"The pronoun they in both the places | say, that whenever an objective case occurs after a transitive verb, it is governed by a preposition understood. In the last example, whom shall we send, no preposition whatever is omitted or understood. is in the nominative, and in the plural number, to agree with ladies in the same case." The pronoun they does not agree with ladies in the same case; for ladies is the objective case, governed by the preposition on. Page 120. To involve his minister in ruin who had been the cause of it. Ruin is in the accusative case, and governed by the verb to involve." Not so; ruin is governed not by the verb involve, but by the preposition in. Page 123." Almost the only point of danger here is of putting whom for who, when the relative follows a noun in the objective case; as in the four examples which follow: The public often despise pawnbrokers, whom they take to be avaricious and sordid characters.'' He whom we thought would prove our best friend, neglected us in trouble.' Several persons called today, whom we took to be foreigners.' Whom shall we send? and who will go for us? In the three first examples it should be who; and in the last example whom, the preposition by is omitted, as being understood." 6 Here we cannot but dissent altogether from Mr. S. except in reference to the second example. Mr. S. would teach us to say, "the public often depise pawnbrokers, who they take," &c. Who is here nominative case. Why? It is not nominative to the following verb take; for its nominative is they; neither is its nominative governed by any verb, for there is no verb in the sentence that governs a nominative. So that here is a nominative case, unconnected with any verb; contrary to one fundamental principle of English grammar, that every nominative case belongs to some verb, expressed or understood; (with the exception of absolute cases only) that is, either is the nominative to some verb, or the nominative after some passive or neuter verb. Accord ing to the uniform construction of similar sentences in Greek and Latin, as well as English, the relative not being nominative to the following verb, is governed by the verb take, and must of course be whom, in the objective case. Just so also in the 3d and 4th of the above examples, where the relative is governed in the objective case Mr. S.'s by the verbs took and send. hypothesis about a preposition being understood wherever the objective is proper, is nugatory. As well might we No. 10.-VOL. I. In the 2d example, He whom we thought would prove, &c. Mr. S. is right in saying whom ought to be who ; not, as he supposes, because it will not admit a preposition before it; but because it is nominative to the verb would prove, the intervening words we thought, being a sort of parenthetical sentence, equivalent to, as we thought, and having no influence at all on the rest of the sentence. "Whom do men say that I am? Whom do the people say that I am?" In these sentences no preposition at all is understood. Mr. S. says: "If the preposition is prefixed, the sense would determine that the relative should be written objectively; as, 'For whom of the ancient prophets do they take me?" In this last clause, the objective whom is undeniably correct, being governed by the preposition for; but the construction of this sentence is wholly dissimilar to that of the former, and proves nothing at all as to the point in dispute. Mr. S. thinks that the English version of these texts may be vindicated from the Greek and Latin. The Greek (Mark viii. 27.) is, Tiva με λεγεσιν οι ανθρωποι είναι; The Latin (Beza) Quemnam esse me dicunt homines? Now if we literally follow these lantion; thus, Whom do men say (or reguages, we shall have a true construcport) me to be? Here whom is properly the objective case, governed, not by any preposition, nor by the verb say; but by the infinitive to be, which having an objective me before it, requires an objective also after it. But when our translators changed the infinitive είναι, esse, into the indicative am, and the preminative I, it was needful to make a ceding accusative Me, me, into the nocorrespondent change in the relative Tiva, quemnam, and render it by the nominative who; otherwise the connection of the words is broken, and the verb am has a nominative I before it, while it governs an objective whom after it. If the accusative and infinitive in Greek and Latin had been changed into a nominative and indicative, thus or yw μ, quod ego sum, the relative 3 P also would have been changed, and the sentences would have been; Τις λεγεσιν οι ανθρωποι ότι εγω ειμι; Quisnam dicunt homines quod ego sum? or in English; Who do men say that I am? Lest any should think that the relative is governed by the verb say, we remark, that this verb has no influence at all on it; and indeed it is one of those verbs, which cannot govern any objective, unless in nouns of a cognate signification; e. g. to say a word, to say a speech, to say a lesson: for it would be nonsense to use it thus; to say a man, to say a disciple, to say a prophet, &c. Besides, if our version be right, whom do men say that I am? it must be equally proper to say, him do men say that I am; or, restoring the words to their natural order, do men say that I am him? where the impropriety is gla- | ring, the verb am having a nominative before it, and an objective after; and we apprehend it is the transposition of the relative that occasions an oversight of its proper regimen. It has been intimated, that our Lord could not mean to ask who he was, but what men said about him; but the difference between these two inquiries is sufficiently obvious, without adopting Mr. S.'s scheme. In the former case he would have said, Who am I? in the latter, Who do men say that I am?! Page 124." Who do you think I saw, &c. and who do you think I took him for? In this last example, both the relatives should be whom, as they admit the prepositions, which determine that they should be in the objective case. The first relative should be whom, not because it admits any preposition, but because it is governed by the verb saw; and the latter relative should be whom, because it is governed by the preposition for, transposed to the end of the sentence. We have been informed that Mr. Sutcliffe has discovered and corrected several of the errors, contained in page 123, and some other parts of his grammar; and that he has cancelled some pages and substituted new ones, in some copies of the book. But as many copies are in circulation, precisely similar to that which we have used, in which all these errors remain uncancelled and uncorrected, we think it highly necessary, that they should be thus publicly exposed and reprobated. "Not Page 125. "I thought it was him." Here Mr. Sutcliffe says both the pronouns are in the accusative case. Not so: it is not the accusative, but the nominative to the verb was, which consequently requires a nominative after it; and hence it should be, I thought it was he. Mr. S. seems not aware that an accusative cannot precede any mood, except the infinitive. Change the verb was into the infinitive to be, and then the construction will be correct: I thought it to be him; to be being preceded by one accusative, it, and followed by another accusative, him. "Whenever the pronoun follows the infinitive mood of this verb (Be), it is always in the accusative case.' so; even in the infinitive mood the verb to be takes an accusative after it, only when it has an accusative immediately before it. Of the three examples given by Mr. S. the second only is correct; "people supposed it to be them." Here the verb to be has the accusative it before and the accusative them after it; which is right. In the 1st and 3d examples Mr. S. is wrong; "it was thought to be him." The accusative him is improper, because there is no accusative before the verb; the only pronoun in the preceding part of the sentence being it, which is nominative to the verb was thought. So in the 3d example; "it was affirmed to be her" the accusative her is wrong, there being no accusative before the verb to be, as the pronoun it is nominative to the verb was affirmed. Mr. Murray treats this subject with his usual accuracy and precision, giving a variety of appropriate examples, under Rule xi. Note 4, of his large Grammar. Page 128. "After a verb infinitive, the noun or pronoun in the accusative is often understood; as- -"he cheats;" that is, "he cheats in trade." On this we observe; here is no infinitive mood, so that this example cannot illustrate the rule. Even allowing that he cheats is elliptical, and that the full sentence would be he cheats in trade; yet trade is not governed by the verb, but by the preposition in; trade cannot be the object of the verb: it is not trade that is cheated, but people who are cheated. Page 129. "Participles, the same as Verbs, govern the accusative case; as, sold to slavery; plunged in despair; given to hospitality; relieving the dis tressed." It is strange that Mr. S. | Hungarian machine, or Chomnitz should give four examples, 3 of which Fountain, as it was first called, from furnish no illustration of the rule. The its being applied to hydraulic pursubstantives slavery,despair, hospitality, poses in the mines of that place. in the first 3 examples are governed, Mr. Boswell, a clever mechanic, first not by the participles sold, plunged, improved upon it, by rendering the given, but by the prepositions to and in. pump self-acting; but a new one, upon "Galloping his horse on the road a better construction, and extremely which leads to London. Here London, simple, has been invented by James road, are both objective cases, in oppo- Hunter, esq. of Thurston, in Scotland, sition to horse." Not so; their case is the principle of which is to raise water not at all dependent on the case of the above the original reservoir, by the word horse; road is governed by the descent of a certain portion of it. preposition on, and London by the preposition to. Page 133. "Lord Nelson lay in state. It should be laid in state." Here again Mr. S. would mislead us. Lay is perfectly correct, being the imperfect tense of the neuter verb to lie; whereas laid is the imperfect or passive participle of the transitive verb to lay; and could not be used on the occasion, unless in the passive voice, thus: Lord Nelson was laid in state. (To be concluded in our next.) DOMESTIC SELF-ACTING PUMP. THERE is scarcely any thing, supposed to lie within the range of scientific research, with which mankind have been more frequently amused, or in which they have been more uniformly disappointed, than the tales circulated respecting the perpetual motion. Many a time has this eel of science been almost caught by the tail; but unfortunately it has been so slippery, that it has hitherto escaped the fingers, even of those who were confident that they held it securely within their grasp. Ages have elapsed since this chimera has been pursued "o'er bog and brake;" and scarcely any one year passes by, in which we do not find that some individual or other has done every thing towards the discovery, except finding the object he sought. The domestic self-acting pump, is an invention which seems to bear some distant affinity to this imaginary desideratum; and according to the following statement given of the improvements it has lately received, it promises to be of more practical utility, than even the philosopher's stone, or the inextinguishable lamp: Domestic Pump, self-acting.-A most ingenious and highly useful improvement has taken place in the application of the famous air and water That such a pump is perfectly applicable to all domestic purposes, is proved by the fact of a very small one having continued working for three months without being touched, raising about two tons of water in the fourand-twenty hours. It acts entirely without friction; and by its means the rain water collected on the top of a house, will pump up a corresponding quantity of pure water from a well as deep as the house is high. It is said, however, to be found most useful, where a large body of water is to be raised through a small height; and consequently, it may be judiciously applied to canal locks to prevent a waste of water, restoring the water to the upper level from the lower locks. Its principle depends upon the alternate filling and emptying of four reservoirs with air and water, by means of pipes and valves. HISTORY OF ASTRONOMY. [Continued from col. 614.] BETWEEN the time of Hipparchus and Ptolemy, the chief observers of any note are Agrippa, Menelaus, and Theon; the two latter of whom are better known as geometricians than astronomers. We remark, however, in this interval, the reformation of the calendar by Julius Cæsar, and a more exact knowledge of the flux and reflux of the ocean. Posidonius, a celebrated Stoic philosopher, who lived about eighty years before Christ, appears to have been the first who observed the relation of these phenomena with the motions of the moon; and of which, Pliny, the naturalist, has given a description, remarkable for its accuracy. It would be very easy to record the names of a great number of Greek and other astronomers, who lived between the times of Hipparchus and Ptolemy; | times of Timocharis, Callippus, Hipbut as they made little or no advances parchus, and others: and concludes in the science, we shall pass them by, with a catalogue of the stars in the and come immediately to that prince northern hemisphere. of astronomers, Claudius Ptolemy, of Pelusium. He is the most ancient astronomer, whose works have been handed down to us. It is to his Almagest, or the great composition, that we are indebted, not only for his own observations, but for almost all which remain of Hipparchus, Aristyllus, Timocharis, and the ancient Babylonians. This learned person was born in the year of Christ 69; and although the principles upon which his system is founded are erroneous, yet his work will always be useful to Astronomers, on account of the great number of observations which it contains, and will, undoubtedly, perpetuate his name to the latest posterity. It is divided into thirteen books: in the first he endeavours to shew that the earth is at rest in the centre of the universe; that it is spherical, and but a point in comparison of the distance of the fixed stars. In the second, he treats of the habitable parts of the earth, and of the nature and positions of its circles in a right sphere. The third book treats of the true length of the year; of the unequal motion of the sun in the ecliptic; and also of the unequal length of days and nights; it likewise contains tables of the sun's mean motion, and precepts for using them. In the fourth, he treats of the lunar motions; gives tables for computing them; and exhibits the principles, and observations on which they are founded. In the fifth, he treats of the eccentricity of the lunar orbit, and the inequalities of the moon's motion: assigns the magnitudes of the sun, and moon, and earth; and their distances from one another. In the sixth, he treats of the conjunctions and oppositions of the Sun and Moon; the limits of solar and lunar eclipses; and gives tables for computing the times when they happen. In the seventh, he treats of the fixed Stars; describes the various constellations, by means of an artificial sphere; rectifies their places to his own time; and shews how different they then were, from what they had been in the The eighth book contains a catalogue of the stars in the southern hemisphere, as also a catalogue of the stars in the twelve zodiacal constellations: this catalogue of the Stars is the oldest extant; and therefore constitutes a very valuable part of the work. This book concludes with a discourse on the Galaxy, or milkyway; and an account of the rising and setting of the Sun and fixed Stars. The ninth book treats of the order of the planets, and of their periodical revolutions: contains tables of their mean motions; and concludes with the theory of Mercury, and that of accounting for its various phenomena, as seen from the earth. Books ten and eleven treat also of the various phenomena of the planets Venus, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn; and shew how tables have been corrected from the observations of preceding astronomers. The twelfth book treats of the stationary and retrograde appearances of the Planets; and the thirteenth of their latitudes, the inclination of their orbits, rising, setting, &c. This work was first translated out of Greek into Arabic, about the year 827, and out of Arabic into Latin, by favour of the emperor Frederic II. about the year 1230. The Greek text of Ptolemy was not known in Europe until the beginning of the fifteenth century, when it was brought from Constantinople (then taken by the Turks) by George, a monk of Trapezond, who translated it into Latin. This translation was published at Venice in 1527, and Basil 1541: at the latter place the Greek had been printed in 1538, with a commentary by Theon the Younger, and Pappus, both mathematicians of Alexandria in the fourth century. It may also be remarked, that Ptolemy has rendered great services to Geography, by collecting all the determinations of the latitudes and longitudes of places then known; and by his laying the foundation of the method of projections, for the construction of geographical charts, which was but little known before his time. With the labours of this great astronomer ended the glory of the Alex andrian School, which had now sub- | rior has been succeeded by the wissisted for more than five centuries, with as much credit to itself as advantage to the sciences; but the successors of Hipparchus and Ptolemy contented themselves with commenting on their works, without adding any thing remarkable to their discoveries. The knowledge of nature, which had hitherto been cultivated with so much success, gave way to the desolating irruption of the Saracens, who were led by a ferocious zeal to destroy the celebrated library of Alexandria, which contained so many treasures of learning and genius. By a singular turn, however, of human affairs, this people became afterwards the protectors and cultivators of literature and science, and were then sensible that this frantic measure had deprived them of the most precious fruits of their victories. To His Most Excellent Majesty. THE humble and respectful address of congratulation, on the sixteenth anniversary of Haytian Independence, of the Rev. Wm. Morton, Professor of Languages in the Royal College of Hayti. The commencement of a new year has brought round another anniversary of the independence of Hayti; a country over which your Majesty has been called to reign, as over a people in whose cause your sword had been unsheathed; for whose liberties your blood had been shed. In the assertor of their claims to the unalienable rights of humanity, the people have recognized their king. The sword has been replaced within its scabbard; but your Majesty's zeal has found another channel for its exertion; and the bravery of the war dom of the legislator. Not only will the page of history tell to future ages, that Henry I. gave liberty to the Haytians, but that from him also they received their laws, the guarantee of its preservation to their posterity. Your Majesty's renown will be even greater than that of the intrepid patriot, whose bosom beat high with a generous ardour for the emancipation of his country from an ignominious yoke, and on the point of whose sword liberty had staked her triumph: it will also be that of the legislative sage, whose powerful reason placed a barrier between the ennobling passion for freedom, and the intoxication of licentiousness. In ages yet remote, the people of this country will feel their bosoms swell at the name of Henry; and will hail him as their deliverer from a disgraceful thraldom, and the founder of their commonwealth. They will say, he shewed the white men we were brave, when he led our forefathers to victory and triumph; and taught our proud calumniators, that as our arms were powerful, our intellect was equal to their own: he filled our port with the ships of the stranger, and gave us to participate in the commerce of the world; he instituted the schools in which our youth were instructed; he brought the Bible in our native tongue from the shores of the Briton, and put within our hands the inspired volume, from which we receive the sublime doctrines of religion, and are taught to practise the holy precepts of morality; he restrained the unhallowed intercourse of the sexes, the badge and mark of slavery and degradation; and in uniting our fathers and our mothers in the sacred rites and indissoluble bands of marriage, opened the channels of the social affections, and rendered our homestead abodes of reciprocal benevolence, and solid enjoyment. Our nobles trace their descent from those illustrious youths, who received in colleges of his establishment knowledge, and wisdom, and virtue: in fine, he led us to peace, to plenty, and to happiness, by teaching us to fulfil our duties to our Maker, and to yield a willing obedience to salutary laws. Such, Sire, will be the retrospections of the people of Hayti, long after your Majesty shall have been gathered to your forefathers: for the glory of the |