©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
Significant historical Pennsylvania newspapers