merly disgusted us, recur in this poem. His lordship's strain is, as ever,

"I seek no sympathies, nor need! The thorns which I have reaped are of the tree I planted-they have torn me,-and I bleed; I should have known what fruit would spring

from such a seed."

If his lordship has such a disdain for sympathy, we wish he would seek some other solace, or, at least, cease to repine. By his own showing, he has, indeed, little claim to commisseration, and since he is not even disposed to allow any one to medicate his wounds, it is a ridiculous and offensive ostentation to display them. His lordship confesses that his afflictions are

the fruits of his own folly;-the natural remedy would seem to be a change of conduct. If he have not resolution to reform, nor yet hardihood to persevere in a course which he condemns, his case is a hopeless one.

Burying Places in Cities.
MESSRS. EDITORS,

T

live in an enlightened age. The progress of scientific improvement, and of whatever may meliorate the condition of mankind, is certainly great. Yet, in some respects, we are inferior to those generations who lived in what are called the dark ages. In the present age of civilization and progressive improvement, when religion and science exert their benign influence over a vast portion of the habitable globe, we still tolerate prejudices and customs of which we must be divested, before we can presume to say that we are truly enlightened.

"To be weak, is to be miserable, Doing or suffering."

In most eastern countries it was customary to bury the dead at some distance from any town. This practice obtained among the Jews, the Greeks, the Romans, &c. Among the primitive Christians, burying in cities was not allowed for the first three hundred years, nor in churches for many ages after. Many of the American tribes and nations whom we generally characterize as savage and ignorant, never permit a corpse to moulder away in or very near their villages and towns. But in regard to this wise regulation, the civilized inhabitants of our cities stand in the back ground. In this very populous and crowded city-this enlightened city of New-York, you meet with burying places and cemeteries in the most central and populous parts!-Daily, in this warm season, you are annoyed by the opening of vaults on the very verge of the footways, where thousands of passengers are forced to witness dead bodies in every stage of putrescence, and to in

We intended to point out some of his lordship's numerous violations both of syntax and prosody, but to any reader, who has a competent knowledge of the language, it will be easy to detect them. Blemishes are the more to be regretted, in proportion to the richness of the mantle which they tarnish. E.

hale the noxious effluvia that escape from the gloomy charnel-houses. In other in

ly disturbed to make room for the recently deceased, which are deposited within a few feet from the surface of the ground. Here they undergo decomposition, and the putrid exhalations are continually contaminating the atmosphere to the great annoyance and injury of the living.

Customs so pernicious and inexcusable, should not be tolerated. It must however be acknowledged, that various religious communities in New-York leave their burying places in the city undisturbed, and bury their dead" without the city." There they can point out the very spot where rest the remains of dear departed friends. There, free from the city's din, we can indulge in those pious reflections which the melancholy place suggests. There, in solemn silence, we can meditate on "the way of all the earth." And, whilst with tears of affection unseen, we bedew the drooping flowrets on the sepulchral hillock, we look with the eye of Christian faith to that "building of God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens."

"Hark! how the sacred calm, that breathes around,

Bids every fierce tumultuous passion cease, In still small accents whisp'ring from the ground, A grateful earnest of eternal peace.' R. N. K.

33

For the American Monthly Magazine. MESSRS. EDITORS,

The following errors in the Nautical Almanacs for 1815, 16, 17, 18 and '19,

are offered for insertion in your Magazine. I wish them to be made public, not from a disposition to injure any individual concerned in that work, but from a sense of duty: for I regard the Nautical Almanac as a public standard, to whose correctness every one is bound to contribute, whenever it is in his power. The errors were found in Blunt's edition, and whether the same are in the London copies, I know not; that is for the four first named years; the Almanac for 1819, having been recalculated by Mr. Blunt. It is thought of consequence to mention the errors in the copies for the years previous to 1818, since observations may have been made during those years, that are not yet calculated.

For 1817. Page 6, Moon's Declinat. 1st day, noon, for 23° 43', read 23° 43′ N. Page 40, Mars' Geocentric Long. 19th day, for 10s 3° 54', read 11 3° 54'. Mars Geocentric Long. 25th day, for 10s 8° 26', read 11s 8° 26'. Page 41, Moon's Lat. midn. May 1st, at bottom of page, for 0° 38′ 28′′, read 0° 33′ 28′′.

Page 43, Prop. Log. 15th day, midn. for 5300, read 5233.

Page 101, Moon's Lat. 1st day, midn. for

1° 10' 16" S. read 0° 10′ 16′′ S. Page 127, Moon's Parallax, 30th day, noon, for 55′ 26′′, read 56′ 26′′.

For 1818.

4

Page 5, Moon's Lat. 1st day, noon, for 2° 48′ 46′′ N. read 1° 48′ 46′′ N.

Page 16, Venus' Geo. Lat. 7th day, for 1° 11', read 1o 1'.

Page 18, Moon's Declinat. 1st day, noon, for 25° 56', read 25° 56′ S. Page 30, Moon's R. Ascen. 12th day, midn. for 47° 5′, read 57° 5'. Page 55, Moon's Parallax, 1st day, midn. for 53' 32", read 55′ 32′′.

Page 64, Mercu. Helio. Lat. 7th day, for 6° 58', read 5° 58′.

Page 66, Moon's Declinat. 1st day, midn. for 18° 33', read 18° 33′ N. Page 79, Moon's Semid. 2d day, midu. for 14' 48", read 14′ 45′′.

Moon's Semid. 22d day, midn. for 15' 8", read 15′ 28′′. Page 113, Moon's Long. 21st day, midn. for 2$ 24° 32′ 51′′, read 3s 24° 32′ 51′′. Page 115, Moon's Semid. 9th day, noon, for 16' 57", read 15′ 57′′.

Moon's Semid. 10th day, noon,

for 16' 51", read 15′ 51′′. Page 121, Conjunction of Planets, 12th day, for, read 3. Page 126, Moon's Declinat. Ist day, noon, for 26° 35′, read 26° 35′ S. Page 137, Moon's Long. 22d day, midn. for 8$ 27° 19′ 46′′, read 6s 27° 19′ 46′′. Page 25, Conj. of Planets, 16th day, for

34' N. read y 34' S. Page 37, Conj. of Planets, for 7th day , read 9th day.

It is gratifying to find that Blunt's edition of the Almanac for 1819, has been published so much neater and more distinct than those of former years, and containing a modest preface, without any "pledges of reputation" for infallibility, or offers of reward for the discovery of errors. In particular, he deserves much credit for having procured a recalculation of the London edition, in which a great number of important errors have been detected. Conducted on such principles, it is believed, his edition cannot fail of patronage from men of science. The following errors in this corrected copy for 1819, are not pointed out with a view to detract from its merits, nor in compliance with Mr. Blunt's " challenge!" but because they are thought important to be known. And here I would take occasion to observe, that in the communications I have heretofore made to your Magazine on this subject, I was not influenced by a wish to depreciate the general correctness of Mr. Blunt as a publisher. What was said concerning him in the first communication, was forced

from me by a failure of every other method to obtain any satisfactory explana tion, and did not proceed from a spirit of resentment. To the matter of his communication in your Magazine for January last, so far as I can understand it, it would be easy to reply; and to show that the facts of the case are but partially stated. But this is conceived to be unnecessary; for any one who examines it, will perceive that it is but an unwilling acknowledgment of most of the errors I had pointed out. As to the "Chronological Cycles," &c. a London copy has been examined since my first statement, and these were found to be correct in it, or as I had put them down. The manner of Mr. Blunt's communication is such as not to deserve a reply. By writing with so much warmth, he defeats his own object. As to my statements, I shall only say, that what is written, is written; and though I would make no pretensions to accuracy, and wish not to engage in any public dispute, yet, whenever I may chance to notice any errors of magnitude in a work of such vital importance as the Nautical Almanac, I shall consider myself bound to offer them for publication, whether they be made by A, B, or C.

Distance Moon and Spica, m, 17th day, midn. for 59° 0′ 13", read 39° 0′ 13".

Page 25, Conj. Moon and Mercu. for

25d. 7h. 29m. read 26d. 3h. 56m. Page 28, Mercury's Declinat. 28th day, for 4° 8', read 7° 8'. Page 29, Moon's Lat. 10th day, mida, for 3° 9' 7", read 3° 29′ 7′′. Page 31, Moon's Semid. 9th day, midn. for 14' 0", read 15′ 0′′.

Moon's Parallax, 11th day, noon, for 55' 4", read 55′ 41′′.

Page 37, Conj. Moon and Mercury, for 23d. 23h. 3m. read 24d. 22h. 33m. Page 40, Mercury's Declinat. 7th day, for 13° 15', read 15° 15'.

Mercury's Declinat. 25th day, for 19° 43′ read 18° 43'. Page 49, Conj. Mars and Venus, for 45' S. of 9, read 9 17′ S. of 3. against the 19th day, for s read. Page 52, for Inf. * 8 2d. 16h. read Inf. ó, 2d. 16h.

Page 53, Moon's Lat. 1st day, midn. for

5° 3' 28", read 5° 3′ 28′′ N. Page 58, Dist. Moon and Sun, 1st day, 9th hour, for 82° 32′ 46′′, read 83° 32′ 46′′. This error is also contained on the 6th page of the Almanac, previous to the cal. culations, as an erratum to the London copy. The minutes in that copy appear to have been corrected; but the degrees are put down one less than the true number. Page 65, Moon's Lat. 1st day, midn. for

2° 29′ 36", read 2° 29′ 36′′ N. Page 76, for 6 1d. 34h. read Sup. d id. 3th.

-

Moon's Parallax, 25th day, noon, for 59′ 43′′, read 58′ 43′′.

Mercury's Geo. Lat. 25th day, for 1° 51', read 0° 51'.

Mercury's Geo. Lat. 28th day, for 1° 27', read 0° 27'.

Mercury's Geo. Lat. 31st day, for 1° 1', read 0° 1'. Page 77, Moon's Lat. 1st day, midn. for 0° 38′ 41", read 0° 38′ 41′′ S. Page 89, Moon's Lat. 1st day, midn. for 4° 24' 11", read 4° 24′ 11′′ S.

Moon's Lat. 30th day, midn. for 4° 10′ 41", read 5° 10′ 41′′. Page 100, for Inf. * 8 6d. 16h. read Inf. 6d. 16h.

Page 133, for enters 24, read enters, or capricorn.

Page 134, Sun's Declinat. for North, read South.

22d. 18h.

The two corrected times of the conjunctions of the moon and planets given above, against pages 25 and 37, were obtained by the longitudes of the objects in the Almanac, and, therefore, may not be correct to the nearest minute; since the planet's longitudes in that work are put down only to minutes.

Respectfully, yours,

EDWARD HITCHCOCK.
Deerfield, Mass. June 6, 1818.

* Opposition.

For the American Monthly Magazine. If J. G. the learned correspondent of the Magazine for May, will take the trouble to look into Lowth's Syntax, he will find the phraseology which he so justly censures, distinctly authorized. To the authority of Lowth is undoubtedly to be ascribed the prevalence of the error in question. This opinion of Lowth's has been often controverted:-by Campbell, in his "Philosophy of Rhetoric," book ii. ch. 4-by Crombie, in his "Treatise on the Etymology and Syntax of the English Language," Syntax, rule xv.-by Priestly, in his "English Grammar,” Notes and Observations, sect. ii.-by Murray, in his "English Grammar," Syntax, rule x.-by Webster, in his "Philosophical and Practical Grammar," Syntax, rule xxv.-&c. &c. How, then, J. G. could be understood in saying that this uncouth form of speech has lately" crept into the language, and that it has hitherto escaped "all public animadversion," is not so clear. P. Q.

Although the inaccurate phraseology animadverted upon by J. G. was long ago employed, it was not sanctioned by the practice of eminent writers; and it has not been, until lately, frequently to be met with. The very frequent and growing use of it now-a-days, called forth the strictures of J. G.; and although it has been noticed by the best grammatical treatises, yet it has not, we believe, been made the subject of stricture in the popular periodicals of the day.

For the American Monthly Magazine. MESSRS. EDITORS,

There is a circumstance, of which I have taken notice, during the continuance of very hard frosts, which appears novel to most people in this country to whom I have mentioned it; and it has sometimes subjected me to the alternative of stating facts in a very positive manner, or of running the risk of being disbelieved. As I do not recollect to have seen it mentioned in any work I have read, I should be gratified to have you take notice of it in your very valuable Magazine.

The circumstance alluded to is-that the best gun locks will not fire gun-powder during intensely cold weather, or when the Mercury stands 20° or more below 0, if exposed fairly to that temperature. On the day, known all over this country as the cold Friday, in the year 1809 or 10, a gentleman, one of the N. W. sompany, observed to me, as he was

going to the cupola of the Cathedral with his thermometer, that my gun (which was one of Fletcher's patent breeches, with a fine agate flint) would not fire gunpowder; and on my expressing some doubt on that point, he followed by saying, that he had hunted many days in the north when he could not get his gun off from the effects of cold, to his great mortification, when game was plenty. We immediately prepared for the experiment, and left the gun for twenty minutes or more in the most exposed place we could readily come at, when to my very great surprise, on repeated trials, the flint slid as ineffectually over the steel as if it had been wood, and it did not fire until it had been in a warm room for more than 20 seconds. This experiment was tried at Quebec, in Lower Canada, where I resided at that. time.-On the cold Friday of last year, and on the cold Wednesday of the present past winter, I tried it with the same effect, only in these cases the gun was not as good an article as in the former experiment, yet it almost immediately flashed on being brought into a room with a stove.

It

Every one who saw the experiment tried, immediately formed some theory to account for it-which were so contradictory and unsatisfactory as to leave me in the dark as to the real cause. is well known that all metals when exposed to colds grow shorter, and of course the springs were stronger than when in a more warm and expanded state; and it was a fair conclusion that a lock ought to give more fire cold, than when warm, or in the ordinary temperature of the atmosphere, were the facts not in direct opposition to the theory. It was argued that the oil used to lubricate the lock became so congealed, as to create so great friotion that the springs could not drive the hammer open with sufficient force to elicit sparks-again, that the spark was extinguished by the intense cold air before it reached the powder-or, that the steel was so full of frost as to deaden the spark on the principle of snow or water's extinguishing fire. The two last, I hold as preposterous and false reasoning.-I think I cannot have been deceived by any fortuitous circumstances in my own experiments, or in the very respectable authority from which I first learned the existence of the fact. If you should think the subject of sufficient importance to give it publicity, or any of your correspondents to speculate on it, I should feel myself highly gratified. A. L.

Your most obed'nt serv't,
Ballston-Spa, 4th May, 1812.