PELING Reformer: PUBLTSHT IN THE INTEREST OV A SIMPLIFIED ORTHOGRAFY FOR THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE. PRINTED ON THE ANGLO-AMERICAN BASIS, VIZ : No new leterz, hut eech leter and digraf ov the comon alfahet employ d iu denote its most usual sound. Buenz & Co., PUBLISHEEZ, 33 Paek Kow, New Yoek. ELIZA B. BURNZ, EDITOR. Ishued Munihly, at so sents a yeer: three copiz, ^7. VoL L ^RCH, 1878. No. 3. THE DUTY OV LITERARY MEN. AN ADDRES BEFORE THE INDIANAPOLIS BRANCH OV THE SOSIETY OF ALUMNI OV THE INDIANA ASBURY UNIVERSITY, \ BY REV. T. A. GO ODWIN, A. M. The theem ov this evening shal be the duty we 5 [owe] tn the wnrld az an assosiashon ov literary jentlmen. The relashon we snstane tn the foremost university in the grate Mississipi valy, no les than onr per- sonal amez, forbidz that we shhd devote onr time holely tn snch snb- jects az may simply entertane or amuze ns individCialy. The wnrld haz a dame npon ns in this assosiated capasity no les than in onr private or profeshonal wanks, and it haz a rite tn command onr servisez in whotever may tend tn devate the milionz, whether that be by lifting them tn a hyer plane, or by simply remooving snch bnrdenz az whd prevent thare lifting themselvz. Posibly, in this age ov phsh it may not be required ov ns that we neglect onr biznes' tn go a forajing for rongz npon which tn devote onr enerjyz, bnt we dare not withhold onr ade when onr iez [eyes] behold an oppreshon which pervadez every rank ov sosiety, inflicting its crueltyz alike npon inosent child- ^^iid and venerabl age, not sparing male or female in the intermediate ^tagez ; oppresing the laboring man and the man ov leterz, and th biznes man. It iz foly for eny ov ns tn atfect egzemshon from snch a rong, notwithstanding onr soshal and literary standing mite indicate tn ntherz that we snffer very litl, if eny, from it. No dont we doo snfer les than snm. We sertenly hav pade ennf in time and mnny tn dame at leest a parshal egzemshon, if eny can, yet we anl snffer ennf tn caul forth our most ernest efforts, oven if acting from purely selfish 2 mStivz, and no manly simpathy moovd us in hehaf ov suffering mil- ionz. No literary man hoo appreshiates hiz oportunityz can be indif- ferent tu a rong which s6riusly affects literary acquirements, and every form ov biznes life abuv the loest grade ov mere musculer ap- plicashon. AN OLD AND JIANT EONG. It wild be unwurthy ov us, waring ttie onor- ov our alma mater and remembering the sucsesez ov our erly struglzT tu hezitate now, when every considerashon ov humanity caulz us tu contribute tu over- thro ov a jiant rong, tu pleed that that rong iz old and interwoven in every department ov literature and biznes. Neether age, nor strength, nor ubiquity can sanctify a rong, nor be allowd tu pleed egzemshon from assault. Suppoze even that sucses iz sertenly a grate 1vay off, that iz no apolojy for indififerens or inacshon. The heroz ov the wurld have seldom bin men ov dash, and very few acheevments in the moral or material wurld wurth naming hav bin accomplisht sudenly. It iz die pashent, ploding wun, hoo winz in the batl ov life. Wilberforce nd Clarkson did not shrink from assaling slavery becauz slavery woz strongly intrencht in the soshal, political and commershal interests ov Great Britain. It woz enuf for theez heroz tu no that slavery woz rong tu indicate thare duty. At ferst thay wer aulmost alone, but diay wer not tu be responsibl for rezults ; hens, beleeving that Truth and wun constitutes a majority in eny good cauz thay” began thare wurk. Neether wer thay discuraged becauz utherz had faled, nor becauz yeer after yeer past before thay saw eny vizibl frutes ov thare laborz. Thay began becauz thay aut tu, and thay continued, notwithstanding dis- curagement, and thay livd tu see slavery abolisht in aul ov Great Britain in les than forty yeerz, and in les than a hundred yeerz thare woz not a slave in the United States. ENGLISH OETHOGEAET A SLAVE POWEE. We ar cauld az literary men tu resl with a more formidabl rong than African Slavery ever woz. In its wurst ^zez sumthing giid ciid be sed in mitigashon if not in justificashon ov that grate bloch upon English and American sivilizashon. It woz at leest profitabl tu the slaveholderz. The fo which demandz our attenshon iz a fo tu aul. It oppresez aul, it impoverishez aul, and enrichez nun. It beginz with the child in th3 nursery, it dogz him throo hiz scool dayz, it be- sets hiz path throo colege, and torments him amidst hiz gratest suc- sesez in the profeshonal and literary pursutes ov mature life ; and that enemy iz the Speling Biik. The bare menshon ov the speling biik shiid arouz the richus indig- 3 nashon ov every scolar. Ifc sudjests yeers ov perplexity and toil, widi at best but parshal sucses. Not wun ov yoo can spel correctly, tho meny ov yoo hav attaned enviabl eminens in yoor several caulings, and thoze ov yoo boo spel witb even tolerabl correctnes doo it at grate expens ov time and labor. A literary jentlman ov no meen reputa- shon, asserts that be baz spent more than too yeerz ov biz literary life in consiilting the dicsbonary on speling alone. It wild surprize eny wun boo baz not bin in pozisbon tu obzerv, tu lern bow very few ™ spel correctly. In an editorial life ov foreteen yeerz, with corre- spondents amung the most eminent lawyerz, doctorz, ministerz, educatorz, politisbanz and biznes men, I seldom found wun booz manuscript did not need the correcting band ov the “ compozitor. ” Blesed compozitor ! He iz the editor’z frend az wel az the frend ov the corespondent ; and compozitorz ar the only men az a clas boo uniformly spel with even tolerabl correctnes, and the wel tbumd dic- sbonary ov the compozing room attests the labor spent in acquiring the art, and bow tu the last the oldest and best ov them distrust thare ability tu conform tu the wbimz ov the tirant. CEUELTY TO CHILDKEN. The cruel mokery which this tirant inflicts upon trustful cbildbiid iz not the leest ov the outrajez which the speling biik perpetrates. It beginz with flie ferst leson in speling and never lets up tbroo the longest life. When the child baz commited tu memory the ferst and simplest task, b-a, ha ; b-e, be ; b-i, hi ; b-o, ho ; b-u, hu ; b-y , hy ; be aut tu feel that be baz lernd sumtbing, but he baz not. If the teecher pronounsez this silabl, “ by,” be cannot tel for flie life ov him which “bi” be iz tu spel, whether b-i or b-y ; and he iz tu lern shortly that be iz stil more at a los, for it may be b-ii-y, or b-y-e, or b-a-y, az wel as b-i or b-y. He can cum within fore ov it after much labor. He baz lernd tu spel “ba,”but be iz tu discuver soon that be duz not no which “ba,” whether b-a, or b-a-y, or b-e-y, or b-e-i ; and plane “be” may be b-ee, or b-e-a az wel az b-e ; and “bo” may be b-e-a-u, or b-o-w, or b-o-a, az wel az b-o ; and “ bu ” may be b-e-a-u or b-u-e az k wel az b-u. Iz thare eny uther tirant on ertb boo baz three, or fore, or five wayz ov dooing a thing, boo inflicts a punishment for dooing it wun way when biz caprees demanded anuther way for that partic- ular occazion. Yet the child or the man boo spelz “ by ” the rong way iz held in contemt — iz punisht for his ignorans aul biz life. But this iz not the wurst. This unsuspecting pursuer ov nolege under dificultiz iz sbure tu lern that be can never tel — never tu the day ov biz detb, tho be becum the most eminent ov men — wbot b-o-w, 4 or s-o-w, or r-e-a-d, or t-e-a-r, and meny uther combinashonz ov leteraj spel, without reding bakwerdz or forwerdz or both, tu gather from the conecshon what thay aut tu spel. He lernz by and by that sumtimez the tirant requires him tu uze a-i for plane a az in jail, but that a-i iz a substitute for e in said and i in aisle ; so e-o becumz e in people, o in yeoman, u in pidgeon ; and o-e iz o in foe, u in does ; o-u-g-h iz o in dough, 00 in through, uf in tough, auf in trough, ou in plough. WHOT MAKES THIS SLAVEBY POSIBL ? The slave hoo obayz a cruel master without suspecting that the ex- acshonz ar outrajus iz more tu be pitid than the more sensitiv and more sensibl wun hoo chafes under the outrage and rezolvz tu be free and tu help utherz to be free aulso. It iz therfore no compli- ment tu yoo that aul thezeyeerz yoo hav bin required tu expres the long sound ov 0 in more than twenty ways, and yet neether new it or cared for it. It iz such stupidity that makes slavery posibl. It iz tu caul yoor attenshon to such outrajez, and thus, if posibl, tu enlist yoor simpathy in behaf ov thoze hoo intend tu be free, that I hav chozen this theem for yoor considerashon, tho fiily aware that sum ov yoo wil continue tu hug yoor chanez az ov bid, and probably even make an effort tu defend and approov the exacshonz ov yoor master. And now so insensibl ar yoo tu yoor one [own] sufferings, diat it iz nesesery tu giv yoo proof ov this before yoo wil beleev that yoo hav even bin so treeted. Ferst, ther iz plane o, then ther ar o-h and o-w-e for 5 alone ; then yoo hav o-w in blow, o-l in folk, k-o in know, o-o in door, e-w-e in ewe, o-e in foe, e-a-u in beau, h-o in ghost, e-w in sew, o-u-g-h, in dough, w-o -1 in wholly, w-o-e in whole, o-a in coal, e-o in yeoman, o-l in roll, o-u in court, w-o in sword, a-u in hautboy, and probably several utherz which doo not now occur tu me.* And nerely the same may be sed ov the different wayz ov expressing the soundz ov the uther vowelz. Iz it eny wunder then that no man but a wurd-bilder in the printing offis can ever lern tu spel our language, and that not wun in a thouz. and ov even wurd-bilderz ever so lernz it az tu be able tu dispens with the speling biik, tho thay hav dun nuthing els than spel for forty or fifty yeerz ? | The evilz ov this outrajus sistem ov speling, (if eny thing so arbi- trary and caprishus can be cauld a sistem, ) ar innumerabl. It not only requirez yeerz tu lern whot shiid be lernd in az meny munths, *Prof. Ellis haz shone in his “ Plea” that the letter a haz 7 different soundz e, j i, 6 o, 11 •, and that the long sound ov e is represented in 40 different combinashons or leterz, a by 34 and o by 34. and harasez its victim throo life with a constant convicshon that he iz aul die time liabl tu mistakes, but, more than eny thing els, it standz in the way ov acquiring our language by forenerz. For that mater meny a fine English scolar never pronounsez aul hiz wurdz correctly. Wun ov the best preecherz we ever had in Indiana, (and so eminent a scolar that he iz recognized az wun ov die ablest prezidents our alma mater ever had,) woz accustomd tu reed from the Samz that “The wicked wauk in a vane shoo, ” az if the shooz [shoes] ov the wicked differd from thoze ov the richus ; and yoo hav ofen bin invited by yoor pastor to attend the suing society at such a time and plase ; and the literary wurld iz now aul torn up over die important question whether “ either” shud be pronounst eether or iether. A LEJUN ov “BUTS.” The majority ov thinking men, upon a prezentashon ov this sub- ject, admit the nesesity ov a reform, but — But whot ? Away with yoor “ buts ” in a case like this. “But” iz the wurd ov cowards and slug- ards, and iz unwurthy a sun ov bid Asbury University. It iz un- wurthy eny enlitend American scolar when applied tu a subject which promisez so much tu the wurld az this reform in speling promisez. When a Swis pezant, fifty yeerz ago, sudjested die bilding ov a tunel under Mount Cenis, the hole wurld exclam ed that wild be a gud thing if it cud be dun, “but” — and if ther had bin no plukyer men than theez “but”-erz, that tunel wild never hav bin bilt. For thouzandz ov yeerz .the commers ov the wurld had cast a longing luk acros the Ismus ov Suez, yet it continued tu sale around the Cape of Good Hope, becauz ther wer so meny “buts” in the way, until pluky France determined tu bvercum them aul. Ther woz hardly an American a hundred yeerz ago that did not beleev that nashonal independens wild be a giid thing, yet thouzandz ov them encuraged the enemy and weekened the patriots by thare eternal din ov “buts.” Wilberforce and Clarkson, and Garrison, and Sumner, and Giddings, faut thare batlz agenst slavery amidst a perfect storm ov “buts.” The truth iz that ever sins thoze ten explbrerz came bak from Canaan and reported tu Moses that die land woz giid enuf, and frutefiil enuf, ‘ ‘ but ” — the cow- ardly “ but”-erz hav bin numericaly about az ten tu too ; the Calebz and the Joshuaz not only having tu fite the batlz, but tu cary the lode ov feerfiil and fant-harted wunz hoo wish wel, — “but.” THE ETIMOLOJICAIi OBJECSHUN. Only a wurd or too need be devoted tu a considerashon ov the ob- staclz in the way ov reforming our speling. In the ferst plase ther 6 ar a few hoo affect a wunderfiilreverens for whot thay caul the historic caracter ov our language ; and thay feer that a uniform method ov speling wild destroy aul this. Thare feerz ar groundles ; but suppoze it shiid, hoo carez ? Ov aul pitiabl caracterz on erth ther iz only wun more tu be pitid than the lothsum sion ov sum playd out aristocratic family hoo clamez speshal recognishon becauz hiz father woz Lord This Wun, or hiz grandfather woz Duke That Wun ; and that more tu be pitid wun iz the haf-starvd pedant hoo findz food intelectual in diging after the roots ov comon or uncomon wurdz. It iz only in shody sosiety that men ar tu be found Hooz therd ansestral thay dare not assend. For feer thay find it waxt at the uther end. The jenuin American jentlman carez but litl for pedigree. Hoo- ever acts wel hiz part iz the man for American nobility. So with our wurdz. Hoo cares whether eny given wurd be a literary Melchisa- dec, az our wurdz “ skedadl ” or “biildoze ” without an ansestry, or a derivativ from the Latin, or the Greek, or the Choctaw, or the Chinese? Ther iz absolutely nuthing in this historical objecshon. But suppoze it tu be aul its frendz dame. Let me play pedant a mo- ment, and try : Jentlmen, the wurd fonografy iz derived from too Greek wurdz, “fone” a sound, and “grafe” tu rite. It meenz, az yoo redily see, tu rite by sound. Duz it make eny differens tu yoo how I hav speld theez wurdz ; whether with ph or plane/? So ov eny uther wurd. Filosofy is derived ixomfilos a luver, and sofia, wizdom. Duz it make eny differens tu yoo that I hav speld the wurdz with an/insted oy ph ? And pray tel me why / iz not az giid Greek az ph. But stil suppoze that we cannot trase tu thare orijin a few wurdz, how meny ov the reederz ov our language can trase them az they now ar speld ? Not wun in a thouzand can trase a hundred wurdz tu thare orijin without the ade ov a dicshonary, and shal we perpetuate the prezent sistem ov speling for the amuzement or gratificashon ov theez few ? Language iz not made for the few but for the meny. But our prezent speling iz quite az likely tu misleed az tu leed in this chase after ansestry. How few ov our pedigree hunters no that the anshent way ov speling sister, woz s-w-i-s-t-e-r. Having dropt die w in sister, why not drop it in sword ? THE MENTAL DISIPLIN OBJECSHUN. But we ar told that lerning tu spel iz a grate mental disiplin. It disiplinz whot ? The reezo'ning facultiz ? No. The perseptiv ? No. The imajinativ? No. Nuthing but die memory, and it disiplinz that 7 only by craming. Haf tbe time devoted tu acquiring the arbitrary method ov speling wild enable die pupil tu commit haf ov Shakespere’z playz, or aul ov the New Testament tu memory. It iz eny thing but an educator. The pupil can take jeografy or arithmetic and study it, but no man iz competent tu teech hoo wil giv a child a speling biik and require him tu study a leson, until he haz had yeerz ov instruc- shon. Whot can eny child doo without the oral instrucshon ov the teecher ? Only think ov a child poring over d-e-w — du ; s-e-w — whot iz that ? It iz not su. Or f-o-e — fo ; s-h-o-e — whot iz that ? It iz not sho ; or d-o-e-s — whot iz that ? It iz not doze or dooz. Or f-l-oo-r — y?ore ; f-oo-t— whot iz that ? It iz not fote. Or g-i-h-h-e-t—jibety g-i-b- b-e-r — whot iz that? It iz not jiber Beter simplify speling so that it can be lernd, and then, if yoo wont mental disiplin and hav no arith- metics or jeometryz, giv yoor child a ches b5rd and instruct him in ches, or let him commit the bible tu memory, and in eether case yoo hav beter disiplin than the speling biik can posibly giv. DUZ SPELING DISTINGWISH MEENINGS ? Akin tu this historic argument, if not indeed a part ov it, iz the ob- jecshon that a uniform method ov speling wud confound the meening ov wurdz pronounst alike but speld differently, and having different meenings. Ther iz absolutely nuthing in this when properly consid- erd. Every teecher ov children noz that ov aul die hard things re- quired ov a child in lerning tu spel, ther iz nuthing harder than tu fix upon the mind theez too or more methodz ov speling the same wurd, attaching a different meening tu eech, unles it be the oppozit cruelty ov requiring them tu sumtimez caul s-o-w — so, and sumtimez sou, and t-e-a-r sumtimez teer, and sumtimes tare ; r-e-a-d sumtimez reed, and sumtimez red. Not wun child in a thouzand livz in such ignorans az not tu no long before he starts tu scool that the word are [air] iz sumtimez uzed tu denote wun hoo inherits, and aulso tu designate the fluid we breeth, and he neether noz nor cares how it iz speld, and he never cpnfoundz the meening in heering or speeking. The truth iz this distingshon ov meening by site iz wun ov the hard- ^ est thingz tu acquire, and wun ov the things not aulways acquired even by men ov eminens in uther wauks ov life than meer wurd bild- ing. No child three yeerz old ever confoundz the sewing his muther duz with the sowing his father duz, the wun in the hous and the uther in the feeld. No man duz, until by long driling he iz compeld tu. Take the foloing : — “ Az I rode homewerd at a brisk gate in a brasing are, with a hole stake in my basket — a chois pees ov meet — a red do with glosy hare crost the rode before me, and a hare sprang from its 8 hole by a stake. The farmer woz soing wheet from a sak. At home I found Mary with her handz in do, aultho her bo, the are [heir] ov ttie late Mr. Jonez woz standing by. Jane woz soing upon a shert, and Clara widi a butifiil bo pind tu her new sak ran tu meet me at the gate, witii a salutashon ov pees, having just red her leson.” Heer ar therteen parez ov wurdz ov the same sound but ov diferent significa- shon. Doo yoo find eny confuzion because thay ar in eech case speld alike ? Needier wild yoo, if yoo wer tu see them in print, if yoor ie had not bin traned at grate expens tu doo so. INDIFERENS, THE GRATE OBSTACL. A second obstacl in the way ov reforming our speling iz the army ov indiferent peepl . Thay doo not care whot it costs tu obtane an educashon. Thay hav about aul thay want, or at least aul thay ever expect tu get, and utherz may or may not be educated ; whot doo thay care ? This iz a formidabl obstacl if numberz ar tu count, but it iz formidabl 5nly by its vis inertia. By and by, however, when the re- form iz wel under way, and sucses iz ashurd, we may count on the wate ov thare infliiens if it iz tu cost them nuthing — no thaut, no time, no muny, no exershon ov eny kind. Then thay wil not only help us by throing the wate ov thare influens with us, but thay wil dame that diay aulways wer in favor ov the reform. Meenwhile theez facts ar patent tu aul : in the army the offiser hooz speling iz scrupulusly exact, iz more likely tu be a McClellan or a Scott, more famus for diching than fiting, tiian tu be a Zach Tay- lor, or fiting Jo Hooker hooz bravery winz batlz. The Drewz and die Vanderbilts needier no nor care diat “money” and “darkey” ar spelt with e-^/, while “penny” and “whisky” end with plane y. Speling according tu Webster iz no disgrase, yet confesedly the very exact speler remindz yoo ov the lawyer, or doctor, or preecher hooz toilet bespeeks the barber and the bandbox ; he may hav grate forse ov caracter, but uzualy he haz not. THE OBSTACL OV A SELFISH CONSERVATIZM. Ther iz a therd obstacl in the clas aulredy alluded tu ; very respect- j abl az tu numberz, and respectabl enuf in caracter az die wurld counts respectability, hoo admit the dezirablnes ov die reform if it ciid be accomplisht, or rather if it had bin accomplisht a hundred yeerz ago, so that they did hav avaled themselvz ov its benefits with- out eny extra expens or labor. But now that it may unsetl them sumwhot, and iz at best likely tu be a long and tedius job, thay beg tu be excuzed, and if thay must take sidez, thay think it eezier tu 9 # take sidez with the majority, and say thay ar oppozed tn the reform. Thay ar not the Wilberforsez, or Clarksonz, or Fultonz, or Morsez ov sosiety. What doo thay care for a blesing that iz a grate way auf [off], and possiblj’’ not attanabl at aul ? Thay care nuthing for heven itself while it seemz remote, and its pozeshon impliez sum exershon on thare part ; and az thay liik widi pity and contemt upon the man hoo seemz tu hav the rewordz ov the future life aulways before him, so thay affect grate contemt for the vizionary impracticablz hoo de- vote thaut and muny tu such a wurk az reforming eny thing, espeshaly so intrensht a rong az English speling. But ov such must be no alumnus ov Asbury University. Hyer and nobler purpusez must moov us. PEACTICAL QUESTIONZ. Ther ar too practical questionz before us relating tu this subject ; the ferst, whot iz tu he dun ; and the second, whot can we doo^ which includez a therd, whot aut we tu doo ; for we aut tu doo aul we can. In anser tu the ferst question I wild say diat the ultimate object must be a uniform sistem ov speling by a uniform sistem ov caracterz, suf- fishent tu reprezent eech distinct sound. But neseserily this con- sumashon must be very distant. Perhaps at prezent, no new caracter shiid be introdust. Whotever iz dun shiid be avalabl by the milionz hoo cannot redily change az tu the mecanical part ov riting. It shiid at leest be opshunal tu uze new caracterz or new combinashonz ov old caracterz. If the yunger shiid be taut tu rite cheefly or holely with new caracterz, ther shiid be such combinashonz ov the familiar caracterz that older peeple may uze the new raethodz ov speling with the old leterz, and uze it only in part if thay prefer. Az tu the second question, we answer that the ferst thing tu be dun iz tu cultivate a profound contemt for the speling biik. Pedagogz and printerz hav labord for ajez with too much sucses tu inculcate the noshon diat speling not according tu Webster iz bad speling, and that bad speling indicates poor scolarship, and in jeneral a wont ov repu- tabl profeshonal, or soshal standing. This iz fauls, absolutely fauls, and we must be bold tu declare it fauls. The truth iz that very few ov our most eminent men spel even tolerably wel, exept at the expens ov immens labor and care. Nuthing iz more contemtibl, therfore, than tu lisen tu the disparajing critisizm which scool teecherz and tipe- seterz ofen indulge in upon the orthografy ov the men hoo command our armiz, and leed our senates, and direct our commers, and explore the sienses, and expound the scriptures. If ther iz eny thing more contemtibl it iz tu lisen tu the criticizm ov a clas ov very smaul literary men hoo join in the refrane, suppozing that thay thareby 10 proclame thare on gratenes. Tu be a correct speler, according tu our prezent standard, indicates tiiat the man haz bin a teecher ov children or a tipe-seter aul hiz life, or tiiat he haz an extrordinary memory, and it indicates nuthing more. When the intrepid William Tell stiid before the oppresor ov hiz peo- ple, and caring not a whit for himself personaly, liikt the tirant fill in the fase and sed, “I hate thee, tirant,” he not only strengthened hiz on arm and the armz ov hiz felo cuntrymen, but he sent a thril ov teror tu the hart ov the tirant himself. The wurld ov leterz, lying at the feet ov the speling biik, shiid find a William Tell in every educated man hoo shiid defiantly say, “I hate thee, tirant,” and bid the milionz folo in a rebelion agenst its authority. HOW KEFOEMZ AR EFFECTED. We must not be over sangwin. From the very nature ov the un- dertaking it must take a considerabl time for its accomplishment. The political sentiment which constitutes the sentral idea ov our Declarashon ov Independens had bin groing for ajes on both sidez ov the Atlantic before it had suffishently cristalized tu becum the basis ov a political revoliishon. The Declarashon came at last, but that only cut us loos from the muther cun try ; it did not giv us a reliabl substitute. It tiik yeerz ov wor, and then yeerz ov debate and experiment before we had a nashonal existens, and ever sins the adopshon ov a constitushon and form ov government we hav bin amending and revizing, and no wun wil say that we ar yet throo. Thus in this revolushon. The groing discontent ov the ajez culmi- nated in Filadelfia at our grate sentenial selebrashon, during which, eminent men of leterz, from Canada, England, die United States and uther cuntryz les directly interested, met tu take steps for utilizing and directing the spirit ov discontent which had, until then, bin pow- erles becauz it had not bin consentrated. Thay organized a sosiety and agreed tu act in consert az far az consert iz practicabl, and it iz safe tu say that no similar assosiashon ever gatherd more strength, or develop! more promise in the same length ov time. In the ferst plase, the thouzandz hoo hav heertufore acted alone, if acting at aul, now find a senter ov simpathy and c5-operashon. In the second plase the differensez ov opinion ar referd tu an able comitee for such adjust- ment az thay may be able tu sudjest. This comitee wil not act arbi- trarily. Thay probably wil not sudjest extreem mezurez. Thay wil probably sudjest, az die ferst step, diat every nian be allowd tu expres hiz contemt ov the speling biik in hiz one way. That iz, thay wil allow every man to spel az he pleezez, without disparajing 11 hiz literary or profeshonal standing, requiring 5nly that he spel sole and hohy and hart and hare and aul uther wurdz having the same vowel sound in the same way, regardles ov the numerus ways dic- tated by the speling buk. Tho diay wil undoutedly conseed that ulti- mately every distinct sound must have its appropriate representing caracter, thay ar not likely tu arbitrarily introduse new caracterz now, nor tu insist upon uniformity at prezent. Tu hav demanded at the begining ov our nashonal exzistens the forms ov soshal, political and • relijus life now obtaning, wild hav bin fatal tu our political life. Meny a relic ov the monarkyz and aristocrasyz ov the old wurld wer so in- terwoven with the hole fabric ov soshal, political and relijus life that tu hav eradicated them sudenly wild hav bin tu destroy the hole ; so in our literary life. We cannot change sudenly from wun extreem tu the uther. It wil be yeerz before, under the most favorabl sercum- stansez, we can hope for eny thing more than approximate uniformity. For that matter, after hundredz ov yeerz ov experimenting ther iz now no universaly recognized standard ov orthografy. But when it duz cum we wil hav a sistem which wil be wurthy the American peepl. INEESHIA TU BE MET BY ACSHUN. For meny yeerz we must expect heer and thare sum hoo wil adheer tu the anshent order ov things, and continue tu obay the speling biik. We wil tolerate aul such, az we tolerate the Jujez ov the Federal Supreem Cort hoo continue tu don wigs and gounz az emblemz ov offishal life, tho we may despize the sily attemt tu perpetuate an effeet sistem. Only this much must we require ov aul hoo wish tu brake the yoke ov the oppresor; thay must uze such a combinashon az wil spel die given wurd and nuthing els. Thus, if he preferz tu spel the wurd “ dough ” by a shorter method let it be d-o, or at most d-o-e. But while s-o spelz so, d-o shud spel do. If s-o ever spelz so, it shiid always spel so, dooing away with s-e-w and s-o-w. If b-a-r-e ever spelz hare, let us doo away with b-e-a-r. If r-o-o-m ever spelz room, let us doo away with r-h-e-u-m, and so on. On diis labor ov reform we must count upon at leest the negativ ^oppozishon ov sum literary men ov fare repute. Thay hav worn thare Wchanez until diay hav becum sumwhat accustomd tu them, and the decrepitude ov age, no les than thare nativ slugishnes, iz unfavorabl tu change. Habit haz much tu doo with sum men’z acts. Meny a prizoner haz preferd the sel tu freedom, from mere habit, az meny an old slave acsepted freedom with a protest. But such men ar not made ov the stuf that makes reformerz. Very meny pas throo life with tol- erabl respectability if not with sum distincshun becauz thay hav bin content tu truge along in liie beeten trak, affecting tu despize ffie restlesnes ov bolder and braver men. Thay chuze tu caul themselvz “ conservativz, ” az if that ment sum thing very respectabl, and thay caul thoze lioo labor tu elevate thare felo men “fanatics,” as if that ment sumthing very dredfiil. But the wurld haz ofen bin lifted tu a hyer plane by fanatics, and the children ov the so cauld conservativz hav never faled tu bild mouuments tu thoze hoom thare conservativ fatherz stoned and contemd. THE KEFOEM NOT A NEW WUN. But after aul, this enterprize iz nuthing new. It iz simply an effort tu hasen the inevitabl and tu reech within the next jenerashon — say within a haf sentury, whot mite utherwize require senturyz. Modifi- cashonz ar going on aul the time and hav bin for hundredz ov yeerz. In our on day “honour” haz dropt die u, and “ traffick ” its /c, and “traveller” wun ov its Tz, and “plough” haz becum plow, and “gaol,”jai/, and rneny similar chanjez hav bin made. Some ov the “conservativz,” hoo dred the exershon which a change may require ov them, becum solisitus ov the fate ov biiks now printed, if the new form ov speling iz adopted. Whot wil becum ov them ? thay ask. We anser, just whot haz becum ov Shakespere, and Milton, and Bacon, and uther biiks hooz ferst edishonz wer printed in an orthografy so unlike the prezent that it requirez an effort tu reed them. Take the foloing from die ferst edishon ov the authorized ver- shon ov our English Bible. “Give eare O yee heauens and I will speake ; and heare O earth. My doctrine shall drop as the raine, my speach shall distill as the deaw, as the smal raine upon the tender herbe and as the showers upon the grasse.” In the same connecshon we hav r-o-c-k-e for rock, w-o-r-k-e for work, w-a-y-e-s for ways, t-r-u-t-h-e for truth, and so on. In Tyndale’s New Testament the pronoun “it” is speld in 8 different wayz ; it, itt, yt, ytt, hit, hiti, hyt, hyit,. Shakespere speld pilgrim, and certain, and black, and again with a final e. We hav abandond the orthografy in which Shakespere’s wurks wer riten, yet hiz wurks remane. So it wil be with aul the biiks now on the shelvz. Such az caul for new edishonz wil be eezily made tu conform tu the| new stile ov speling. A HYER MOTIV. But ther iz a hyer motiv than eny ov theez, which appeelz tu every American scolar in behaf ov the most simpl and sientific method ov speling our wurdz. The ralerodez, and telegrafs, and steemships ov the wurld ar making the nashonz ov the wurld wun in interest az thay ar becuming wun in commers. It iz the English speeking nashonz more 13