7. And neither to get nor to keep their offices would such men be obliged to truckle or trim or descend to mean acts, at least to the same extent as if they had to get and keep the favor of the majority of a small district. Since what they

would loose in one quarter by a manly and upright course on any question, they would be likely to gain in some other. So that not only honesty and statesmanship, but, what is quite as much needed, courage, would be fostered among public men.

8. With the abolition of small districts, too, would necessarily come to an end the demoralizing practice of "gerrymandering," because it would be no longer possible.

The question remains: is the plan simple enough for practical use? Nothing but a trial can answer that question. The proper place to make such an experiment would be in the elections of some city, town, school district or other small division of the community, rather than, at first, on a large scale in state or national elections; because the constituencies in such local elections are smaller and more compact, and any imperfections that might be found to exist in the plan could be more easily remedied and would do less harm.

ARTICLE VII.—“DO PENANCE.” A BIT OF CRITICISM.

THE HON. ASHBEL SMITH, of Texas, is well remembered by those who were contemporary with him in the Academical Department of Yale College between 1821 and 1824, or in the Medical School from which he proceeded M.D. in 1828, as well as by the survivors of those who knew him even earlier in his native city, Hartford. Since those days of long ago, neither his professional eminence in North Carolina, and afterwards in Texas, nor his political and diplomatic career as embassador of the "Lone Star Republic" to the governments of France and Great Britain, has made him forgetful of those liberal studies which were the discipline of his early years. Returning to his plantation after the disasters which the war of secession brought upon him, he "accepted the situation;" and employing as free laborers those who were once his slaves, and, going with them into the field as their employer, he finds it less costly to pay them wages than it was to support them before they were emancipated. It is pleasant to know of a man whose life has been so active and so full of change, that, in these his latter years, he does not cease to be a scholar nor to read the Greek New Testament with critical and reverent attention.

The following communication, received some months ago, and inadvertently omitted from our last Number, is, perhaps, sufficiently its own explanation; but a few more introductory words will not be impertinent. It was designed for the New York Tribune, but the friend to whose care it was sent has taken the responsibility of giving it to the New Englander, thinking that thus it would be more likely to find appreciative readers, and would escape the sudden destruction which comes upon the contents of a daily newspaper.

That we may do full justice to our readers and to all parties, we give, entire, the Tribune's summary of the paper referred to in Dr. Smith's communication. At the same time we take the liberty of suggesting that we do not understand the sentence about "Do penance as giving exactly the signification which

is imputed to it and which at first sight it may seem to give. Prof. Short, as reported by the Tribune, does not say that "Do penance' is really a fair rendering of the Greek," but "the Latin form [used by Jerome] which is translated [by the Douay translators] 'do penance,' is really a fair rendering of the Greek, dispute as we [Roman Catholics and Protestants] may over the English." If the Douay English truly represents the Latin phrase employed by Jerome (as Dr. Smith assumes, and as Prof. Short does not deny) the strictures which come to us from a Texas plantation are exactly to the point.

Prof. Short's paper, read to the American Philological Association in its meeting at Hartford in 1874, was entitled "The Character of the Latin of the Vulgate." The summary of it, which we copy from the Tribune, is very suggestive.

"The Vulgate is now practically the Bible of the Roman Church. It is one of the two oldest and most important versions which we possess. It was made in Africa, in the second century, at a date when Latin was spoke there. It was probably rendered into Latin for the benefit of Latin-speaking Jews. We have no account of the origin of this translation; it was made not later than A. D. 250. St. Jerome, 380 A. D., was commissioned to revise it from the original Greek. Nothing now in existence represents the African manuscript prior to this revision. The principal work of St. Jerome consisted in removing apochryphal additions which had been interpolated. Although the version of St. Jerome at first met great opposition, in the course of centuries it supplanted the old, and the latter went out of existence.

The Vulgate was the first book produced after the invention of printing, and with movable types. A copy of this, valued at many thousand dollars, is in the possession of Mr. James Lenox of New York. In 1590 this edition was carefully revised; it was afterwards amended in 1592 and 1593, called the Clementi, and is now the authorized version of the Church of Rome.

By abundant citation the speaker showed that the Greek order of words was generally followed in the Latin of the Vulgate. But we find occasionally a variation from this form. The Latin form which is translated 'do penance,' is really a fair rendering of the Greek, dispute as we may over the English. Possessed with the devils' is in the Vulgate very accurately translated possessed with demons. The form and words of the Greek original are followed with exemplary fidelity, and often with great ingenuity. Numerous examples were given of the accuracy of this following, which not frequently violates the Latin idiom. A critical examination of passages in the Vulgate was then undertaken, and a very large number of defective or inadequate translations cited specifically. One of the most remarkable features of the Vulgate translation is the substitution of Latin words meaning 'because, 'since,' &c., where the word should be 'that.' But after making all allowance for its errors, it must be acknowledged that the Vulgate is of marvelous accuracy, and goes back to a Greek original older than any we possess.

The Vulgate had a great influence over English translations of the Bible, a very large proportion of the earlier translations of parts of the Scriptures having been made directly from it. If we review the effects which that volume had throughout Christendom, we shall find that no other has exerted equal influence or been comparable in importance."

So much for introduction. Our readers are prepared to appreciate Dr. Smith's discussion of the phrase "Do penance."

EVERGREEN, HARRIS CO., TEXAS, Dec. 28th, 1874.

A few days since a friend gave me several numbers of the New York Tribune, extra. In looking over some papers read before the American Philological Association which, it appears, met in Hartford in July of the present year, my attention was arrested by a critical or philological assertion made by Prof. Charles Short of Columbia College, in a paper on the Character of the Latin of the Vulgate. The assertion I refer to is this, "The Latin form which is translated 'Do penance' is really a fair rendering of the Greek, dispute as we may over the English." I confess to no small surprise that so palpable, so grave an error should pass, as this seems to have done, unchallenged, unrebuked in a Philological Association.

"The Greek" referred to by Prof. Short and of which he says "do penance" is a "fair rendering," is obviously the word μɛTavoitε as used by Matthew iii, 2, and iv, 17, and elsewhere in the New Testament. "To do penance" does not give the meaning, is not a "fair" nor correct rendering of uɛravoéw in the sentences referred to, nor in any Greek written up to the time of our Saviour, that has come down to us. It may seem a rash assertion to make in Texas where we have no library; but surely if μɛTavoéw would bear such a translation as "do penance" or any thing like it in any classical Greek author, there would have been some hint of such meaning in the voluminous Thesaurus of Henry Stephens. The derivation of uɛtavoέw or μετανοέω rather the word itself fixes its own meaning singularly clear, precise, definite, unmistakeable. It is compounded of μɛra and vow, the latter being the verb derived from voos-or we may say voos is the substantive and voɛw the verb. Nóos-contracted vous—is the mind, the thinking principle, the reasoning faculty, the motive power of our nature, which prompts

μετά

our actions. It is thought, not as a resultant of thinking, but the power that thinks. It is that faculty of our nature which lies behind, if I may so speak, and is the source of action, of our doings. Merά is the proposition which asserts in its compounds change, fundamental change. This fundamental change is illustrated in the distinction which Aristotle draws between Μεταβολη and ̓Αλλοίωσις. Μετανοειτε then means change your mind, change the motives of your conduct.

The Greek word has a thoroughness, a precision, an exclusiveness of meaning, which cannot be well expressed by any Latin word, as I shall show in the course of this memorandum.

But first of the English word repent, by which the Greek is translated into the English version of the Scriptures. Repent is derived from the Latin, and to every scholar it partakes of the incapacity of its Latin original to express the full meaning of the μɛtavočite. It is only by relating back to its Greek predecessor that it has come to express the fullness of the original idea in the New Testament. The best formula or phrase in Saxon, home-born English to express the idea of John the Baptist, of our Saviour, and of Peter, that occurs to me, is embodied in the words, change of heart. Change your heart, let your conduct be no longer dictated by evil passions, by ideas of mere policy or seeming utility, by external motives. But change your heart, and, in place of these motives, substitute pure, internal motives for your life. In illustration let us turn to Acts viii, 21, 22, Ἡ γάρ καρδία σου οὐχ ἐστιν εὐθεια κ. τ. λ. For thy heart is not right, etc. Μετανόησον οὖν ἀπο x. 7. λ. Therefore repent, etc. St. Peter here explains, if one may so speak, the meaning of the Greek word in question. If the Greek word may be fairly rendered "do penance," how aces Prof. Short get along with the preposition anó? Would he make it interchangeable or synonymous with ἀντί οι ἕνεκα, or would he interpolate a long ellipsis?

I have said in this memorandum that there is no Latin word which renders exactly the Greek word before us.

Henry Stephens, in his Thesaurus, under the word μɛravośw states the inability to express the meaning fully by any single Latin word. After considerable circumlocution he says, Sed brevius reddi potest, Sententiam muto. Mentem muto. "A more