ipsa vituperandi actione? Why not, rather, ex eo quod in præterito (nuper quidem, sed tamen præterito) vituperasset? P. 165. 27"Qua quidem in Sententiâ," &c. Delerem particulam in, nisi verba etiam ex alia parte laborarent. Nam imperite dictum est, laudandus ESSEM, si Pompeii dignitati suffragatus VIDERER. Atqui VIDERI id fecisse debes; es enim suffragatus: qui igitur locus verbis infectis?' Here indeed the editor seems to be in a vein of hypercriticism. The force of the passage is evidently this; "I should in course be an object for commendation, if I were observed, or known, to have contributed to his dignity."

P. 167. 28. This is one of the instances mentioned in the preface, p. x. in which the editor discerns the want of that civilis prudentia quædam,—" the discretion of a man of the world." De reliqui loci imprudentiâ, quum dicitur de certis hominibus, insidiosis amicis, &c. difficile est sensum nostrum communicare cum lectoribus omnibus; sed pluribus locis exempla talis imprudentiæ satis facile conspiciuntur, quæ viro in republ. et illorum hominum consuetudine versato imputari nequeant.'

P. 204. §56. Scilicet is homo sum," &c. The well-deserved ridicule on this passage is happily written. So also p. 207. §. 61. "Quibuscum,` &c. and p. 213. § 67. "Jam distracta," &c. Indeed it is scarcely possible to conceive such nonsense to have proceeded from the mouth of Cicero,-and that too before an audience so grave and learned.

P. 292. § 145. Ut, si in illo-commissam putabo." This is an ingenious and learned note. M. WOLF very convincingly shews a want of coherency in the text, precisely similar to that which was above noticed by us, on an almost parallel passage, the exordium of the Orat. ad Quir. p. 83.

In the last of the Orations, as in each of the preceding, we find a severe stricture on the very first sentence. The expression particularly censured in this instance, p. 307. § 1. is the P. Clodii impudicam impudentiam. Impudicus,' it is observed, ad corpus pertinet; impudens, ad animum; sed, quamvis hæc sæpe conjuncta esse in vita non abnueris, illud tamen absurdum anvgoñoglav habere senties, si alia ad eandem normam conformes, aut Germanicè scribas, eine schamlose Unverschämtheit. Quin minore forsan offensione Latine dixeris impudentem impudicitiam, etsi hoc quoque abhorret a bono usu loquendi.

The meaning of impudica impudentia in plain English is "lewd effrontery;" the expression indeed is uncommon, and very strong for an exordium, and the prxnois may seem to savour of affectation; however, we do not see that it may not be very descriptive of the style and manner of the interference

of

of Clodius; see Epist. ad Q. Fr. II. 13. init. quoted by M. WOLF, and compare p. 313. § 4.

P.313.§5." Nihil enim-odin mei."Quicquid fecit Clodius, nen fecit odio Ciceronis, sed odio severitatis et dignitatis Ciceronianz. Ridete, patres Conscripti, quicquid est vobis cachinnorum !

P. 325.12. "Causa cognita, duobus locis dicta." • Nihil hujusmodi apud Ciceronem legi, jam p. 143. animadverti. Without wishing to controvert the seeming opinion of the editor respecting these particular historical references, we deem it just to remark, in general, that whatever of historical assertion occurs in these speeches, not noticed elsewhere, yet not contradictory to what is elsewhere related in true history, should be considered as presumptive evidence in favour, if not of the genuineness, at least of the historical authenticity of these Orations. A mere declaiming sophist would scarcely venture to invent facts;-nay, at some distance of time, he would hardly dare to enter into detail of their attending circumstances,—unless these circumstances, as well as the facts, were confirmed by history, or supported by general belief. Such attempts have seldom failed to involve incoherences, and thus to lead to the speedy detection of imposture.

P. 340. 24. P. 360. § 38. P. 363. § 40. P. 364. § 41. &c. The observations of the editor on these and numerous other passages are well deserving of notice: but it is not our wish, by multiplying quotations, to protract this article. Enough, we trust, has been advanced to justify us in recommending the work to the attention of our learned readers; and we would avoid, if possible, to weary their patience by unnecessary prolixity.

We cannot, however, dismiss the subject, without anticipating a question which is very likely to be started; -to what period are these compositions, if spurious, to be referred?

Markland,-who maintains that they are mere rhetorical declamations, in imitation of the lost originals spoken by Cicero, and partly made up of genuine, though corrupted, remnants of those originals,-pretends to ascertain their date with very minute precision. He observes that the passages quoted by Valerius Maximus from the Orat. de Haruspicum Responsis are to be found in the oration which has come down to us bearing that title, but with this remarkable difference; that in Val. Max. the language is correct and Ciceronian, and in this oration it is very much otherwise. Asconius cites the passages as markland they occur in this oration; be hence infers that Val. Max. gives the passages from the genuine oration, and that Asconius copied from the declamation, the original having previously

been

been lost; and he consequently refers these spurious compositions to the interval between the publication of the Histories of Val. Max. A. U. C. 786. (or thereabouts) and that of the Commentaries of Asconius Pedianus about A.U.C. 812., or certainly not later than A.U. C. 786,-i. e. to the interval between the years 33 and 42 of the Christian Ara. He supposes Quintilian to have implicitly followed the opinion of his master Asconius.

Now it seems probable that, if these four orations be not genuine, they could not be of the time of Cicero, for the spurious offspring would not have been acknowleged. Neither could they have made their false pretensions very near the time of Cicero; for he delivered two of them, as he expressly informs us, De Scripto; and the originals must, therefore, in all probability, have continued long in the hands of his admirers. On this account, and because Asconius was not a man likely to be deceived in such a matter, the hypothesis of Markland seems very improbable; moreover, as Gesner observes, since Val. Max. quotes the passages, without ascribing them to Cicero, "Unde igitur in mentem venit declamatori hac purpura se posse centonem suum exornare ?"

The hypothesis of M. WOLF is not liable to these objections, and is, indeed, on various accounts, much more intitled to credit. Without precisely fixing the date, he places it considerably later than the time of Asconius Pedianus; he supposes Valerius Maximus, Asconius, (between whose quotations and those of Val. Max. there is really no very important difference either in point of Latinity or otherwise) Quintilian, &c. all to have quoted from copies of the genuine Orations, which afterward in the lapse of time became extinct. From the remnants of those originals, and from other orations of Cicero which are still entire, he imagines some one of that numerous class of Rhetoricians, which succeeded the Augustan age, to have com piled and composed these four Declamations.

It must be confessed that an astonishing number of passages in these disputed compositions are to be found, almost totidem verbis, in the Orat. pro Sextio, in Pisonem, &c. and that, where they differ, the difference is almost universally in favour of the latter:-the deviations from them are, for the most part, such as render the language of the former more turgid and declamatory.

To decide the question, which is the professed object of this work, belongs not to us, but to the public, to whom the appeal is made. M. WOLF has undoubtedly done very much towards establishing his point: but we think that it is by no means improbable that his opinion may still meet with oppo

sition;

sition; and that some second Patronus Cause (see pref. p. xxv., may stand forwards, and demand a hearing before the pleading be finally closed,—prius quam eatur in consilium.

G. But."

ART. II. Nouveau Dictionnaire d'Histoire Naturelle, &c. i. e. A New Dictionary of Natural History, &c.

[Article continued from the last Appendix.]

N the course of noticing the botanical and zoological departments of this extensive undertaking, we naturally turned to the account of organized bodies. Here M. Virey deduces several important conclusions from extensive observation, but mingles with them some repetitions and more conjectures.

The article Tree occupies 130 pages, and is comprehensive without being tedious. Its value chiefly consists in many excellent practical directions relative to the culture of trees in general. The physiological part of their history, however, is not wholly omitted, and may be fully collected when the publication shall be completed, from the kindred titles Plant, Vegetable, Root, Stalk, Branch, Leaf, Seed, Fruit, Timber, and Forest, &c.

Most of the general facts are carefully noted, and ably discussed: but some portions of the details which regard the ve getable kingdom are either passed in silence, or too slightly. treated. Many of the cryptogamic species, for example, are omitted, and many of them so faintly described as to be of little benefit to the student. The Linnéan names of plants are not always inserted with that attention which is promised in the preliminary discourse; and the specific descriptions are often scanty, and sometimes inaccurate. Nepeta Cataria and Crambe Maritima are represented as belonging to the south of Europe: but they are by no means peculiar to that latitude; for both are natives of our own island, and both grow spontaneously even in its northern districts.-That Ulex Europaus (furze) is destined by nature to occupy the worst of soils, we cannot readily believe its frequency is supposed to indicate ground of a good quality.-It is carelessly asserted of the Alchemilla, that they inhabit only cold mountains: but the most common species is no stranger to vallies and the banks of rivers.-The Fucus mentioned at page 220 of Vol. i. is, doubtless, the Saccharinus but the fact is first loosely reported, and then presumed to be a mistake. The real process consists in steeping the plant in fresh water, then drying it in the sun, and afterward laying it up in wooden vessels :-the consequent efflorescence is not sugar, but a sweetish salt, unknown, we believe, to the English. They, however, like the Icelanders, occasionally

:

use

use the fucus as a pot herb. In the interior of Iceland, it sells at half the price of dried fish.-Artemisia, and not Absinthium, is the Linnéan generic name of wormwood.-The known species of heath, instead of 137, as here stated, amount to at least 250. Few of the grasses are illustrated in a manner suitable to their importance.

These and other deficiencies, which we cannot stay to enumerate, excite our regret rather than our surprise; since they are such imperfections as are incident to the execution of every extensive and complicated plan. In the present instance, they are more than counterbalanced by the copious and satisfactory manner in which other parts of the work have been composed. Those articles, especially, which are more immediately connected with rural or domestic economy, are well worthy of an attentive perusal, on account of their novelty, or real importance. Thus the history of the cotton plant is detailed with minute interest, and we are taught to expect that the herbaceous sort may be habituated to the climate of Southern France. Did our limits permit, it would be an easy and pleasing task to dwell on many passages of a similar description but we are desirous of confining our notices to a very few of the shortest.

Signor Casagrande, an Italian physician, discovered, some time ago, that the fruit of the dog-berry tree yielded an aromatic oil, which may be advantageously used in burning, and in the preparation of a soap superior to that of Venice or Spain. From the Doctor's experiments, combined with those of Messrs. Chancey and Sarton, it appears that this oil may be obtained in the same manner with that from olives; that it is fit for burning as soon as extracted; that it nevertheless improves by keeping; that 100 lbs. of berries give 34 lbs. of oil; and that 8 ounces of the latter, mixed with 6 ounces of soap-maker's liquor, yield 11 ounces of excellent soap. As, like olive oil, it is subject to ferment in a warm situation, the addition of a little water, to disengage and draw off the mucilaginous principle, is particularly recommended. The dog-berry tree possesses several advantages over the olive; it bears fruit in the course of two years, springs up in the worst soils, requires no culture, injures not the plants in its neighbourhood, nor dreads the vicissitudes of weather.

The following hints concerning wild Endive are particularly intitled to the consideration of the agriculturist:

Wild Endive casily grows in any soil, but prefers that which is rich and well improved. It is raised at a small expence, being sown after a single ploughing, and covered by the harrow. It braves drought, resists storms and rains, fears neither frost nor intense APP. REV. VOL. XLIV.

Hh

cold,