subject is particularly treated on in a new exposition of the metallick image and the Apocalypse, though published under the title of the Revival of the Roman empire. It is there contended that the prophetic history of the Jews forms a much greater part of the Revelation of St. John than has hitherto been apprehended; and particularly that they are in the 9th, and several other chapters, described individually under the term man, and collectively by the appellative of men. But this appellative, when evidently given to a race distinct from other people then mentioned, is first educed as descriptive of the Jews, from prototypes in the Old Testament; and as they are found in their own scriptures, the Jews themselves may do well to consider them. The only one which I shail mention is a passage that has often been brought forward, but I believe never in the same point of view; it is from the great compendium of all prophecy, the metallic image; Daniel there speaking of a certain people belonging to the last empire, foretels that they shall, at the time of the end, mingle themselves with the seed of men; and this does appear to signify that there is in prophecy a peculiar people, denominated pre-eminently men; and, though in another part of Daniel, ch. ii, 41, the same people are symbolized by clay; it is potters clay, which is a selection of the best sort of clay. We will now, therefore, view what the author of the Revival of the Roman Empire says in favour of the supposition that the term man, when emphatically applied, designates a Jew in the Apocalypse.

"Revelations, chap. ix. ver. 4. And it was commanded them that they should not hurt the grass of the earth, neither any green thing, neither any tree; but only those men who have not the seal of God in their foreheads,'

"In the latter part of this chapter it is also said, the four angels were prepared to slay the third part of men; but, as this is never apprehended to mean the third part of mankind, it must, in either sense in which it can be taken, designate some particular people distinguished by the denomination of men; which necessarily puts us upon the endeavour

to find out who are the people preeminently called men.

"It appears in the 7th chapter, that 144,000 Jews were sealed and in the 14th ch. when the 144,000 appear with the Lamb as the first fruits, it is said that they were redeemed from among men; and that no mun except the 144,000 could learn the new song (new covenant); the insurmountable difficulty which the Jews in general find to learning the joyful Christian doctrine, or new song, is well known; but, as the Gentiles of all kindred and tongues can learn that song, does it not seem to follow that those men who could not learn the song were Jews, the blindness of whom is accounted for by st. Paul, Romans xi. 7. What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the ELECTION (the 144,000) hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded. And accordingly, the blindness of the Jews, though constantly mixed with Christians, continues à wouder to this day. The Jews, as selected by their Maker, are entitled to the chief distinction; and in respect to the term men may receive it in the following words, given as from the Deity himself: Ezekiel xxxiv. 31. And ye my flock, the flock of my pasture, are men, and I am your God, saith the Lord God."

Mr. Butt seems aware of some particular meaning of the word man in the Apocalypse, as he says, "omit the word man whenever it is not found in the Greek." He also says, "The same things are often exhibited in different views by various emblems at once;" that is, as we must conclude, "various emblems" in one chapter or particular section of prophecy. In his explanation of symbols, it likewise appears that trees and grass denote men having spiritual life.

"St. Paul, in Romans 11th, particularly describes the Jews by the emblem of the olive tree; and that the vine is in the Old Testament a chief type of the Jews, and that they may from thence in the Scripture language appropriately be called, trees, has already been discussed in the preceding chapter; and if trees were there rightly apprehended to mean Jews, they must mean the same here, When, therefore, the above 4th.verse says, the locusts were not to hurt

any

any tree, but only those men which have not the seal of God in their foreheads, do not the trees and the men, from the word only, appear to be of one and the same kind, though spoken of (as is common in the succession of discourse) under various denominations, but as if the sense was, hurt not the Jews, excepting that part of them which have not the seal; and thus would the term of men and that of tree be found, as indeed they bere seem to be, synonymous. And this will agree with the safe sealing only of some Jews in the 7th chapter. Daniel, in his 2nd chapter, shews at the 43d verse, that of two different nations which will in the latter time mingle themselves together, one only is to be termed men! And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of MEN: but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay. And the 7th chapter of Hosea, 1st verse, says, when I would have healed Israel, then was the iniquity of Ephraim discovered. And at the 8th verse it is said, Ephraim, he hath mixed himself among the people.... Our Saviour bora of the Jews is styled the Son of man; the most eminent of the prophets are also frequently called son of man, which may have a particular meaning, or may be casual; but in this part of the present chapter the term men is so evidently made use of to specificate and distinguish a certain people from their conquerors the horsemen, that henceforward, whenever that same term is emphatically applied, we cannot but conclude that it is one of the scripture appellatives of some peculiar race of people *."

That the term man is still further emphatically applied in the Apocalypse, will be found on turning to the 13th, 14th, 15th, and 16th chapters. In the 13th it appears that men will be allured to coalesce with, and worship a great Antichristian empire or beast, while in the 14th there is a strong prohibition and warning against this very crime: 9th verse, If any MAN worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand, 10th verse, The same

* Revival of the Roman and Greek Empires, from p. 207 to 212.

THINK no one will dispute (though

It is not so generally adopted as it

The

should be) that the Clergy ought to be taught to read; but few have seen or acknowledged the necessity of extending that instruction to their Clerks, although our ears are on every Sunday assailed with the most disagreeable voices and the most wretched pronunciation from the person, who, next to the Clergyman, leads the congregation. Instead of drawing the attention, and adding to the devotion of those assembled solemnly to deprecate the wrath of God, to implore his assistance and protection, and praise him for his mercies, I believe every person will agree that nine-tenths of our Clerks perform their part in a disagreeable, ignorant, and sometimes even in a laughable manner. responses are, surely, an important part of the service of our Church; and if the person appointed to make them, were to do so in a serious and sensible manner, it would naturally follow that the congregation would do so also. A quiet, calm, and as our excellent exhortation expresses it, "an humble voice," would excite attention, and restore the lost custom of each person in the assembly audibly joining in the same manner. The dissonant voice of the Clerk, and his bad pronunciation, has probably been the cause, that he alone now is heard at all. Clerks, I believe, are usually chosen after their education (if such it may be called) is finished: they must certainly read and write; but would it not be desirable to have them prepared for their office, and pains" taken to impress on them the importance of it, and to instruct them in the manner they ought to follow the Clergyman?

I do not think it would be beneath the Dignitaries of our Church to suggest the above in their Visitations. I am persuaded the happiest effects would ensue, not only in "but out of

the

Mr. URBAN, Moy, Ireland, Aug. 21.
JOUR readiness to insert in your

Y valuable collection, any commu

nication leading to the improvement of our Agricultural Practice, together with former indulgence, give me reason to hope that my reply to a Letter in your last June Magazine from Mr. Salisbury, p.542, will also find a place.

I have often transmitted to the President of the Board of Agriculture, and to other respectable members, Fiorin strings or stolones, both for propagation and experiment.

The worthy Baronet has (it appears) very properly given some of these to Mr. Salisbury, whose discriminating powers as a Botanist I am little disposed to question.

I hope, however, that the President has not confined his distributions to the Botanic School, but has also given a share to the Naturalist, that not only the characteristic differences by which classes, orders, and genera, are distinguished, may be discussed, but that the habits, properties, and probable uses, of the vegetable in question, may be carefully investigated.

Whether Mr. Salisbury shall, upon patient examination, pronounce Fiorin to be the same with, or different from the Agrostis Stolonifera, is of small importance; but I lament that any decision on the subject of this valuable discovery should have been put into prejudiced hands; as it is plain, from Mr. Salisbury's letter, that he has already made up his mind, not only on the species, but upon the merit of this Grass.

When Mr. Salisbury had the high honour conferred upon him, of being consulted by the Board of Agriculture, upon a question in his own department, it might be expected he would have taken some pains to inform himself on the subject; that he would have made himself acquainted with the treatises written upon this Grass, laid before him in so complimentary a

manner.

and published in their Transactions? -Mr. Salisbury chose to look for information where he was certain he would not meet contradiction; he consults the practical farmers, who, with himself, had always pronounced the Agrostis Stolonifera to be SQUITCH GRASS.

It is amusing to see these gentlemen bandying back wards and forwards their anathemas against this unfortunate Grass. Mr. Salisbury tells us, "the Farmer, from habits of growth, will pronounce both Fiorin and Agrostis Stolonifera to be noxious weeds."

Again, he feels himself obliged to step forward to prevent any one from encouraging that vile weed."

The intelligent Farmers, whose opinions of this famous Grass Mr. Salisbury asked, replied, “D-n it altogether, 'tis nothing but Squitch." An answer which Mr. Salisbury pronounces, "though coarse, to be very applicable."

From the above quotations, it appears that Mr. Salisbury is deficient in that necessary qualification for impartial decision, freedom from previs ous prejudice; he is not indeed the on ly person who has laboured to deprive the world of the benefits to be derived from the cultivation of the Agrostis Stolonifera, by far the most valuable of the grassy tribe.

In a letter to my friend Mr. Greenough, printed by Phillips, I have measured swords with other gentlemen who had declared war, ud internecionem, against this grass, eveu before it was suspected to have merit, and before it was known to have a protector.

Fortunately, Mr. Salisbury in his hostility lays open new matter, and relieves me from the irksome necessity of treading over the same ground.

Having so decidedly pronounced Agrostis Stolonifera to be SQUITCH, he lays down some positions relative to Squitch, which astonish me, as coming from a gentleman who boasts that he had studied the British Gramina for twenty years in an eminent school; these positions I should by no means have noticed, had they not been radi cally and essentially connected with the natural history of the Agrostis Stolonifera.

The Botanical School is much disposed to arrange its vegetables in

classes

classes and genera; but Mr. Salisbury is the first that I have met with, who has formed Quitch Grass into a genus, with its subordinate species, seven of which are known to him.

On the formation of a genus, a Disferentiu essentialis is required to mark the difference between the members of this and other genera; here Mr. Salisbury is not deficient, he gives us the characteristic marks, the Differentia essentialis, by which the Squitch genus is distinguished; he tells us "the plants of both the Fiorin and the Agrostis Stolonifera began to creep on the ground, and to root at every joint, as the Couch Grass does, which is the property of at least seven different species of this genus."

This definition certainly includes the Agrostis Stolonifera, for which it was intended, but not any one variety of Squitch with which I am acquainted. The TRITICUM REPENS, the greatest nuisance of all Squitches, runs its mischievous roots horizontally, not on, but some inches under the surface; and from this root, at intervals, sends up its harsh erect stalks, not one of which ever creeps, or touches the ground.

The AVENA ELATIOR, called by the farmers Knobb Squitch, very injurious to standing corn, raises its coarse gigantic stem vertically, and never creeps or roots.

The AGROSTIS ALBA, White Squitch, less troublesome, but always erect, never creeps, its roots work under ground, and are so strong and sharp, that, as Dr. Withering tells us, they will penetrate a potatoe.

AGROSTIS STRICTA, much cultivated in America; this grass has decidedly a Squitch root, from which it sends up a solitary erect stem with its panicle

at the end.

AGROSTIS NIGRA, black Squitch, little differing from the Stolonifera, involved with it in the common obloquy, from which I hope to relieve the whole Genus.

Mr. Salisbury's definition is, no doubt, good and descriptive; but, unhappily, it belongs to a genus very different from that to which he applies it, and by this error (were he able to establish it) would deprive the world of the most valuable food for their cattle, with which Nature has favoured them.

Had Mr. Salisbury, in the course of his twenty years study of the British Gramina under a celebrated máster, paid proper attention to the physiology of Botany, and the classifications of Nature; he would have discovered that she had drawn a marked line of discrimination between two descriptions of her Grasses, the Culmiferous, and the Stoloniferous; a distinction which will be found decisive in the present question.

The Culmiferous tribe of Grasses, at their stated periods (mostly early in Summer) send up in vast numbers their erect Culmi, each bearing its seed panicle; these Culmi have hitherto chiefly composed the hay crops, for the portion of Root Leaf caught by the scythe is small in quantity, and of inferior quality.

The Stoloniferous tribe also send up their Culmi and panicles at their respective periods; but kind Nature has been pleased to endow the grasses of this genus with another production, whence they derive their name, and incalculable value.

Not far from the period at which their panicles appear, the grasses of this genus begin to project shoots (like the runners of strawberries) called by Naturalists Stolones; these, if supported, rise erect; but they generally creep along the surface, emitting small fibres from their joints, which catching the ground, take root, and form new plants.

These Stolones, in uninterrupted vegetation, continue increasing their length until Christmas, and, Ï have reason to know, much later.

Hence it is plain, that when the ground shall be clothed with a crop of Stoloniferous grass, the proprietor must make option, whether he will avail himself of the Culmi, and mow them at the period of their perfection, as he has been used to do, with other grasses, or whether he will wait for the Stolones, until, in the course of their steady vegetation, they shall amount to a quantity sufficient to compensate for the loss of the Culmi.

Here then is a new field open to the Agriculturalist, whose prospect of deriving advantage from it rests on the comparative amount of the crops of Culmi and Stolones, on the com parative quality of their produce, and on the facility of saving Stoloniferous

crops