©aztM
PUBLISHED WEDNESDAYS AND SATURDAYS BY 7OliN FENNO, No. 69, MARKET.STREET, BETWEEN SECOXD AND THIRD STREETS, PHILADELPHIA.
[No. 58, of Vol. ll.] Wedne SDAY, I 7, 1790.
The Tablet. No. 149.
[General fubjeft of the two lalt numbers continued, and further
iliuftrated.]
" Whether lu:.;irx fl.ould be denominated it public
good or evil, depends very much c.u the jituatisi: oj the
people among -whom it prevails
MANY persons, who have the profperityof
their country seriously at heart, seem to
be agitated with a strong degree ofanxiety,at the
approach of that luxurj which flows from a
flourifhing commerce. The men who cherish
this patriotic concern fuffer their imaginations
to pry into future events, and to realize it, with
horror, as a certainty, that when wealth and lux
ury have arrived at an high pitch, the liberties
of their countVy will be overwhelmed and 101 l
forever. If we enquire of one of these defpond
jtig patriots, why he anticipates so melancholy a
cataltrophe, he will gravely tell us that the fpi
jit and even the forms of the anYient republics
fell afacrifice to the eifecfts of overgrown luxury.
When riches become enormous, he will ask, are
not the principles of the people vitiated, and
their fortitude deftroved ; and how easily will
they yield up the precious blelfings of freedom
to the magic delusions of pleasure ? Why then,
he will reply, fliould not opulence and luxury
produce the fame effects in our age and country ;
and why should not our liberties meet a like dis
aster with those of antiquity ? These questions
and many others of similar import croud tlieni
felves upon the inquisitive and anxious patriot,
while his contemplations are turned into the
channel of political speculation. The point up
on which he will most incessantly harp, is that an
tient liberty was extinguilhed by licentious man
ners. This will be his favorite theme ; and this
will sharpen the edge of all his declamation. It
is of no small importance therefore that every
man, who is conversant in public affairs, fliould
pofTefs a fixed, a determinate opinion on these
fubje<fts ; whether antitht Itberty did fall a facrifice
to wealth and luxury ; ar.d ij it did, whether modern
liberty is in danger of a fiviilar fate.
The real source of mistake and delufionin this
matter lies in the difference of charaiiler andcir
cumftanceS, between the present and antient
times. Cases are compared which, in many es
sential refpeifts, are not parallel. And by fall
ing into an error of this (lamp, the whole fubje<ft
takes an improper complexion. A small degreq
of investigation will convince us, that the licen
tious manners of Rome, for example, were so very
different from what now prevail, chat their vices
and misfortunes afford no just criterion, by which
to estimate our own. To illultrate the truth of
this position nothing further is requisite, thaji a
comparative view of the characters, which may
refpeiflively be ascribed to us, and them. Before
I run off these sketches, however, I will offer a few
reflections to the reader, that I inay thus eluci
date the propriety, and explain the purpol'e, of
the examples which may be introduced.
It deserves to be noticed, that it is not the quan
tity of wealth a nation poffefles, so much as their
modes of acquiring it, that lead to the extremes
of pernicious luxury. A fierce, martial people
who make sodden acquisitions of riches, by plun
ders, have no suitable ideas of their use or value.
They a<ft confidently with themselves in squan
dering their money in folly and extravagance ;
and in such a manner aS will moll effectually de
stroy every appearance of virtue and decorum.
From a people thus circumstanced, nothing is to
be expedted, but that their morals and privileges
■will be swept away, beyond the power of reco
very. But how very different a pidture do we be
hold, when we turn our eyes upon the condu<ft
of a nation, which has accumulated wealth by the
flow and regular lteps of commerce and honest
industry ! Such a community will unavoidably
form habits of order and economy, which make
them averse to such a riotous fort of profligacy,
as a plundering army delights in ; and which de
serves to be called by a far worse name than lux
ury. That nation which depends on the industry
and ingenuity of its inhabitants, for its wealth
and importance, adts upon a system that will re
gulate and take care of itfelf. It contains inher
ently those principles which will give it as much
fafety and duration, as can attend the institutions
of man. For it fhonld be remarked, that men
habituated to an induflriousoccupation, learn al
so to be frugal ; and they will of course shun
cr
thatexcefs oflicentioufnefs, which chara<flerifed
the downfall of the amient republics. The weal
thy part of a community, grown rich by arts and
industry, will ailunie foine splendor in their ex
pellees, but it willftill be managed with purity of
taste, and decency of manners. It will be fub
jecfted to such restraints as arc not incompatible
with the of a free and virtuous com
munity. Perhaps tlie arts of elegance and utili
ty, rifingup, as the fruits of industry and enter
prize among apeople, render the (late of society
not only more eligible, but encreafe the proba
bility of preserving the most rational fort of ci
vil liberty. A populous community cannot em
ploy its hands, so fafely, or so beneficially in any
other way, as by diveriifying their labors, in a
griculture, commerce, arts and manufa(ftures.
Hut fiich a distribution of industry will create many
private fortunes, and probably some degree of
public prosperity. This is the stage of affairs,
when the vigilant patriot fees danger approach
ing. Wc will in the next number endeavor to
shew him that his fears and suspicions aflume too
high a tone , and that the character of the peo
ple under the antient republics exposed them to
evils, which we cannot butefcape.
IT is frequent for people to fay, the jatts slated
are true. This is no more than to fay, thefafls
are fails'. Can facts be othervyife than true P The
cxpreflion fliould be tlius varied, the things ltated
are fafls : Or what is told is faß,
The Use of the word interefl for eflate or proper
ty is perhaps peculiar to New-England. We fay
a man of interefl, for a man of estate or property.
I do not find this meaning annexed to the word
in good English writers. In Great Britain a man
of interefl is a man of influence ox respeCtability ; as
one has a great interefl at court. We fay also
with propriety, it is for a viarfs interefl ■, that is,
something is abenefit or advantage to him, either
ill point of property or reputation, and we fay
one man is iriterefled in another's concerns. But
the use of the word for the estate or property it
felf is local and not well established.
It is common to hear tHe phrase bad economy,
instead of want of economy or bad management; and
one enjoy i a bad slate of health. But it would be
difficult to fay how economy can be bad, or how a
person can enjoy indisposition. Economy when
carried to excess takes the name of parsimony or
avarice.
It has been disputed whether we should ufetlie
word contemporary or cotemporary : But a firigle
experiment as to the ease of pronunciation, will
decide for cotemporary in all cases.
Many people miflake in nfingingenious for inge
nuous. It would be well therefore to remark
that ingenious fignifies Jkilfu! in inventing or imita
ting, as an ingenious artifl : But ingenuous means
frank, fncere, open hearted.
Our well meaning and very civil people who
have little education, ufethe third person instead
of the in addrelfing those whom they re
spect: How does the Colonel do ? Howis uncle ?
Does the squire know any thing of the matter ?
This is a very awkward mode of speaking to a
man. How do you do, fir. How do you do, col.
This mode of address should be used to all ranks
of men ; it is equally refpe&ful and more polite.
The use of Miss for Mijlrefs in this country is a
gross impropriety, and occasions an inconveni
ence inconverfation. The word miflrefs [or ma
dam to an old lady] should always be applied to
a married iady, and miss to one who has[never been
married. The application of Miss to a married
woman is very inconvenient, for scarcely a day
pafles without my hearing Miss so used, that I do
not know whether it is meant for the mother or
the daughter. Amer. Mercury.
From WEBSTER'S DISSERTATIONS en the ENGLISH LAN-
Of MODERN CORRUPTIONS in the ENGLISH
PRONUNCIATION.
(CONTINUED.)
I AM sensible that some writers of novels and plays have ridi
culed the common pronunciation of creaiur and nalur, by in
trsduringthefe and similar words into low chara&ers, fptlling
them crcattTy natcr : And the supporters of the court pronunci
ation allcdge, that in the vulgar pra£lice of speaking, the letter e
is founded and not u ; So extremely ignorant are they of the na
ture of founds and the true powers of/the Enghfh letters. The
fd£t is, wearefo far from pronouncing e in the common pr>-
nunciation of natur, creatur, See. that e is always founded like
short «, in the unaccented syllables of over, Jobcr, banter, and
(Tl-e f.ibjett to be ctntinued.)
REMARKS ON THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE
641
GUAGE,
[Whole No. 162-]
other similar words. Nay, most of the vowels, in such syllables,
found like ior u short.* Liar, elder, fa&or afe pronounced !iur y
e/dur, faftur, and this is the true found of ain creator, nature,
rapture, legijlature, 'See.
I would just observe further, that this pretended dipthong in
was formerly ex pre flea by ew and eu, or perhaps by eo, and wa>
considered as different from the found of u. In modern times,
we have, in many woid<, blended the found of u with that of ew t
or rather use them promifcuouflv. It is indifferent, as to the pro
nunciation, whether we write fuel or jewel. And yet in this
word, as also in new, brew, See. we do not hear the found of
cxccpt among the Virginians, who afFefk to pronounce it diftinft
ly, ne-ew, This afFetlation is not of modern date,
fqr Wallis mentions it in his time and reprobates it, " Eu, ew,
eau, fonariter per e clarum et w ; ut in neuter, beauty. Qui
dem tamen accutius efferunt, acfi fcriberentur niew ter,fiew,bieut).
At prior pronunciatro reftior eft."——Gram. Ling. Aug.
Here this author allows these combinations to have the found
of yu or iu ; but disapproves of that refinement which someaasset& t
in giving the e or i short itsdiftinft found.
The true found o! the Eng'ilh u, is neither czv, with the dif
tin£l found of c and co ; nor is it oo ; but it is that found which
every unlettered person utters in pronouncingfolitudc, rude, threw,
and which cannot easily be mistaken. So difficult is it to avoid
the true found of u, that I have never found a nun, even among
the ardent admirers of the stage pronunciation, who does not re
tain the vulgar found, in more than halt the words of this class
which he ules. There is such a propenfny in men to be regular
in the conftru&ton and use of language, that they are often obli
ged, by the customs of the age, to fh uggle against their inclination,
in order to be wrong, and ilill find i: impofiibie to be uniform in
their errors.
The other reason given to vindicate the polite pronunciation, \t
enphony. But 1 must fay, with Kenrick,f I cannot discover the
euphony ; on the contrary, the pronunciation is to me both dis
agreeable and difficult. It is certainly more difficult to pro
nounce two consonants than one. Ch, or, which is the fame
thing, tjhy is a more difficult found than t ; and dzh, or more
difficult than d. Any accurate ear may difeoVer the difference in
a Tingle word, as in natur, vachur. But when two or three words
meet, in which we have either of these compound founds, the
difficulty becomes very obvious ; as the vachural feackurs of indivi
juals. The difficulty is increased, when two of these churs and
jurs occur in the fame word. Who can pronounce these words,
" at this jun&fliur it was cowjeEljhurcd"—or u the ast parted in a
tjhumultjhuous legijlatjhur," without a pause, or an extreme exer
tion of the lungs ? If this is euphony to an Englifti ear, I know
not what founds in language can be difagrceable. To me it is
barbarously havfli and unharmonious.
But luppofing the pronunciation to be relished by ears accus
tomed to it (forcuflom will familiarize anything) will the plea
fuie which individuals experience, balance the ill iffc&s of crea
ting a multitude of irregularities ? Is not the number of anomalies
in our language already fufficient, without an arbitrary addition
of many hundreds ? Is not the difference between our written
and spoken language already fufficiently wide, without changing
the founds of a number of consonants ?
1f we attend to the irregularities which have been long eflablifil
ed in our language, we shall find mod of them in the Saxon
branch. The Roman tongue was almost peife£tly regular, and
perhaps its orthography and pronunciation were perfectly corres
pondent. But it is the peculiar misfortune of the fafhionable
pra&ice of pronouncing d, t, andf before u, that it deftroysthe
analogy and regularity of the Roman branch of our language ; for
those consonants are not changed in many words of Saxon origi
nal. Before this affe&ation prevailed, we could boast of a regu
lar otthography in a large branch of our language ; but now the
only class of words, which had preserved a regular conftru&ion,
arc attacked, and the correspondence between the spelling and
pronunciation, destroyed, by those who ought to have been the
firft to oppose the innovation.
Should this praflice be extended to all words, where d. t and f
precede u, as it must before it can be confident or dcfenfible, it
would introduce mr»rc anomalies into our tongue, than were be
fore established, both in the orthography and conftruttion. What
a perverted taste, and what a lingular ambition must those men
poffels, who, in the day light of civilization and science, and in
the fliort period of an age, can go farther in demolishing the ana
logics of an elegant language, than their unlettered ancestors pro
ceeded in centuries, amidst the accidents of a savage life, and the
frocks of numerous invasions ! (To be continued )
* AJh obfervcs, that u in unaccented, Jhort and infignifUantfollabhs,
the founds of the Jive vowels are nearly coincident. It mujlbe a nice car
that can dijiinguijh the difference of found in the concluding fy liable of
the following words, altar, alter, manor, murmur, satyr." Gram.
Dijf. presto Die. p. 1.
+ For my part I cannot dijcover the euphony ; and tho the contrary
•mode be reprobated, as vulgar, by certain mighty fine Jpeakers, / think
it more conformable to the generalfcheme ofEnglifh pronunciation ; for tho
in ordei to make the word but two syllables, ti and te may be required to
be converted into ch, Q* the i and e into y, when the preceding syllable
is marked with the accute accent as in question, minion, courteous,
and the like ; there seems to be little feajfor,, when the grave accent pre
cedes the t, as in nature, creature, for converting the lintoch ; and
not much more for joining the t to the ftrflfyllable and introducing the y
before theJ'econd, as nat-yure. Why the t when followed by neither i
nor e, is to take the form of ch, I cannot conceive : It is, in my opin
ion, a species of affetlation that should be discountenanced. Kenrick
Rhet. Gram, page 32. Die.
£ Well might Mr. Sheridan ajfert, that " Such indeed is the slate of
our written language, that the darkefl hieroglyphics, or mofl difficult
cyphers which the art of man has hitherto invented, were not better cal
culated to conceal the Jentiments tff those who vfed them y from all who
had not the key, than the slate of our spelling is to conceal the true
pronunciation of our words, from all, except a few well educated
natives. Rhet. Gram. p. 22. Die. But if these well educated natives
would pronounce words as they ought, one half the language at leifl
would be regular. The Latin derivatives are moflly regular to the
educated and uneducated of Amcrica ; and it is to be hoped that the mod
em hieroglyphical ohfeurity will forever be confined to a few well edu
cated natives in Great-Britain.
THE HARVEST
THROUGHOUT the United States, the latter as well as the
former, has rewarded the toil of the bufbarrdman with a rich a
bundancc, both for man and beast. Pomona has not been less
profufeof her favors than Ceres of her's ; and the great plenty
of that federal beverage, Cyder, will, we hope, by rendering the use
of that antifcderal liquid, Rum, less excufeable, make it less conj
mon. ' [Columbian CtntinciJ
I