, has, we trust, been attained in this department. At all events no pains have been spared to obtain an extensive range of useful and practical information of the existing condition of education, at home and abroad. An anxiety to do adequate justice to the sources whence our intelligence was derived, may, with other causes, have occasionally led us into too copious detail; and in this respect we hope to improve the practical character of the Journal, by a more strict selection of matter, so as to present whatever is purely and indisputably good, and omit whatever we are satisfied is not fully adapted to promote the progress of improvement.-The mass of matter, too, which has accumulated to an unforeseen amount, makes condensation, as well as rigid selection, an urgent duty.

The second aim of the Journal, was the diffusion of just and adequate views of education. Some essential aid, it is hoped, has been rendered to this object. Our endeavor has been to exhibit the whole subject, as much as possible, in its relations and dependences. Physical culture has been inculcated as the basis of all education; and we have been more full and more urgent on this head, from the previous neglect of it, which was prevalent; and we do not hesitate to express our