quoted here, but is well authenticated by the editor of the Lancet, and is a most remarkable instance of the amount of education of which dogs are susceptible. It will be found at pp. 108-110 of Mr. Youatt's volume. There appears to us no difficulty in believing that the dog may learn by experience to attach a certain meaning to peculiar sounds as readily as to peculiar signs. We have seen a friend of our own excite his dog to violent barking merely by the utterance of the word 'Ring,'-that being the name of another dog, which disputes the mastery of the village with our friend's favourite. If he merely points to the ring on his little finger, it has the same effect; and there can be no doubt that in one case the sound, and in the other the signal, is understood by the dog as a reference to his rival.

Dogs may be excited to anger by the violent tones of the human voice, and, more especially when young, they will whine if spoken to in a plaintive, commiserating manner. They understand, too, the expression of reproof, of playfulness, and of encouragement, and the cry of distress.

Two instances are related by Mr. Southey in his Omniana, of dogs that could count the days of the week. The first went every Saturday to cater for himself in the butcher's shambles; and the second, which had belonged to an Irishman, would never touch a morsel of food on a Friday. Other similar examples are furnished by Mr. Martin, which it is unnecessary to quote.

There are many cases on record that display, in an affecting manner, the strong attachment with which the dog regards its master. Faithful to him in life, it has followed him to the grave, has refused food, and wasting its last energies in the vain attempt to reach the body has, at length, fallen a victim to inconsolable grief. In other instances, where sudden accident or wounds in battle have left the corpse exposed on the ground, the dog has watched by it incessantly, day and night, and has died in its protection.

When guiding a blind beggar, the dog often evinces a great amount of sagacity; and a case is recorded by M. Blaze, where a dog, after the death of its master, commenced begging on its own account. M. Blaze, who saw the dog himself, states that it stood on its hind legs whilst the horses of the diligence were being changed; and, when he threw a sou on the ground, it ran off with it to the baker's, and brought back a piece of bread, which it forthwith devoured.

An account is given by Mr. Youatt of a Highland cur, which noticed a man pocket a bridle in Lord Fife's stables; and, by barking and biting at him, excited the suspicion of the servants,

and the theft was discovered. Dogs have thus not unfrequently been instrumental, under various circumstances, of fulfilling the ends of justice by the detection of criminals.

Our readers will perceive from the previous remarks, that we fully appreciate the good qualities of dogs. We think it desirable, however, to say, that we have no wish to encourage the prevalent custom of keeping an unnecessary number of these animals. It is a custom which we cannot but regard as highly reprehensible and dangerous. In the present state of society it can find little justification. The dog, without whose services many savage tribes, and the inhabitants of the Polar regions, could scarcely exist, becomes of less use with every advance of civilization, until, at length, it has scarcely any real value, except in the guardianship of lonely houses, or as the assistant of the shepherd and drover.

We freely admit that these animals deserve the affection of man more than any other quadruped, and this might be a reason why a human being cast on a desert island, and separated from his fellows, should rejoice in the companionship of a brute capable of attachment-still, we think there can be no such excuse in the midst of civilized society. We estimate the qualitics of the dog highly, very highly, but we believe that our sympathies may find ampler scope amongst beings whose qualities are immeasurably higher. When we desire the society of an intelligent attached companion, we prefer a man to a dog.

We have not unfrequently been disgusted at observing the manner in which pet-dogs have been treated by persons claiming the distinction of peculiar refinement. Still we might probably have endured all this without remark-and borne, too, without complaint, as one of the suffering public, the annoyance occasioned by the mongrel curs which infest the streets of every town and village in the kingdom, were there no real danger in the absurd custom of keeping these animals. But let any one read Mr. Youatt's chapter on Rabies,' or pay attention to the awful accounts of hydrophobia which occasionally appear in the newspapers, and he will begin to think that the practice ought to be checked. For our own parts, we much question whether the horrible death of a single human being from the effects of canine madness does not more than counterbalance the entire advantages, derived by all the inhabitants of this kingdom, from the whole tribe of poodles, curs, and bulldogs. The evil has really become a serious one, and should be put down.

Art. III. An Introduction to the critical Study and Knowledge of the Holy Scriptures. By Thomas Hartwell Horne, B.D. Ninth edition, corrected and enlarged. 5 volumes, 8vo. London: Longman and Co. 1846.

THE 'Introduction' of Mr. Horne has now reached the ninth edition, a fact sufficiently indicating the extensive circulation and ample patronage which the book has obtained in this country. When first published, it was of much less extent; but each successive edition has increased in size, in consequence of the accumulation of new materials, especially the publication of new books connected with the Scriptures, whose titles are generally inserted in the Bibliographical Appendix. The work has been very useful to students and ministers of the gospel in different ways. It embraces an extensive range of subjects, more indeed than belongs to the department of Introduction,' according to the German idea of it. It brings together a great amount of information from many sources, which will frequently be found profitable to the intelligent reader of the Holy Scriptures. It exhibits a digest of the contents of numerous books, or, at least, portions of them; and there are copious references to authorities, for the benefit of such as may desire to study more profoundly or extensively the various topics touched upon by the writer. The labour bestowed on the work has doubtless been great, and the materials within reach of the author immense. Great patience, industry, and research, have been expended upon it. The number of persons whom it has excited to inquiries connected with the Bible, must be very considerable. The esteemed writer is therefore entitled to the gratitude of the Bible-reading public for volumes which have been well received, not only on account of their intrinsic value, but because they constitute the only Introduction to the entire Scriptures originally written in our own language.

But with all the valuable and excellent matter contained in the work before us, it is marred by serious defects. It will never commend itself to the approbation of those who are conversant with the Introductions of Eichhorn, Michaelis, Jahn, De Wette, Hug, Hävernick, Schott, Feilmoser, Credner, Neudecker, Guerike, Scholz, and Herbst. It is pervaded neither by accuracy nor by depth of learning. It is far behind the improved state of 'Introduction' in the present day. In the estimation of all sound and comprehensive scholars, it belongs to a bygone period. The authorities cited and relied on are far from being the best. Weight is attached to the remarks of men who should never have been mentioned in the character of

scholars. The author has attempted too much; and in so doing, has failed. He has read extensively, without digesting the results of his reading. He has amassed materials, without sifting them in his own mind, or giving them the hue and form of an independent intellect. Few men are masters of many subjects; and Mr. Horne is no exception. Indeed, he appears to be complete master of none of the numerous topics which he proposes to discuss. Had he been so, he would probably have advanced our knowledge of them, or have placed them in a strong and novel light. To say that the book has gained the public favour is saying little for it, when we consider how small is the number of competent judges in regard to so many departments. It is apparent to us, that the author is not acquainted with German books, or familiar with German literature. Hence he is often ignorant of the best materials from which to derive his knowledge of a subject. He is also very moderately acquainted with Latin works published on the continent; a circumstance manifestly unfavourable to the character of his own. English books are the sources from which he has chiefly drawn his materials. And we are constrained to add, with some degree of reluctance, that even the best English works are sometimes neglected. Mr. Horne is familiar, for instance, with single sermons proceeding from bishops and other dignitaries of the Established church, and with volumes of discourses published by the national clergy; but he is not always familiar with the books and writings of Dissenters, even when they might be of considerable assistance in correcting errors into which he has fallen, or of leading him in the right way. In this respect there is a degree of culpability which can hardly be excused. Hence he has made little, if any, use of a great number of articles in Kitto's Cyclopædia of Biblical Literature, although his articles on the same subjects are miserably defective or exceedingly incorrect. So also Dr. Pye Smith's Scripture and Geology,' which would have prevented serious errors had Mr. Horne consulted it, is quite unheeded. How ridiculous to argue against the particularity of the deluge in the unphilosophical mode exemplified in the first volume; or to adopt, at the present day, after what Dr. Smith and others have collected from the writings of naturalists, a statement formerly made by Dr. Hales, can we doubt of its (the ark) being sufficient to contain eight persons, and about two hundred or two hundred and fifty pair of four-footed animals; a number to which, according to M. Buffon, all the various distinct species may be reduced, together with all the subsistence necessary for a twelvemonth?' Hence too, he has made no use whatever of Davidson's Lectures on Biblical Criticism, and of the same

author's Sacred Hermeneutics; although the latter work in particular, is not unknown in Germany.

We must confess our great disappointment in the book before us, even in the new edition. There is no substantial

improvement in it. There are additions, it is true, the most material of which relate to the Apocryphal books of the Old Testament; but additions are not always improvements. Why should the old text have been retained in many instances where it is defective and incorrect? Why did not the author re-write the whole? Truly it needs to be re-written, with the exception perhaps, of the first volume, which is the best. The second volume is the worst of all.

Scholars will not be satisfied with stereotype or all but stereotype works treating of subjects which are every year investigated afresh, and to which something new or important is constantly being added. If the intelligent public rely on the statements of stationary men, they will be often misled. In short, Mr. Horne cannot be taken as a safe or correct guide. He has moved on too slowly. The growing literature of the Bible has got far ahead of him, and he will hardly overtake it. He has, indeed, lost sight of it. At one time it might have been apprehended, when he was a younger and more vigorous man; but he will never reach it now.

It is unnecessary to substantiate the truth of our remarks by examples taken from the pages of these volumes. Proof in abundance is at hand. What will be thought, for instance, of the man who writes on the Targums without knowing anything of Zunz's 'Die gottesdienstlichen Vorträge der Juden,' that profoundly learned work which has thrown so much light on some of these Chaldee paraphrases? What can be said of him who writes a history of the Septuagint version in perfect ignorance of Frankel's Vorstudien?' Who, but Mr. Horne, would now compile his account of the Samaritan Pentateuch from Le Clerc and Kennicott, rather than from Gesenius's masterly treatise, and others by which it has been succeeded? Who, save he, would venture to affirm, that Boehmer holds Paul to be the founder of the church at Colosse, when the reverse is the fact? What will the reader think of one who, after the researches of Kopp, Gesenius, and Hupfeld, gravely advocates the view propounded by Joseph Scaliger, that Ezra, when he reformed the Jewish church, transcribed the ancient characters of the Hebrews into the square letters of the Chaldæans: and that this was done for the use of those Jews who, being born during the captivity, knew no other alphabet than that of the people among whom they had been educated. Consequently, the old character, which we call the Samaritan, fell into total disuse?'