seriously affected, he replied to a friend, who expostulated with him for being so vehement in the pulpit, I could not help it: I must have done the same if I had seen the grave at the end of the discourse.' Such being his love for the immortal souls of men, it is not surprising that he was honored by the great Head of the Church with that truest of all popularity, the general esteem and affection of the Churches of God. Yet his own views of his preaching talents were far from being elevated. As the gifts of God he used them for the purposes for which they were entrusted; but they were never perverted to inflate him with a vain conceit of himself.

6

With the apostle, he was ever ready to exclaim, God forbid that I should glory save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ.' Various facts might be adduced confirmatory of this statement. A few weeks before his death, having preached a powerful and affecting discourse from those words, Behold, I stand at the door and knock,' he was urgently requested to print it; but this request he met with his invariable reply to all similar applications, I never produced any thing worth publishing.' Nor were his gifts for the ministry confined to preaching he was also mighty in prayer. In his addresses to the throne of grace there was, in a high degree, a combination of earnestness and humility, of confidence and gratitude, with an intense longing after the blessing for which he poured forth his supplications. His language in prayer was plain, energetic, and yet dignified, frequently interspersed with quotations from Scripture beautifully appropriate, and tending in no ordinary degree to fill the mind with deep solemnity, lowly reverence, and holy adoration. While he has thus been calling on the name of the Lord, large congregations have been powerfully affected; and cold and carnal must that heart have been that did not, on such occasions, say, with devotional feeling, Surely the Lord is in this place.'

As a Wesleyan minister, he was strongly and from principle attached to the doctrines of Methodism. These he had carefully examined by the test of Divine revelation, and was fully persuaded that they were in perfect accordance with the oracles of God. He therefore preached them, not merely as forming the creed of a people whom he loved, but as the essential truths of the Gospel. The discipline of the body had also his unequivocal approval. Unbiassed by favor, and unmoved by fear, he faithfully maintained this discipline in all circumstances with inflexible firmness.

We are finally called to contemplate him as one of the secretaries of our widely-extended and flourishing missions. In this laborious office his conduct was marked by the strictest integrity; and he manifested an intense concern for the interests of every department of the missionary cause. His qualifications for the public duties of a missionary secretary are well known; and many delightful instances might be given of his successful pleading in behalf of the heathen. His appeals to the best feelings of the audience were frequently overwhelming and irresistible. One of those appeals, made in Abbeystreet chapel, Dublin, a few months before his death, will long be remembered by those to whom it was addressed. He was very anxious for the liberation from slavery of a converted negro, called Pierre Sallah, having heard that it might be obtained for fifty pounds, and

6

that he was a very proper person to be employed among his countrymen as an assistant missionary. In his energetic manner he stated the case to his Irish friends, and put it to their generosity, whether, when for such a sum his freedom might be obtained, and his gifts so honorably employed, they would allow him to remain in bonds. The effect produced was astonishing. He was answered by a simultaneous shout of No, no! And, although the usual collection had already been made, yet from all parts of the chapel gold and silver were showered on the platform until the redemption price of Pierre Sallah was more than realized. To the missionary candidates, who frequently lodged with him, he extended his watchful care and attention, endeavoring to promote their personal piety, as well as their personal comfort. He also took considerable pains to improve their minds, in order that they might be rendered acceptable and useful; and by his pious and judicious counsels many of them have been greatly encouraged to enter with fortitude and diligence on their work in foreign climes. His zealous and upright observance of the more private duties of his office secured to him not only the approbation, but the confidence and unfeigned esteem of those who were capable of estimating his worth. The testimony of one with whom he was associated during his stay at the mission house will show the high opinion formed of him in his official character :

In speaking of our lamented brother as one of the general secretaries of the Wesleyan Missionary Society, it is difficult to avoid some semblance of eulogy, as in this very important engagement he appeared to great advantage. He possessed a strong mind, a quick perception, and a peculiarly sound judgment: he therefore took a comprehensive and correct view of the whole missionary field, and his decisions and management were consequently well calculated to promote the welfare of the society. How ably he could plead the cause of missions is well known to many; but it was only by the committee, and those immediately associated with him, that his talents and work could be fully appreciated.' That committee, on being called together after his decease, unanimously passed various resolutions expressive of the honorable opinion which they entertained of his character and services, and of the loss which, in his removal, the cause of missions had sustained. *

The committee also, in the general report of the Wesleyan missions, have recorded the following tribute to the value of his labors, and to the excellency of his character:

Mr. James had filled, with the highest credit to himself, the office of general secretary for upward of five years; and his exertions in most of the principal places in the three kingdoms have contributed, under the Divine blessing, to maintain and increase the high tone of public feeling in favor of the missions of the society; and the committee can bear ample testimony to the ability with which he performed those arduous duties which do not so immediately meet the public eye. His sound judgment, his uncorrupt integrity, his indefatigable industry, greatly promoted the successful management of the affairs of the society; while his frank and generous disposition endeared him to all who had the happiness of being associated with * See Wesleyan Methodist Magazine for Dec. 1832, page 899.

him. The sorrow occasioned by his removal is increased by the reflection, that his excessive labors in the missionary cause contributed to bring his valuable life to a premature close.'

Such are the valuable testimonies concerning Mr. James, from those who had no inducement or disposition to overrate his worth. Similar testimonies might be multiplied, but they are unnecessary; for in his character there is no doubtful point to confirm.

In preparing this imperfect account of one of the most excellent of men, I am not conscious of having concealed or extenuated any known fault or infirmity; nor of having in the least exaggerated any single virtue. That it has been written under the influence of an affectionate remembrance of a long and most endearing friendship, I am free to admit; but the feelings of the friend have never violated the fidelity of the biographer. A frequent and unrestrained intercourse with him for many years warrants my asserting, that he was truly all which has been said of him, and abundantly more. The removal of such a man, and of so able a minister of Christ, in the meridian of life, is an event mysterious to human reason; but a safer guide than reason teaches us to bow with unrepining submission to the sovereign pleasure of Him, who worketh all things after the counsel of His own will.' At the same time, such visitations of Divine Providence should impress on the minds of all who love Zion, the duty of praying, Help, Lord! for the godly man ceaseth; for the faithful fail from among the children of men.'

·

From the Wesleyan Methodist Magazine.

HORE ANGLICANE;

OR, OBSERVATIONS ON THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE.

THE English language is remarkably distinguished from the languages of ancient Greece and Rome by the simplicity of its structure, and the paucity of inflections or variations, of which its radical words are susceptible.

In Latin, many substantives (as dominus) admit of seven variations of the nominative singular; and many of the Greek substantives (as Xoyos) have nine or ten variations; whereas English substantives at the most have only three; as from child we have child's, children, children's.

English adjectives have no variation on account of number, case, or gender. They are susceptible of two variations only, which are employed for the purpose of showing the degrees of comparison; as from hard, we have harder, hardest; whereas the Latin durus has, in the three degrees of comparison, thirty-five variations; and the Greek pos has fifty-three.

The Latin verb amo, independently of its compound tenses, that is, the tenses formed by the help of the verb sum, has upward of one hundred variations. The Greek verb rurw, independently of its compound tenses and of the inflections of its participles, has nearly five hundred variations. And a French verb (as parler) has in its simple tenses thirty-five variations of the radix. Whereas all the

variations of an English verb, independently of compound tenses, are not more than six or seven.

This paucity of inflections in our nouns and verbs has necessarily led to a very simple, easy, and natural method of arranging words, and constructing sentences. In consequence of the numerous inflections in Latin, and still more in Greek, the words in many sentences might be thrown almost into any order, without altering or obscuring the sense; because, whatever situation a word occupied, its particular form would at once point out its relation to the other words in the sentence. Hence the poets, for the sake of their metre, often adopted such an arrangement, that the words, if placed in the same order in an English translation, would convey either no meaning at all, or a meaning widely different from that of the original.

In the Latin sentence, Brutus necavit Cæsarem, the order of the words might be varied at pleasure, without occasioning the least ambiguity. It might be Brutus Cæsarem necavit; or Necavit Brutus Cæsarem; or Necavit Cæsarem Brutus; or Cæsarem Brutus necavit; or Cæsarem necavit Brutus. In each of these six arrangements the meaning of the words is equally plain, and cannot possibly be mistaken; because the terminations of the nouns show, with infallible certainty, which is the nominative to the verb, and which is the accusative, governed by the verb. The corresponding English sentence, Brutus killed Cesar,' will scarcely admit of any variation in the arrangement. In poetry, perhaps, Brutus Cesar killed,' would be admissible; but any other collocation of the words would convert the sentence either into nonsense or into falsehood. In this instance, therefore, while a Latin writer has the choice of six methods of arranging his words, an Englishman is confined to one; or, at the most, allowing him the liberty of a poet, he has but two.

That the paucity of inflections and the consequent multitude and frequent use of particles and auxiliaries in our language have rendered it inferior, in beauty and harmony, to the learned languages, may be admitted; but, taking it in its present improved state, there is reason to believe that the English language, in copiousness and precision, is decidedly superior to the Latin, and not inferior to the Greek.

The entire want of articles in Latin is an undeniable defect, and renders many sentences ambiguous. The Greek here has a manifest advantage over the Latin in having one article; but the English, having two articles, is in this respect superior to both. For the different ideas conveyed by the three expressions, man-a man-the man, there is but one expression in Latin-homo, and but two in Greekavdgwros—å avIgwros. Filius Dei, may mean either a son of a god, (that is, of some heathenish deity,) a son of God, (that is, of the true God,) or the Son of God (that is, the Messiah.) The Greek writers, though possessing a definite article like ours, do not always employ it in that precise and regular way in which it is used among us. Hence the ambiguity of some Greek expressions, which, had the speaker used English, would have been obviated. When Satan said to our Lord, Eos ε T8 88, it is not clear or certain, whether he meant,' If thou be a son of God,' (that is, one enjoying the peculiar favor and protection of the Most High ;) or, If thou be THE Son of God,' (that is, the Messiah.) That the latter was the precise meaning of Satan's

words is rendered highly probable by the confession of the unclean spirit, which was expelled out of the man in the synagogue at Capernaum, 'I know thee who thou art, THE HOLY ONE OF GOD.'

There is the same ambiguity in the language of the centurion, who, having witnessed the miracles that accompanied and followed the death of Christ, exclaimed, AndWS DES VIOS NY 8T05. Collating this verse, Matt. xxvii, 54, with the passage of Luke xxiii, 47, where the words are stated to have been, Οντως ο ανθρωπος στος δικαιος ην, we are led to infer, that es rog in one is tantamount to dixaros in the other. Hence it is likely that the centurion did not refer to the peculiar character of our Lord, as THE Son of God, or the Messiah; but that he simply meant He was a son of God,' a righteous man,' a special object of the Divine regard and favor.

The proper application of our articles is highly conducive to precision and energy. When two or more nouns, having the same regimen, follow each other in close succession, if they denote persons or things that greatly resemble each other, or that are usually connected, the article may be expressed with the first noun, and understood with the following ones. But if the nouns denote persons or things that are dissimilar, that cannot be united, or that are viewed in the way of opposition or contrast, we should either omit the articles altogether, or repeat them with every separate noun. In such cases also, if there be a preposition before the first noun, it ought to be repeated with each of the following ones:

Daniel iii, 5. The sound of the cornet, flute, harp, sackbut, psaltery, dulcimer,' &c. Here the article is expressed before cornet, and understood before all the other nouns; because they are all closely connected as denoting various instruments of music.

Daniel iii, 2. To gather together the princes, the governors, the captains, the judges, the treasurers, the counsellors, the sheriffs,' &c. Here, all the nouns being closely connected as denoting various ranks or offices, the article expressed with the first noun might have been omitted before the others. Its repetition makes the enumeration more distinct and more impressive.

Matt. v, 45. Τον ήλιον αυτό ανατέλλει επι πονηρός και αγαπες, και βρέχει επι δικαιές και αδίκες. Here are four adjectives without any article; but our translators, having inserted the article before the first, have very properly repeated it before each of the others on the evil and on the good, on the just and on the unjust,'-because in each clause there is an obvious contrast, and the characters mentioned are he reverse of each other.

Luke vi, 35. Χρηςος επι τις αχαρίζες και πονηρες. Here the adjectives axapsss and rovnpss, denoting qualities that are closely allied, and that usually or rather always co-exist in the same persons, the article is used with the former, but omitted with the latter. The same idiom might have been followed in English- kind unto the unthankful and evil;' but our translators have here repeated both the article and the preposition-kind unto the unthankful and to the evil.'

Acts xxiv, 15. Αναςασιν νεκρων, δικαίων τε και αδίκων. Here the adjectives dixav and adixwv, denoting opposite classes of persons, classes that cannot possibly coalesce, the article should either be omitted in both, as in the Greek, or inserted in both; whereas our