All of the vowels have two sounds, and two

vas w in we.
only. They are as follows:

ā as a in father.

ǎ as a in idea.

ē as e in they.

ĕ as e in net.

i as i in machine. Ĭ as i in holiest.

ō as o in holy.

Ŏ as o in obey.

ū as u in rule.

ŭ as u in full, and

y has the i sound when used as a true vowel.

There is thus but really one sound to each vowel and two lengths of it. In a the sound is prolonged, in ǎ it is clipped. No merely English scholar will be surprised at these sounds, for they are of every-day use in pronouncing our native tongue; the peculiarity consists in limiting these letters to these sounds. For we have in English seven sounds of a, five of e, four of i, eight of o, five of u, five of c, and two of g, s, and t. How much more simple, euphonious, and beautiful is the old Latin than the modern English!

But when we come to speak of the diphthongal sounds we fancy the unclassical scholar will rebel. They are as follows: ui as the pronoun we.

ae and ai as the English pronoun I. au as ow in now.

oe and oi as oi in boil.

ei as ei in veil.

eu as eh-oo, two sounds, yet uttered very nearly at once.

All these are in use to-day in the languages of southern Europe those most closely connected with the tongue of Cicero. Yet we English people say that the Roman method is harsh and rough in its sounds. Perhaps we may find this to be largely a judgment of the imagination. William Cullen Bryant, one of the finest classical scholars that the New World has produced, in an article published as an editorial some three or four years ago in the New York Evening Post, makes an incidental reference to this matter in the following words:

The whole force of reason lies on the side of this Roman method of pronunciation. Once generally adopted, its harshness which, after all, is no greater than that of Greekwill cease to be thought of. The absurdity of objection on this ground will appear to any one whose ear has ever caught the mellifluous flow of Homer's grand old Greek, or of Anacreon's lyrics, polished, perfect, and musical.

One of the most prominent Latin teachers that ever occupied a college chair, Professor J. F. Richardson, of Rochester

University, New York, says to those disposed to ridicule the peculiarities of the Roman method:

As well might a rude Thracian have laughed at the polished discourse of the sage of the Athenian academy, as well might a driveling, reeling inebriate, meeting a sober and upright man, fancy him to be the stammering staggerer and sneer at his really clear speech and steady gait, as for an English Latinist to cast ridicule upon the pronunciation of a Roman Latinist.

Another able scholar, the late Robert Kelly, LL.D., in referring to the Roman pronunciation, uses very strong language:

"Tis better to give to Scipio and to Cicero the names by which they were known in the flesh, and which they have invested in immortal glory-far better all these changes-than to turn the Roman senate into a mass of hissing serpents.

He thus refers to our pronouncing Scipio sip-i-o, Cicero siser-o, and Cæsar see-zar, which names these great Romans never would have recognized as their own as they are pronounced by the English scholar of to-day.

But is there any probability that this Roman system will be generally adopted? We believe it is only a question of time. It is already used to quite an extent on the continent of Europe and in England. One of the professors of Latin at Oxford has prepared a "Syllabus of Latin Pronunciation," in which he has introduced this system.

The Rev. E. B. Mayor, M.A., Professor of Latin in the University of Cambridge, tells to what extent the new (if we may call it new) pronunciation is used, and how esteemed in that great English institution :

There is, I think, no great difference of opinion here in regard to the principles of Latin pronunciation; even the w sound of v is secure from ridicule. In practice there is great diversity. Many schools adopt the new pronunciation in the higher forms only, which seems like beginning at the wrong end. However, the result is that the proportion of those who are familiar with the new pronunciation on entering the university is continually increasing. The old mumpsimus, both in respect to orthography and pronunciation, is doomed, and no longer ventures to put in a plea in arrest of execution. If American scholars accept the reform, we may hope that, in the next generation, all Englishspeaking Latinists will be intelligible to their colleagues all over the world.

But let us inquire how this Roman method is being received in this country. My distinguished friend and former collegemate, Dr. John W. White, (a professor in Harvard University,) says, in a recent letter:

The Roman method is used here, and has been for several years. It is just going in at Yale with their new professor, Peck, who comes from Cornell, (New York,) and is an enthusiast on the subject. It is used at Cornell by his successor, one of our graduates.

We have investigated pretty thoroughly, and find that this system has been already introduced into about seventy universities and colleges of this country, among which, in addition to the three mentioned above by Dr. White, are the following institutions: University of California, Columbian University, (Washington, D. C.,) Illinois Wesleyan University, Indiana State University, Indiana Asbury University, Upper Iowa University, Cornell College, (Iowa,) University of Kansas, Kentucky State University, Kentucky Wesleyan University, Louisiana State University, Boston University, University of Michigan, University of Mississippi, University of Missouri, Rutger's College, Columbia College, (New York City,) University of City of New York, University of Rochester, (New York,) Union College, (New York,) Ohio University, Ohio Wesleyan University, Hiram College, University of Lewisburg, (Pennsylvania,) University of Virginia, Bethany College, (Virginia,) State University of Wisconsin.

But what of the success of the new pronunciation ?

So far as I have been able to learn, it has been received with favor in every place where it has been used more than a year. I have known of but two teachers who were not satisfied with it. And they, I think, did not give it a fair trial. The eminent Professor Richardson, to whom I have already referred, expresses his experience in language that can substantially be adopted by those teachers of Latin who have used the English and Roman systems:

I am persuaded, from the experience of twenty-four years in teaching Latin, seventeen on the English and seven on the Roman system, that I can teach the important principles of the language far more successfully with the true than with the false system of pronunciation. I have given the two systems a fair trial, with

no interest but to ascertain the truth; and I not merely think but know that, by the daily use of the true pronunciation, I can secure, on the part of the student, a much more intelligent and lively interest in questions pertaining to the etymology of the language, to its various inflectional forms and laws, to its quantities, and, above all, to its metrical system and to its relations to kindred languages.

And we think, if this system is fairly tried, it will meet with universal favor; and within another generation the original method may be used by all the Latinists of the world.

ART. VIII.—SYNOPSIS OF THE QUARTERLIES AND OTHERS OF THE HIGHER PERIODICALS.

American Reviews.

AMERICAN ANTIQUARIAN AND ORiental Journal, July, 1883. (Chicago, Ill.)— 1. A Part of the Navajo Mythology; by W. Matthews. 2. Village Defenses; or, Defensive Architecture in America; by Stephen D. Peet. 3. Ancient Mexican Civilization; by L. P. Gratacap, 4. The Religion of the Omahas and Ponkas; by J. O. Dorsey.

AMERICAN CATHOLIC QUARTERLY REVIEW, July, 1883. (Philadelphia.)-1. The Catholic Doctrine on Marriage; by Rev. Henry A. Brann, D.D. 2. The Church of France and the Revolution; by Kathleen O'Meara. 3. An Old Biblical Problem Solved at Last; by Rev. Simon Lebl, D.D. 4. Father Felix Varela, Vicar-General of New York from 1837 to 1853; by J. I. Rodriguez. 5. Capital and Labor; by Rt. Rev. James O'Connor, D.D. 6. English Administration in Ireland To-day; by Bryan J. Clinche. 7. Converts: Their Influence and Work in this Country; by John Gilmary Shea, LL.D. 8. The Alleged Fall of Pope Liberius; by Rev. P. J. Harrold. 9. The New Sovereignty; by A. F. Marshall, B.A.

BAPTIST QUARTERLY REVIEW, July, August, September, 1883. (Cincinnati.)— 1. Comparative Religion; by Rev. O. P. Eaches. 2. Herbert Spencer in the Light of History; Prof. William C. Morey, Ph.D. 3. Wilkinson's Webster Ode; by William C. Conant. 4. Some Christian Testimony from Herbert Spencer; by Rev. Alvah S. Hobart. 5. Mr. Howells and the Scholastic Element in Novel Writing.

BIBLIOTHECA SACRA, July, 1883. (Andover.)-1. The Brahma Samaj; by Rev. C. W. Park. 2. On the Origin of the Primitive Historical Traditions of the Hebrews; translated from the German of August Dillman, D.D. 3. The Theology of Calvin-Is it Worth Saving? by Rev. E. A. Lawrence. 4. The Doc. trines of Universalism; by Rev. A. A. Miner, S.T.D., LL.D. 5. A Symposium on the Antediluvian Narratives-Lenormant, Delitzsch, Haupt, Dillmann; by Prof. Samuel Ives Curtiss, D.D. 6. Schleiermacher's "Absolute Feeling of Dependence," and its Effects on his Doctrine of God; by Rev. P. H. Foster, Ph.D. 7. Religious Instruction in Prussian High-Schools; by Prof. Hugh M. Scott.

NEW ENGLANDER, July, 1883. (New Haven.) — 1. The Salvation Army: by Rev. C. P. Osborne. 2. The Study of Elementary Geometry; by Prof. Eugene L. Richards. 3. Some Neglected Factors in Congregational Fellowship; by Rev. A. Hastings Ross. 4. Bancroft and Doyle on Colonial Maryland; by

Rev. President G. F. Magoun. 5. The Decline of the Congregational Church; by Rev. Charles F. Thwing. 6. The Present Claims of the Clerical Profession on Christian Young Men; by Rev. J. W. Backus. 7. The Revised Version and the Future State; by Rev. O. A. Kingsbury. 8. Herbert Spencer's Ultimatum; by Rev. I. E. Graeff.

September, 1883.-1. The Relation between Christianity and Heathen Systems of Religion; by Rev. D. Z. Sheffield. 2. Evolution as Bearing on Method in Teleology; by Rev. H. S. Stanley. 3. The Metaphysical Basis of Belief in God; by Rev. W. D. Hyde. 4. Apriorisms as Ultimate Grounds of Knowledge; by Prof. Henry N. Day. 5. The Modern Novel; by F. H. Stoddard. 6. Pantheism; by Rev. E. Janes. 7. The Present Outlook for Old Testament Study; by Prof. F. B. Denio. 8. The Revision and its Cambridge Critic; by Prof. C. J. H. Ropes. 9. A Lesson in Figures, or a Chapter from Numbers; by Rev. John Winthrop Ballantine.

NEW ENGLAND HISTORICAL AND GENEALOGICAL REGISTER, July, 1883. (Boston.) -1. Memoir of Stephen Whitney Phoenix, Esq.; by Jacob B. Moore, Esq. 2. Genealogical Gleanings in England; by Henry F. Waters, A.B. 3. Huguenot: Origin and Meaning of the Name; by Hon. George Lunt. 4. Widow Ann Messant, alias Godfrey; by Charles E. Banks, M.D. 5. Portraits of New Hampshire Public Men; by Hon. Benjamin F. Prescott. 6. The Garfield Family of England; by William P. W. Phillimore, A.M., B.C.L. 7. Marriages in West Springfield; by Lyman H. Bagg, A.M. 8. Edward Randolph; by G. D. Scull, Esq. 9. Marriages in Warwick, R. I.; by Benjamin W. Smith, Esq. 10. Peter and John Brown; by Frank B. Sanborn, Esq. 11. Soldiers in King Philip's War; by Rev. George M. Bodge. 12. Braintree Records; by Samuel A. Bates, Esq. 13. Descendants of Thomas Deane; by John Ward Dean, Esq. 14. Register Plan for Genealogical Records. 15. Records of Winchester. N. H.; by John L. Alexander, M.D. 16. Name and Family of Broughton; by Henry E. Waite, Esq.

PRINCETON REVIEW, July, 1883. (New York.)-1. The most recent Phases of the Tariff Question; by David A. Wells, LL.D., D.C.L. 2. Anthony Trollope; by Bayard Tuckerman. 3. The Alleged Conflict of Natural Science and Religion; by George P. Fisher, D.D., LL.D. 4. On the Education of Ministers: A Reply to Pres. Eliot; by Prof. Francis L. Patton. 5. Recent Researches in Cerebral Physiology; by William B. Scott, Ph.D. 6. The Political Situation in France; by Edmond de Pressensé.

3. In

September.-1. "A College Fetich; " by President Porter. 2. Our Iron, Woolen, and Silk Industries before the Tariff Commission; by Herbert Putnam. cineration; by Rev. John D. Beugless. 4. The Artist as Painter; by John F. Weir, N.A. 5. The Antecedent Probabilities of a Revelation; by David J. Hill, Ph.D. 6. Recent French Fiction; by J. Brander Matthews. UNIVERSALIST QUARTERLY, July, 1883. (Boston.)-1. Episcopacy; by I. M. Atwood, D.D. 2. Scripture Exposition Reviewed; by the Rev. W. R. French. 3. Robert G. Ingersoll vs. Christianity; by Thomas J. Vater. 4. Questions in Relation to Sin and its Consequences, Salvation and Destiny; by Hon. L. W. Ballou. 5. The Romance and Religion of Geology; by S. H. M'Collester, D.D. 6. The Restoration of Humanity; by Rev. G. M. Harmon. 7. New Testament Mysteries; by Rev. H. R. Nye. 8. Usage vs. Rights; by A. A. Miner, D.D. 9. The Critic Criticised; by O. D. Miller, D.D. PRESBYTERIAN REVIEW, July, 1883. (New York.)-1. Modern Miracles: by Rev. Marvin R. Vincent, D.D. 2. The Doctrines of the Buddha and the Doctrines of the Christ; by Professor S. H. Kellogg, D.D. 3. Infant Salvation and its Theological Bearings; by Professor George L. Prentiss, D.D. 4. Spencer's Philosophy and Theism; by Oscar Craig.

The article on INFANT SALVATION is well worth the perusal of our most thoughtful Methodists for its candid survey of the historical ground and its irenical spirit. It fully recognizes the