.... quamquam fessi erant, laeti tamen, quod Metellus.. morabatur, instructi intentique obviam procedunt-where, says he, laeti has the force of lubenter and must be construed with procedunt. In this case it would have been more rational to have brought it nearer to procedunt. Laeti procedunt would be intelligible; but where it stands, it has the awkward effect of referring their joy to the supposed danger of their own commander Metellus, laeti quod M. morabatur. We might also object to the inelegant combination laeti instructi procedunt. In the very next sentence, we may observe by the bye, strepitu adventare might have benefited by the conjectures of some happy critic; for it is not usual to omit the preposition cum in such a case. Mr. Allen's quotation of majore strepitu castra moveri jubet is not sufficient to justify the reading. The presence of an adjective renders the absence of cum much less objectionable. See Zumpt, § 72. 9. The truth, however, is that the whole sentence requires medical advice. From c. 60. we are induced to quote another specimen of the tone in which our editor speaks of his fellow critics. Cortius and Mr. Allen read: sicuti audiri a suis aut cerni possent, monere alii, alii hortari. Here the Bipont editor, following some of the earliest editions of Sallust, reads sicubi. Teller, of Berlin, does so likewise, and naturally expresses surprise that Cortius, in his bulky collection of various readings, should have taken no notice of this variation. Now we strongly suspect it is the right reading, for we have an indistinct feeling that sicuti would require poterant, and we know that sicubi, necubi, numcubi have often been ill treated by the librarii. But we hesitate to support the substitution of sicubi too warmly, for fear we should incur the same censure as the poor ́ administer Bipontinus,' who is courteously called by Mr. Allen on this occasion homo omnium quos unquam sustinuit terra, ineptissimus. When he was borrowing the phrase from Sallust, we wonder he did not keep the original epithet: sceleratissimus would have been as justifiable as that which he has substituted. But the Bipont gentlemen will find some consolation in sharing the delicate censures of our editor with Cortius himself, who, though generally praised, has at times language almost as rough, viz. pueriliter ineptientem, (p. 158,) putida ineptiola, (p. 210,) &c. We have spoken pretty fully of Mr. Allen's attempts to correct the text, but we may say a few words still on his sins of omission. That he has not given us a collation of the new MSS. which he has so thoroughly examined, is to be regretted, because a collation after all may be given very briefly. But we quarrel more with him for every now and then adopting the conjectures of Cortius silently, without the least notice that they are conjectures. Often too it happens that the text of Cortius has got a reading which is supported indeed by some of the MSS., but not to the exclusion of other readings entitled to considerable attention, if not preference. In such cases Mr. Allen would have done well to note the variety; we do not ask him to reprint in his little volume the whole farrago lectionis' of the Cortian quarto. We will give two or three instances in support of what we say. In c. 14. Utinam illum .... simulantem videam,... nae ille.... poenas reddat, is the reading of every MS. ; but Cortius, of his own sole pleasure, changed reddat to reddet the future, to the great damage, as we stated in our second volume p. 150 *, of the meaning of the passage which requires the subjunctive after the clause, depending on utinam, just as in c. 102, utinam a principio placuisset! profecto (corresponding to nae in the other passage) accepisses. With Mr. Allen reddet is silently adopted from the edition of Cortius, but not one word upon its being conjectural. In c. 67, instead of inulti obtruncati, several MSS. have inulti obtruncari, a reading which we should decidedly prefer to the other. Such a variety should at least have been noticed in a critical edition such as Mr. Allen's. So again, in c. 75, he should not have placed in his text diem locumque, ubi praesto fuerint, praedicit, without adding that forent is the reading of all the old editions, and that even the MSS., instead of fuerint, have fuerit. The phrase, in fact, as Cortius and Mr. Allen give it, can only bear this Irish translation -‘he foretels them where they have been.' The reference which the former makes to Gellius is of no service to his cause. We can only give Mr. A. one of these alternatives, to read forent, or fuerent (as an older form of the same word;) or, what will perhaps be more to his taste, to omit the three words ubi praesto fuerint altogether. In c. 47, a violent alteration has been made in the text; with some notice indeed in the note, but not enough to satisfy the case. The passage we speak of stands in nearly all the MSS. ratus frequentiam negotiatorum et commeatum juvaturum exercitum etiam paratis rebus munimento fore; which we would propose to correct by writing commeatu instead of the accusative (and the ablative is, in fact, found in some MSS.) and secondly by dividing etiam into et jam. Commeatu juvare is supported by Caesar's phrases: B. G. i. 26. ne eos frumento juvarent.—vii. 78. ut se cibo juvarent—B. C. i. 15. exercitum omnibus rebus juvant. Thus the meaning would be: * In that same article, p. 151, two other passages from c. 70, and c. 101, were spoken of, in both of which Mr. Allen has retained the reading we objected to. Thinking that the numerous merchants there resident would, in the first place, readily procure supplies for his army, and secondly, when once they had brought their property into the town for that purpose, would be willing to defend it with him against Jugurtha.' If there is any thing suspicious in the sentence, it is in paratis rebus; but the efforts of Cortius and Mr. Allen are chiefly directed against exercitum juvaturum, which the former includes between brackets, and the second rejects altogether as an interpolation. We will conclude our remarks upon the text of Mr. Allen's edition, by recommending a few orthographical changes as, 1. civitates for civitatis (p. 233) in the accusative. Mr. Allen has tempestates (p. 241) asperitates (p. 244). His note on the accusative omnis at the beginning of the Catiline is too general. 2. hique alveos, &c. (p. 148) for iique, &c., comparing Cortius' note on the passage with his own note in c. 76. n. 11.; also his for is in c. 17. 3. totiens for toties, seeing that every MS. has the former, as Mr. Allen himself states (c. 106.) 4. dispersa for disspersa (p. 189, &c.) transcendes for transscendes (p. 230. note 9). And we are inclined to think, that on a second inspection of his MSS., he will find reason to write contio, benificium, maestus, hucine rather than concio, beneficium, moestus, huccine. Here we close our remarks on the critical services of Mr. Allen; and we cannot refrain from stating that Sallust is but little indebted to him for what he has done in this respect. A much better text might have been made, without visiting the British Museum, from the various readings of the Cortian edition alone. We regret much to say this, because it is gratifying to find a gentleman endeavouring to recall the attention of English scholars to the importance of securing the best text in the different classical authors, an object which had long been lost sight of in all editions of at least the Latin writers. But while we are in the censuring mood, we will clear off the whole score, by adding all our other objections. They are simply these: the almost total omission of what would explain the matter of Sallust's writings, whether historical, geographical, or antiquarian; the want of a life of Sallust; the absence of all his fragments, which would not have swelled the book beyond reasonable bounds; and last, but not least, the price of the volume, which is not dear, perhaps, compared with many books, but is certainly too dear to allow the book that circulation which we suppose Mr. Allen would wish. The book, indeed, is beautifully and most accurately printed, for we have only observed two misprints throughout, and our examination, as the reader will see, has been pretty minute. After the long string of objections and faults which have been brought forward, we shall perhaps surprise the reader by saying that we think the work still one of decided merit, and one that will be found highly useful to a good teacher. Mr. Allen has at least done one thing well. He has most liberally and most successfully illustrated a very large number of idiomatic phrases throughout the two historical treatises. We only regret that he has thought it infra dignitatem* to write English; yet as he is determined to use the Latin language, it is some considerable satisfaction to have it written so correctly and therefore so intelligibly. Still we have an unconquerable affection for the mother tongue. We must make room for a few extracts from Mr. Allen's notes, that the reader may judge of their merit for himself. In Cat. c. 7, there is a phrase which gave considerable trouble to an editor of Sallust, whose work was noticed in a previous Number of our review, viz., Eas divitias, eam bonam famam.... putabant. Mr. Allen quotes the following passages from Sallust: Cat. c. 20. Nam idem velle atque nolle, ea demum firma amicitia est-c. 58. In fuga salutem sperare, ea vero dementia est.-Jug. c. 31. Sed haec inter bonos amicitia est, inter malos factio.- -c. 85. Hae sunt meae imagines, haec nobilitas.' And then follow ten or a dozen similar passages from Livy, Tacitus, Virgil. 6 Again, c. 23. on occultum habuit, he adds the note: Sic infra, c. 58. compertum habeo, et Jug. c. 10. falsum habuit.' And again, c. 43. on Lentulus cum ceteris .... constituerant.' 'Jug. c. 38. Cohors una Ligurum cum duabus turmis Thracum transiere ad regem; et c. 101. Bocchus cum peditibus .... postremam Romanorum aciem invadunt.' And on c. 44. Ceteri .... dant: Cassius 'Infra c. 46. Ceteri sine mora veniunt: Coeparius profugerat.-c. 52. Nam cetera tum persequare hoc, nisi provideris implores. -Jug. c. 14. Ceteri_reges nostra familia. . . c. 113. Ceteri obtruncati: Jugurtha Sullae vinctus traditur.' .... .... In the last passage but one, we have ventured to transpose familia nostra. That the order of words is not fully to be depended upon in many manuscripts may be seen in Mr. Allen's note twenty in this very chapter, in reference also to the very same words, familia nostra. We would gladly quote more from this work; but the present paper has already run to an undue length, and we will content ourselves with directing the reader's attention to the close similarity between the language of Sallust and Tacitus, as established by the numerous quotations of Mr. Allen. * Pottier (the Paris editor) is thus censured by Mr. Allen: Professorem literarum Latinarum non puduit Gallice praefari! PAUPERISM AND EDUCATION. Extracts from the Information received by His Majesty's Commissioners, as to the Administration and Operation of the Poor-Laws. Published by Authority. THE publication before us, which has been wisely issued at a cheap rate, and which, in consequence, has had a very extensive sale, is in many respects one of the most valuable contributions which we possess to the hitherto undigested mass of our materials for National Self-Knowledge. It would not be within the province of this Journal to examine the contents of the work with reference only to the great question to which it immediately applies; but as it appears to us to lay bare many of the more frightful forms in which popular ignorance displays itself, we may not improperly direct attention to it as a text-book full of valuable evidence of the manifold evils which arise out of that ignorance. The conclusion from such premises is, we think, self-evident;-namely, that whatever measures may be suggested or adopted for the instant amelioration of the particular evils here displayed, there is no hope for their extinction but in the establishment of a National Education upon the broadest and most comprehensive principles. 6 The system of poor-laws in England began, no doubt, in expediency. The gradual breaking up of feudal service and protection, the sudden dissolution of the monastic institutions, and the almost concurrent depreciation of the value of money consequent upon the discovery of America, produced an aggregate of misery which imperatively demanded a forced contribution from capital. The same laws which justly and mercifully, to a certain extent, required that casual misfortune should be relieved, also provided that the poor should be set to work.' The natural operations of demand and supply were here disturbed; the natural relations between profits and wages were interrupted; a fund was created for the labourers, which could not be distributed with reference to the amount of profitable labour; the fund for the support of profitable labour was therefore broken in upon; and, for three centuries, consequently, a struggle has been going forward between the demands of want and the demands of industry. Circumstances, which have arisen almost within our own generation, have been steadily breaking down the barriers which separated the two classes of claimants upon the labour-fund; and at the present time, with reference to the largest body of labourers, the agricultural, the distinction between the two classes of claimants |