« AnteriorContinuar »
the most triumphant defence of the bill, entering profoundly into all its details, and meeting the arguments of the opposition with characteristic manliness.
During the second reading of the second Reform Bill, on the 13th of April, 1832, Lord Durham again addressed the House of Lords, and, after exposing the conduct of the Bishop of Exeter with the utmost severity, he concluded an eloquent speech with the celebrated words of Mr. Fox :“ We risk our all upon the excellence of this bill.
We risk upon it whatever is most dear to us, whatever men most value—the character of integrity, of honour, of present reputation, and future fame--these, and whatever else is precious to us, we stake on the constitutional safety and enlarged policy, the equity and the wisdom, of this measure.”
Such is a brief statement of the conduct of the noble Lord on the question of Reform. Since the period in which these sentiments were dilivered in parliament, he has made an avowal upon the subject, which raised still higher the opinions and feelings which his countrymen have long entertained towards him. This was on occasion of a public dinner given to him at Gateshead, on Wednesday the 23d of October, 1833, when, in speaking of the Reform Bill, he made the following statement :
“ I will not conceal from you, that immediately after the formation of the government, Lord Grey did entrust to me, personally, the preparation of that measure. I was assisted by the advice of three of my colleagues,Lord John Russell, Sir James Graham, and Lord Duncannon; and with their co-operation, the first Reform Bill was submitted to the Cabinet and to the Sovereign. Of that measure I shall say no more, than that, if it was not entirely perfect, it was, at the same time, free from many of those imperfections which attended the passing of the second Reform Bill, and which, from accidental circumstances, it was impossible to guard against. I allude, in particular, to the £50 tenants' clause, which was forced upon the supporters of the bill by the then Tory House of Commons, and afterwards inserted in the second measure, although contrary to the principles on which the first was framed-or, at least, upon which I framed it; namely, that independence should be the security for a vote, and that no matter how small the property was, provided the voter could exercise an independent suffrage, he should be entitled to vote for his representative. It is needless for me to tell you, that circumstances to which I cannot, and dare not, further allude, prevented my attending in my place in parliament during the discussion of the first measure, and from having any thing to do with the formation of the second. When it did come before the House of Lords, I supported it to the best of my ability, knowing that, with all its imperfections on its head, it was one of the greatest charters of public liberty, and one of the greatest renovations of the constitution, that any Government ever staked its existence upon, or the two Houses of Parliament ever ventured to pass into a law.”
About the middle of the year 1832, Lord Durham proceeded on a special mission to the court of Russia ; and in March of the following year, his services were rewarded by an exaltation to the rank of an Earl.
The Earl of Durham is, we believe, highly respected in that neighbourhood in which his estates chiefly lie; and no longer ago than on Tuesday, the 13th of January, 1834, he opened his mansion to receive the members of the Committee of the Lambton Collieries' Associations-on which occasion, his Lordship, attended by the Countess and family, honoured the party with their presence after dinner : and the noble Earl addressed them at some length, in a speech distinguished by benevolence, condescension, and good sense.
MEMOIR OF WILLIAM GREENFIELD, M.R.A.S.
(Concluded from p. 16.) Of the multifarious nature and importance of Mr. Greenfield's labours in the service of the Bible Society, the quarterly reports which he presented to the Committee furnish interesting evidence. The second of these, comprising the three months from Michaelmas to Christmas, 1830, will serve as a specimen. I give it verbatim from his own MS.
“ Gentlemen,-In presenting another quarterly report of my labours in the editorial department, I beg leave, as usual, to draw the attention of the sub-committee briefly to those works which have more immediately engaged my care and attention; merely premising, that, besides those specified, the versions into the modern Greek, Berber, Singhalese, Welsh, and others, have demanded and received some portion of my time and labour.
“1. The Arabic version, the plates of which I have corrected, from the 23d psalm to the Song of Solomon.
“2. The Persian version, of which I have carried through the press the Book of Psalms, from the Ixxxix. psalm, and prepared for printing the first twelve chapters of Proverbs, of which six are already printed.
“ 3. The Catalonian version, of which I have revised and corrected by the original and Vulgate, in its progress through the press, from the xxvii. chap. of St. Matthew to the vii. chap. of St. Luke.
“4. The French version of Osterwald, 12mo., the plates of which I have revised from Deut. xxviii. to Jeremiah xxiii.
“5. The French version of De Sacy, of which I have prepared specimens of corrections to be made in this translation, consisting of several chapters of St. Matthew and the epistle of St. James.
“6. 'The German version of Dr. Leander Van Ess, of which I have prepared and forwarded a copy, from which future editions are to be printed.
“7. The Greek and Latin Testament of Dr. Leander Van Ess, of which I have made an examination and report.
“8. The German Testament of Van Meyer, which I have also examined and reported on.
“9. The German version of Dr. Kistemaker; also examined and reported on
“10. The Protestant Hungarian version of Karoli Gaspar, whereof I have prepared a copy, from which an edition is to be printed.”
The special reports above referred to, relating to the Greek and Latin Testament of Van Ess, the German versions of Van Meyer and Kistemaker, and the Hungarian version, will shew the minute and careful examination which must have been bestowed upon them. These also I give from what appears to be a rough draft in his own hand-writing.
“ Mr. Greenfield reported, that he had examined the Greek and Latin Testament of Dr. Leander Van Ess, referred to him by the General Committee's order, Minute, No. 13, of the 11th October, and stated, that the Greek text was founded on that of the Complutensian Polyglott and the editions of Erasmus; that the Latin text was grounded on the Clementine editions of 1590, 1592, 1593, and 1598; that Dr. Van Ess had placed at the foot of the page the variations in these several editions, as well as those of the texts of Griesbach, Matthæi, and Stephanus; and had inserted with the Latin a variety of parallel texts, which were perfectly unobjectionable, with the exception of the three following references to the Apocrypha;
namely, in Matt. iv. 4. a reference to Sap. xvi. 26.; in Matt. vii. 12. a reference to Tob. iv. 16.; and in Joan, x. 22. a reference to Macc. iv. 52.; and that, besides a preface by Dr. Leander Van Ess, there was inserted the Approbations of Pope Leo X. to the editions of Erasmus and Complut."
“ Mr. Greenfield reported, that having examined the German Testament of Van Meyer, 8vo. in conformity to a minute of the General Committee. (No. 6, of ilth October last,) he had found that it was, as it professed to be, not a new translation, but a correction of the text of Martin Luther ; and that the alterations made, appear to him preferable to those of the old version, inasmuch as they, in most cases, bring the translation nearer to the original, and frequently assimilate it to that of the authorised English version. He also stated, that he had carefully examined the marginal references, and found none to the Apocrypha, but that there was a table of the Epistles and Gospels subjoined at the end, which should and might easily be detached.”
“Mr. G. stated, that having examined various portions of the German version of the New Testament by Dr. Kistemaker, agreeably to the directions of the General Committee, he believes it to be in general a good and faithful version of the Vulgate; but that there are several omissions and insertions not authorised in the Latin, which appear to render it unfit for circulation by this Society, until corrected; such as the following: Matt. iv. 4. • It is written,' omitted; Matt. iv. 18. 'two brethren,' omitted; Matt. v. 41, 'to go with him,' inserted; Matt. x. 27. spoken,' inserted."
" Mr. G. presented a copy of the Protestant Hungarian Testament of Karoli Gaspar, which he had prepared for printing from, by striking out the short prefaces, &c. by which each of the books is preceded; and stated, that. as far as he could judge in that language, the copy so prepared, printed at Pest in 1829, appeared sufficiently accurate for that purpose; but recommended that, in its progress through the press, the proofs should be read by another edition.”
With this last language, as well as with several others, Mr. Greenfield's acquaintance was of course slight; only such as qualified him to be a correct reviser of the press. But the literal accuracy which his quick and correct eye enabled him to secure, was scarcely less valuable or extraordinary than his critical acumen. As an instance of this, I may mention one singular fact. I had been applied to from a highly respectable quarter, to undertake an edition of the English liturgy in the Russian language; and one day, when Mr. Greenfield called upon me, I shewed him the copy, and asked him if he could undertake the revision of the proofs. He replied, that he knew nothing of the language; but added, after looking at the book for a short time, that he thought he should have no difficulty in soon learning to read it. Presently he said, there is a word mis-spelt. Surprised at this remark, I noted the word alleged to be incorrect; and in a subsequent interview with the Rev. W. Smirnove, senior chaplain to the Russian embassy, I requested to know whether there was not a mistake in its orthography. He, too, was surprised at my inquiry, but admitted that it was wrong, although the error was not material, being only such, he said, as a scholar would notice.
But in proof that his knowledge of languages in general went far beyond the mere acquisition of the character, the orthography, and the grammatical structure, and that he possessed an almost intuitive faculty of discovering the genius of a language, a still more remarkable fact may be mentioned. Among his latest labours was the revision of the Chippeway version of St. John's Gospel, in conjunction with the translator, Mr. Peter Jones, himself a half-caste, being born of an Indian mother, and familiarized from bis
infancy with the language. Since Mr. Greenfield's death, Mr. Jones has expressed his astonishment at the accurate acquaintance which he appeared to possess of this almost unwritten dialect, and confesses, in a letter addressed to a friend, that he was taught much that was new to him in his own language by bis lamented friend.
Another of the latest labours of Mr. Greenfield was the transcription for the press of a considerable portion of the Gospel of St. Matthew, in Berber; a language spoken over a ery extensive region of Northern Africa, but which has hitherto been wholly unknown to the literati of Europe. Of the enthusiasm with which he entered upon the study of this new and extremely difficult language, the following letter to a literary friend furnishes interesting evidence. It is dated August 29, 1831:
“My dear sir, I have much pleasure in being able to give you a satisfactory reply to your kind inquiries respecting my Libyan studies. I am prosecuting them with vigour, and, as you will believe, quite con amore; and bave so far succeeded as to read any plain passage in Mr. Hodgson's translation of the Gospels with little difficulty. I herewith send you the Lord's Prayer from that version, with the pronunciation and translation in English. [Here followed the transcript of the original in Arabic characters, and then in
English letters, with an interlinear translation.] “I think your opinion, that the Berber will prove the same as the Nubian, highly probable; though, if such be the case, it will be found that the statement of Burckhardt, that it has no relation to the Arabic, must be taken with some limitation. For I think I can as clearly prove as that two and two make four, that the Berber language not only has a positive affinity with the Coptic, but that both these languages are closely related to the Ethiopic and Amharic, and consequently to Arabic and Hebrew. This affinity does not exist merely in a few words, which might casually have been imported, but in the grammatical structure, which clearly shews that they all belong to one family. I should delight to enlarge on this important theme, did time allow; but with the hope that I may soon resume the subject, I shall merely make a few observations, confined chiefly to the Berber and Arabic.
“ In the Nouns, both these languages have but two genders, the masculine and feminine; (the feminine being formed from the masculine, in Arabic, generally by adding ton, and in Berber by adding and prefixing t or th;) and they each have two ways of forming the plural,—the regular and irregular; the masculine being formed regularly by adding to the singular una, and the feminine by adding aton, in the Arabic; and an or en to the masculine, and át to the feminine in Berber.
[Here follow examples in the proper character, with translations.] " The irregular plurals assume a variety of form in both languages ; but amidst this variety, they not unfrequently agree.
** The personal pronouns are of two kinds, separable and inseparable, a comparison of which will clearly evince their affinity, not only in the words and particles, but also in the use. The separable are as follows.
[Examples are here given, followed by illustrations of the inseparable pronouns.) "In the Veres, in Berber as in Coptic, they have but one simple tense, which is a preter or present; but I have no doubt, from certain irregular verbs and fragments, that they had originally two, as in Arabic, Ethiopic, Hebrew, &c. This indefinite tense corresponds to the Arabic and Hebrew future in form, as you will perceive from the following examples: the root is the imperative.)
(Examples, the conjugation of ifal, do, in Arabic, and esker, dr, ip Berber.] 20. SERIES, no. 38.-VOL. IV.
182.-- VOL. XVI.
“These examples are sufficient, I apprehend, to shew the close affinity of the Berber language with the Arabic, &c., in grammatical forms, which establishes the family to which it belongs. This might be much strengthened by an examination of its vocabulary, had I time; but I would just remark, that the substantive verb, yella, he was, is the same in Ethiopic; that iba, or baba, a father, is the same as the Arabic ab; that yemma, a mother, is the Hebrew aểm ; that ighma, a brother, is identical with akkar; that to kill (in Berber) is derived from the Hebrew nakah, &c. &c.
“I am curious to know what led you to refer to the Pehlevi, as I was led to the same source from the identity of some of the forms and words. You were quite right about alka, the earth, as you will perceive from the above version of the Lord's Prayer. By the way, it seems to have an affinity with the Arabic laká, earth, dust; and, by a permutation of r and l, with the Chaldee arka and aráh, which are derived from the Hebrew eretz.
“With respect to the Siamese Grammar, I would say, as far as I can judge, that it is perhaps nearly as good as the nature of such an uninflected language would allow. I put it into the hands of a friend who has resided many years in Burmah, Siam, Assam, &c., and from whom I expected a good notice by this time ...
“I feel much indebted to you for the loan of the North American Reviews,
which I have found of considerable service in studying the Chippeway. Can you allow me to keep them a little longer. If so, I should feel greatly obliged.
“Excuse this hasty scrawl, and believe me,
“My dear sir,
Yours very faithfully,
“ Wm. GREENFIELD."
This specimen of familiar correspondence, never designed to meet the public eye, will strikingly evince the wide range of Mr. Greenfield's philological studies and inquiries, and the intense interest with which he was prosecuting them in connexion with his editorial labours.
The most astonishing proof, however, that he gave of his facility in mastering a new language, and of his talents for philological criticism, is to be found in his published" Defence of the Serampore Mahratta Version of the New Testament; in Reply to the Animadversions of an anonymous
Writer in the Asiatic Journal for September, 1829.” (8vo. pp. 78. Price 2s. 1830.) In this tract, which procured for its author the honour of being chosen a member of the Royal Asiatic Society, no fewer than two-and-twenty languages are brought to bear successfully on the argument, each cited in its proper character. It is quire a typographical curiosity, and the expense of printing it would have been enormous, had I not been provided with a polyglott apparatus. The subject I first introduced to him, and the whole expense of the printing I took upon myself. The most remarkable feature of the pamphlet, however, is the accurate acquaintance which the writer appears to have attained of the Mahratta itself,--a language of which, but a few weeks before his undertaking to enter the lists with one of the first Mahratta scholars of the day, he was utterly ignorant,-never having had his attention drawn towards it, or having even learned the character. The acquisition of a new alphabet was, however, with him, the work of only twenty-four hours; and in this instance, it was most strikingly evinced, how soon his aptitude for philological investigations, aided by his previous acquisitions, enabled him to master any language to which he