Page images
PDF
EPUB

nature, are neither good nor bad, being of themselves nothing but mere sounds, but only as they are opportunely and properly, or otherwise applied. (Lib. X. 2.)

But among whom must we look for that custom, which is, on this occasion, to be the judge? It might seem plausible to answer, that any word used by the majority of a nation, should be admitted as part of the national language. But to say nothing of the difficulty of ascertaining this point, should we be, in all cases, willing to abide the result? Are no words used by a majority of our own or any other nation, which no good writer would admit into composition, which he designed to make public? Manners are judged of, not by those of a clown, nor by those, which prevail among the majority; nor should we seek for the established rules of medical practice among empirics and charlatans. "As money, to be current, requires to be struck from the die of the state; so," says the Roman Rhetorician, "language, to be received, requires the consent of the learned." "I shall therefore, call the genuine custom of speaking," continues he, "the consent of the learned; as that of living, the approbation of honest men."

The canon, which Dr. Campbell has adopted, though much more definite than that of Quinctilian, does not contradict it. The two lines are parallel, though one is more extensive; perhaps I ought rather to say, more broad and distinct, than the other. Use, in order to become the sole mistress of language, according to Dr. Campbell, must be reputable, national and present. Under national use he comprehends whatever modes of speech are authorized as good by the writings of many, if not the majority of celebrated authors." The word national, he uses, both in opposition to provincial and foreign. The meaning, which he attaches to the epithet present, may be judged of by this remark. "It is safest for an author to consider those words and idioms as obsolete, which have been disused by all good authors, for a longer period, than the age of man. (Vol. I. 315.) If in this rule, notwithstanding the author's labor to draw his lines distinctly, we find less precision, than might be desired, we ought to inquire, whether there be not as much, as the subject admits. The rule has, indeed, for another reason, been severely condemned by a distinguished rhetorician of our own. "It supposes," says he, "a long, settled, universal practice of usages, which never could commence." (Adams's Lectures.) May we not rather say, that it supposes, agreeably to well known fact, that men will sometimes, in their language, depart from

common usage, and introduce terms, which have no such authority? But the author's censure proceeds further. "The principle of Dr. Campbell, continues he, holds up a purity to be compounded of impurities multiplied. The first time a word is used, by this rule it must be impure. The second, third, and fourth time, it is still impure, though still in a lessening degree. In proportion to the number of its repetitions it grows continually clearer, until by obtruding its pollution on the whole nation, and their best writers for a number of years, it clarifies into a chrystal."

It will not, I hope, be considered disrespectful to the distinguished author of this animadversion, to inquire whether it contains as much of sound argument, as it does of rhetorical vivacity-and further to ask, whether, were it possible for a piece of bad gold to lose a portion of its alloy, or to acquire some degree of purity from every individual, through whose hands it passed, and in this way, eventually to become standard gold, its purity thus acquired, would be "compounded of impurities multiplied?" The rule does indeed imply that he, who first uses a new word, or an old word in a new sense, violates the purity of language; but he does it at his own risk; he is making an experiment. Terms thus introduced, to borrow the expression of Dr. Johnson, "stand as candidates or probationers, and must depend for their adoption, on the suffrages of futurity." The republic of letters many either admit or reject them. It is certainly a bold experiment, which a modest man would be cautious of making.

To put the matter in another, and less favorable point of view, if good right to private property, or even a kingdom, may be acquired by prescription, or a long possession, though such possession commenced in usurpation, why may not a word, originally impure, lose its native contamination by long continued and general use? In fine, the thing implied in Dr. Campbell's rule is no more inconsistent or absurd than that what was once not customary, should by a series of acts become so.

We come now to a question, which no European has occasion to answer; a question, which arises from the peculiar relation, which our country bears to Great Britain. Under reputable use, Campbell comprehends whatever modes of speech are authorized as good, by many, if not the majority of celebrated authors. These authors, for the present, will hardly be looked for in America; or if they should be, it will be in connexion with a much greater number in the land of our forefath

ers. This must be deemed a just and reasonable way of proceeding, until our literature and literary men shall be able to hold an honorable competition with theirs. This would certainly imply, that no word, with the exceptions already made, of such as may be peculiar to our government, religion, etc. should be considered as in good use, which has never been so considered there. But are we to imitate them in their estimate of terms as obsolete? Must we relinquish a word, which having received from the best English authors, we have preserved for a century, because no man in England can recollect the time, when it was there in good use? The dilemma is this, if we retain what she discards, we, in this respect, break off our intercourse with the present literature of England. If we discard, in imitation of her, we equally break communication with her ancient literature. On this subject I do not presume to offer an opinion.

END.

GENERAL INDEX.

A.

Academies, their value; inquiry whether a moderate number, well
endowed, is not preferable, ii. 301.

Actions moral, essential difference in, ii. 324, 402. In general readily
perceived, 325.

Agency free, not difficult, in most cases, to conceive how divine in-
fluence may comport with it, i. 154, etc.

Alor, aiovios, their import, ii. 87, etc.

Amusements, how far justifiable in students, ii. 378.

Antoninus Marcus, his opinions on a divine Providence, i. 148.
Atonement, doctrine of, i. 449. Nothing more common under the
divine government than for one person to be the medium of bene-
fits to another, 450. Men in this world often reduce themselves
to a state from which repentance and reformation can afford no re-
lief; if by transgression men are placed in a condition from which
even repentance can afford no relief, it would be analogous to a
common occurrence, 451. Main point to be established, that
there were serious obstacles to the pardoning of sin merely on re-
pentance, 452. God maintains a government sustained by rewards
and punishments, 453. Consequences of allowing penitence in a
criminal to atone for his crimes, ib. Penitence cannot atone, 454.
Some reasons which rendered an atonement necessary may be
discerned It is important to the universe that the character of
God as hating sin should be known, 455. Were offenders made
happy on repentance, the obedient and disobedient would be treat-
ed alike, 458. The divine law requires unfailing moral rectitude.
Conformity therefore to this law cannot atone for offences, 459.
If grace is exercised, it must be so as to show the divine hatred of
sin, 466. — Jesus Christ has died and endured suffering of which
no account can be given on ordinary principles, 461. The Scrip-
́tures represent these sufferings as answering most important pur-
poses in the economy of redemption, 463 et seq. -- Objection, a.
The death of Christ is called a sacrifice for sin in accommodation
to the prejudices of men, 466. b. It is so called in allusion to Jew-
ish sacrifices, 467. c. Other things are also called figuratively
sacrifices-Colossians 1: 24, considered, ib. d. We are saved by
the death of Christ, because he died in fulfilling his ministry. e.
Because he died to confirm his doctrine, 468. f. If Christ, then,
innocent, died to procure pardon for sinners, it manifests indiffer-
VOL. II.

-

62

ence to right and wrong, 470; or varying the objection, every ac-
countable creature should be treated according to his deserts, 473.
g. The doctrine is inconsistent with our best ideas of God's mercy,
474. h. The doctrine would have been revealed in the Jewish
Scriptures, 475. i. Less said of it in the gospels than we should
expect, 476.-Character of Him who made atonement, 478.
Altention, power of. The difference in the success of those who en-
gage in the pursuit of knowledge, to be ascribed to the different
degree in which they possess it, ii. 463. Not the gift of nature,
464. Consequences of neglecting to form habits of, ib. How
they may be formed, and value of certain studies with reference to
this object, 464. Importance of industry to this end, 466.

B.

Baptized children sustain a peculiar relation to the church, ii. 316.
Buchanan, Dr. testimony to the condition of the Jews in the East,
i. 344.

C.

Character, harmony of, ii. 432. How best promoted, 433. Whether
the design of our existence can be as well answered by devoting
the mind to one object, as by dividing it anong many, 435. Re-
gard to proprieties of time and place essential to it, 436. Cannot
be perfect without fixed moral principle, 437.

Christ. His character, i. 478. His sufferings the ground of justifica-
tion, ii. 26. See atonement-see Reign, etc. Resurrection of, i.

296. See below.

Christianity, Evidences of, i. 274 et seq. Testimony from pagan
writers to its origin, 275. Obstacles it met with from Jews, 276-
from gentiles, 280.-Direct argument for it. a. Jesus and his
apostles professed to give the evidence of miracles in proof of their
religion, 289. b. All who received this religion must have believ-
ed that the miracles asserted were, in fact, wrought, 290.
c. The
miracles thus pretended to and thus believed were in fact wrought,
291. On this point particular miracles noticed and examined, 293.
Among others Christ's resurrection, 296. A more particular con-
sideration of it, 299. See infra, "Christ's Resurrection." The pre-
ceding reasoning strengthened by considering, a. What must have
been the character of Christ and his disciples, if his claims were
not well founded, 312, and b. Whether the accounts of them given
by the evangelists corresponded with such a character, (i. e. of
fraudulent men.) The condition of the apostles, on supposition
they testified falsely, 316. Conclusion; the disciples could neither
have deceived others, nor had any inducements to attempt it, 319.
Internal evidence of, briefly stated, ib. et seq. Evidences of, from

« PreviousContinue »