gent proofs of sameness.-It is equally true that R. P. did not approve the application of Dr. Marsh's theorem to determine the identity of MSS. by a coincidence in their readings and Dr. Milner, in his Strictures, p. 252. has expressed in substance R. P.'s sentiments on this point; "the mathematical theorem, he signified, was totally inapplicable to the purpose. A multitude of considerations, he said, were necessary to form a correct judgment on MSS. which could not possibly be reduced to any theoretical computation of that kind.”—I have repeatedly attempted to elicit his opinion concerning Dr. Marsh's general Hypothesis touching the origin of the three Gospels. He was uniformly an unbeliever in it. R. P. accounted for the verbal coincidences very differently.— I consulted R. P. three or four different times, about that principle of scriptural interpretation, as an universal property of the Greek language, which the late pious and humane Granville Sharp first steadily applied to certain texts as additional testimonies to that fundamental doctrine—the Divinity of our Saviour: R. P. was silent. I can, however, state from very good authority that in conversation with certain friends R. P. intimated his distrust of the canon, and assigned reasons for his apprehensions, which appeared decisive to competent judges. At this time a pamphlet appeared, which was entitled Six more Letters to Granville Sharp, and written in the spirit of certain tracts which had been published about the close of the seventeenth century. The author of it makes irreverent sport truly, but is exceedingly shy of the main question. This effusion was attributed to R. P., who did not feel disposed to thank his friends for the compliment.] DETACHED DETACHED OBSERVATIONS. [E.M.] The original of γλυκὺς was δευλκυς, whence δλευκυς, γλευκος, γλυκὺς—γλεῦκος sweet wine. ó, n, To was ròs, Tǹ, Tó whence ris, etc. [Conf. H. St. tract. de Orthographia, p. 2.] ἐγὼ Ionice ἐγὼν, i. e. λέγων, the speaker*. “Iva i. e. ‹ ḍ—iv the old preposition, which probably was v—eis, és, év· in Lat. on Gallice. Πρὸς τῶν θεῶν, and πρὸς θεῶν are both good Greek, but the former is the more fami *["In the infancy of speech there might have been no occasion for the first person, or any such word: the verb was always used in the third person, as we call it—for the nominative case was always expressed although the speaker was talking of himself." Capt. G. Brown, 32, 3. "This is the case in the language of New Holland. One of the natives, when he was in England, was asked, Do you eat fish? The answer in his own language was Banneelong eats fish." Dr. Vincent, p. 19. T.K.] liar expression, and never used by the Tragic writers. Me signified originally in the first place; (μείς, μία, μὲν); δὲ in the second place (contracted from dúo). T.K. In Tragicorum et Comicorum Iambicis, Trochaicis [et ni fallor addebat Anapæsticis] articulus semper fere ictum metricum habet, nisi ubi versum inchoat. [Hinc emendabat Eur. Bacch. 192. åλx' οὐχ ὁμοίως ό θεος ἄν τιμήν εχοί pro άν ὁ θεός.] Vox emphatica raro ictu caret in Iambicis. [P.P.D.] AD AUCTORES LATINOS. Ennius apud Jul. Rufin. p. 222 ed. D. R. Ut ego plectar, tu delinquas: tu pecces, ego arguar. [P.P.D.] AD AD TERENTIUM Fr. Lindenbruchii; P. 13. 1. 29. Ambigue extulerat Menander. P. 14. 1. 8. “hunc" Lege huc, ex Adelph. v. i. 13. P. 20. 1. 49-51. Cicero Div. in Cæcil. 7. P. 27. 1. 33. " ad illud spectat," 1, 2, 21. ibid. 42. " ut Cicero" in Verr. IV. 12. Minus clarum putavit fore quod de— P. 55. 1. 46. "Plautus in Aulularia" III. 6. 23. P. 104. l. 12. Phorm. I. i. 7. l. 14. " in Andria" III. iii. 26. P. 105. 1. 29. "in Aulularia" III. vi. 23. Poeta apud Donatum ad Terent. Adelph. 1. 1. [* Hæc an recte descripserim nescio. P.P.D.] nam, |