verbal anomalies has been employed. The criticism from which a reader shall receive the proper means of improvement, should be enlightened, liberal, and comprehensive. It is to a deficiency of this kind of criticism that Mr. Walker refers. He has no objection to the niceties and abstrusities of criticism.. I am,' he remarks, very well satisfied that some should de' vote their whole lives to the study of the Greek Choral Metres; if they be only as liberal in clearing the path for others, as they are industrious in pursuing it for themselves.' But. there are, we agree with him in thinking, higher and more useful results than these verbal niceties, which the less learned have reason to expect from scholars of superior pretensions. The diffusion, in a state of advanced improvement, of that knowledge which is to enlarge, to purify, and to exalt the human faculties, to meliorate the institutions of society, and to establish and amplify the liberty of mankind, is within the scope of their obligations, and within the reach of their exertions. The extent to which classical literature may be made available for the promotion of objects like these, cannot be mistaken or underrated by any enlightened scholar, or considered as of little account, even by those persons who may be disposed to regard its uses and its facilities as belonging rather to the embellishments of society than to the higher interests and destiny of men. In either case, the services of the classical editors of this country will probably be regarded as less meritorious than the celebrity which some of them have acquired would seem to imply. To enter fully into the subject, would lead us into a wider field of discussion than we are at liberty to traverse. Thus much, however, we may say; that if the names of the most celebrated and instructive authors of antiquity be passed through the minds of our readers, the instances will not, we think, be found very numerous, in which the labours of modern scholars in England have been extensively and beneficially applied to their correction and interpretation.

If, with the real knowledge of the classics, the interests. of all correct taste, all sound literature, and all solid science also, are inseparably connected,' every indication of its decline must be considered as threatening evils of too serious a kind to be viewed without alarm. The prevention of the implied consequences becomes not only a useful, but a necessary care. That the consequences may be prevented, and the credit of classical learning be restored, is the opinion of the present Annotator. The means of correction and improvement are, he thinks, at hand, and require only to be vigorously employed that they may be completely successful. Some of

the proposed remedies are suggested in the following paragraph.

• Why should not the Universities employ their scholars and their printing presses, for supplying our schools with proper editions of the Classics; and with all the literary apparatus needful for their study? Why should not the two Universities of England throw open their gates for education to the Dissenters,-(as the one University in Ireland has long done with safety,)-however they might still confine their emoluments and their offices to those who conform to the religion of the state? Why rather should not the Dissenters of England-(with whom, however, either in a religious or political view, I should be very sorry to be considered as making a common cause)-why should not a body so numerous, so wealthy, and so powerful, have such a seminary for the highest education, as should rival our Universities in literary character, though not in opulence or splendour? The continued want of any such seminary is at once their opprobrium, and one of the glaring evidences of the decline of solid learning in the country. It is not by the opening of Theological Academies for the education of non-conforming ministers, that the want can be really supplied.' Pref. xxii.

These proposed remedies will, we apprehend, be regarded by persons not less acquainted with the Universities and with the Dissenters than Mr. Walker, as insufficient for the removal of the evils which are supposed to exist, or for the securing of the advantages which are represented as so important and desirable. One of the remedies, it appears, has been applied in Ireland, where Dissenters are admitted, in common with Churchmen, to the benefits of a University education. Is the state of classical learning, then, more flourishing in Ireland, than it is in England? Are the educated classes there more distinguished for correctness of judgement and taste, than those of this country? Have the classics been edited with a decided superiority of learning and adaptation to usefulness by Irish scholars? Are the evidences of an erudite and accomplished education more common and more decisive among the gownsmen of Trinity College, Dublin, than they are among the gownsmen of Trinity College, Cambridge? If these queries should receive a negative answer, it will be reasonable to infer, that the remedy in question would not be sufficient to effect the object for which it is proposed. We can easily understand that the admission of Dissenters into the colleges of Oxford and Cambridge, might be a means of extending the advantages which those seats of learning confer; but, as no essential difference in the pursuits of learning, or in the inducements to engage in them, could be consequent on the introduction of Dissenters, we cannot so easily perceive that this measure

would be in favour of a better cultivation of Classical literature. The admission of Dissenters would only increase the number of residents; it would not supply either better means, or stronger motives than those which exist. We are not disputing either the benefit to Dissenters of a superior education, or the reasonableness of admitting them to a full participation of its advantages, by throwing open to them the gates of the Universities; but we are referring to such a measure simply as a means of advancing to higher degrees of excellence the ⚫ real knowledge of the Classics.' To the proposal of increasing the number of correct and useful editions of the Classics from the University presses, we subscribe our cordial approbation. Who does not regret that the publication of such a work as Dr. Maltby's edition of Morell's Thesaurus from the Cambridge press, is so rare an occurrence? Or that the editions of Cicero and Livy from the Clarendon press, are only republications of Ernesti's and Drakenborch's texts?

Mr. Walker has been very careful not to identify himself with the Dissenters of England; he likes not either their religious or their political character. He has, however, shewn himself friendly to their reputation in one respect, and has thrown out a suggestion in reference to an object which he considers as closely connected with their importance in society. Why, he asks, should not a body so numerous, so wealthy, and so powerful, have such a seminary for the highest education, as should rival our Universities in literary character? The continued want of such a seminary, he pronounces to be at once their opprobrium, and one of the glaring evidences of the decline of solid learning in the country. As such a seminary has never existed among Dissenters, we cannot perceive the cogency of the proof which would seem to be relied on in this last assertion. That such a seminary has not been instituted by Dissenters, is, perhaps, owing to the circumstance, that, though they are numerous and wealthy, they are not a body. There are not either common feelings or common interests to unite them in a measure of this nature. The project of a Dissenting University will appear little less than visionary, we think, to persons whose acquaintance with the several classes of Dissenters is sufficiently particular and extensive to enable them to form a competent opinion on the subject. Admitting the desirableness and the utility of such an institution, the difficulties which must suggest themselves to the consideration of persons favourable to its establishment, are so numerous and so formidable as to forbid their cherishing the hope of seeing its commencement. Funds, permanent endowments, and other necessary means of support must

be provided. Whence shall they be obtained? Dissenters have no spells to bind on the consciences of men, from the operation of which they might receive the chattels and the lands of the dying as bequests to pious uses. Their ministers perform no masses, enjoin no penances; they have no purgatory in their creed; these sources of ecclesiastical revenue would supply nothing towards rendering them wealthy. Their customary method of raising supplies must be their only dependence, voluntary contribution. It is a University that is contemplated, not a number of separate, independent Colleges. Would it not be a previous point, to consult on the propriety of relinquishing the several academies for the edu cation of Non-conforming Ministers,' and of consolidating their respective funds in aid of the new Institution? Or, shall these be preserved distinct, and retain their original character as Theological seminaries, a residence in which shall still be deemed requisite after the completion of a University edu→ cation, or during the intervals of University vacations? Will it be necessary to obtain the concurrence of all Dissenters in the project? If so, is there the probability that a system of primary articles in which they shall all agree, can be provided? If the union of all Dissenters be not considered as an essential preliminary, will the proposed Institution answer the end for which it is wanted? Shall subscription to articles of faith be required as a condition of admission to the new Institution? Or shall pledges be taken from the resident conductors of its business, for the profession of any definite tenets of religion? These are some of the questions which will obviously occur in connexion with the proposed measure. There are many others which must be considered. It would, we know, be quite easy for some persons to sit down, and devise a plan, in which buildings, localities, revenues, professors, masters, a rector, or chancellor, modes of education, and every other requisite of a University should appear very distinctly. But the question must necessarily be viewed in reference to the existing state of Dissenters; and so viewed, it is, we think, a question of impracticabilities.

Whether there be any urgent considerations which may be supposed to interest Dissenters generally in the question, is, we conceive, doubtful. It is quite obvious, that the highest • education' is not required for their ministers, who are but too frequently selected apart from every consideration of learning, and whose qualifications are expected to be of a different kind from those which it is the design of an University education to impart. For classical attainments in Dissenting Ministers,

there is scarcely any demand among Dissenters. There are but few other offices or situations among Dissenters, that require from candidates even so much as a superficial acquain tance with ancient literature; and therefore, though we agree with Mr. Walker, that the opening of Theological Academies for Non-conforming Ministers will never supply the place of a seminary for the highest classical learning, yet, we think that they are fully adequate to confer all the learning which those who have the choosing of non-conforming ministers, are concerned about finding in them.

One object which would be in some minds connected with ' the existence of a Dissenting University, the obtaining of degrees, is abundantly provided for by other means. There are degrees which are somewhat rare amoug Dissenters, but they are such as indicate inferior graduation: of the higher titles there is an ample number. A. B. is an appendage which is, we believe, altogether unknown among Dissenting divines; M.A. sometimes glitters at the end of a name; but of LL.D.'s and D.D.s, there is quite a galaxy. Where, then, the highest honours are so profusely obtained by Dissenters, without a Dissenting University, what inducement is there to found such an institution for the denomination, from which literary titles may be derived?

Previous connexion with one or other of the two Universities, is considered as at least affording facilities in respect to the higher branches of the legal profession; and so long as the excluding statutes are in operation, which forbid the honours and emoluments of office to be conferred upon Dissenters, University residence, either at Oxford or Cambridge, will be regarded as affording peculiar advantages to young men preparing for their entrance into public life. Would the establishment of a Dissenting University be the means of providing an effective substitute for the advantages of connexion with Oxford or Cambridge? We should imagine not. The latter would still retain its superiority. We know the charm which subsists in a name, the importance which antiquity con. fers upon Institutions of royal and noble foundation, the effect of association, where present circumstances bring an ardent mind into connexion with the illustrious men of former times. We know the difference too between eligibility to the highest offices and entire exclusion from offices. Even if the Test and Corporation Acts were repealed, the advantages of University residence would remain nearly, or altogether the same. The inferior estimation in which any new Academic Institution on a large scale among Dissenters would necessarily be held, must present to the projectors of any such object