Co ticltu%an. Cs 0 0 1 We bslev, den, dal we furnij in dsz pajez ds desideratum defend in dg fdloiij pasej, liwiq we liav ccstracted from a revii ov lluunbolts Cozmos, in dc Edinburo Ttsivj for Jamieri 1848, nr. 175, p. 226, and adopted az st moto : v\ e must enter sr protest, we fer an unavalip wun, agénst de supjnnes hwie suferz doz invdliiabd monuments, de un-rit’n laijgwejez ov de ert, tin periJ wid a mpiditi verli incresiij, widit wun rajunal and wel-conserted efurt tm sav dem in de onli mod in liwig it can be dun efectiiali, namli, bj redifsip dem tin rjtiij acordiij tm dar egzâci nativ jgronunsiafun, trat de medium ov a fcuroli wel-considerd and dijésted Fonetic alfabet. Abdt sicsti (/3) wel-goz’n, ezili rit’n, and unecwivocal caracterz, completli egzempliijd in dar ixs bj pasejez from gad rjterz in de prinsipal FLropean and estern iapgwejez, wild satisfj everi wont, widdt goir) intm imprdcticab’l njsetiz ; and we ernestli recomend de construe]un and promulgajun ov a manual ov dis cjnd, for de us ov travelerz, vaejerz, and colonists, az a mater ov presii) nrjensi, tm de considerajun ov filolojists, etnolojists, and jeograferz, in dar respéctiv Sosjetiz asémb’ld.” cIe rpter ov âe abuv pasej woz aewanted wid ds fonetic Iyglif alfabet liEi* egzibited, but onli in a veri imperfect and elementeri form ; yet ev’u in dut stat he sez ov it, in a not upended tin ds abuv statment, dat it— “ wad liav considerab 1 merit, wer it not funded on an esenfali IrjgliJ, ilisted ov a cosmopolitan vu ov de vvel smidz, az reprezented bj Idropean leterz, and darfor Jmr tiu be rejected bj everi foren filolojist,” and dat, “ enlqrjd tin sut de écsijensiz ov de cas, [itj wad be préférai)4 fer témporeri us tm de prezent no-sistem in liwig eg traveler in biz djeri, and eg mi/uneri in formai gramer and diejuneri, confondz and fer ever mq,rz, az semz gad in hiz on jz, de pronunsiajun lie preténdz tm fies. cIe objecjnn lier razd,—not tin ds tsori ov sr Alfabet, but soll! tm de fermz hwiq we hav qoz’n tm reprezént tnt vselz,—we must consider ov slit importons. He tab’lz on pajez 216 and 217, wil enab’l de reder tiu ss h is lit’l trmt dar iz in ds pdea dat serten Latin leterz etr apro- priated tm serten svmdz az Uropsan leterz. We consider dg IrjgliJ, az a liviij laijgwej, spoe’n az dar nativ tuij bp meni mor pep’l dan ever spoc Latin, posésiij a lqrj bteratur, an snermus vocalmleri, (compârd tm hwiq ddt ov de clasical Latin siijcs elmost intm insignificans,) and haviij wun ov ds most complet eoleejun ov consonants hwiq iz tm bs fond in eni wun Uropean laijgwej, îiaviij meni vselz and consonants hwiq de Latin laijgwej iz totali unab’l tm reprezént or tm sujést ; —wg consider dat ds fonetic andlojiz ov suq a laijgwej (pr mor wurdi ov considerajun dan doz 73. FTr etnical alfabet contânz 55 sjnz (p. 122), and if we reject az unneseseri de sics compsndz i, v, y, g, ç,j, we hav 49 simbulz az sufijent fer etnical pnrpusez, ecsclmsiv ov de streijt’nd leterz, liwig dm not recwjr seperet simbulz, az de variajun ov roman and italic tjp iz sufijent tm indieat dar prezens. 20