ideas, or relations are therein expressed. These names or terms he compares with names or terms of the same import, as contained in professor Pallas's Vocabularia Comparativa of the languages of Asia. By this process, which appears to us to be the most promising that, under existing circumstances, could be adopted or devised, he has discovered, as he conceives, a radical affinity between the languages of the two continents.

A few examples of the professor's examination of the languages of Asia and America, while it will afford the most satisfactory elucidation of his principles and manner of proceeding, will, at the same time, enable the reader to judge for himself, as to the success or failure attendant on the inquiry. That the specimen of our author's examination, as here exhibited, may be fair and unexceptionable, the examples shall be extracted promiscuously from his essay, without any regard to their being either the best or the worst that might have been selected.

The name of the nation or tribe, whose language is examined, stands in the first column, and the particular word or form of ex. pression, constituting the immediate object of comparison, in the second, directly opposite. Our author's Comparative Vocabularies begin with the word

The preceding is a specimen, as ample as our limits will permit us to exhibit, of professor Barton's mode of proceeding in his comparison of the American and Asiatic languages. However exaltedly we may think of our author as a philosopher and a man of letters (and in this respect we yield to none of our countrymen) and however high our estimation of his ingenuity, industry and perseverance, in preparing and arranging the materials of the present essay, we are forced to observe, that, in our view of the subject, the result of his inquiry is by no means conclusive. Without attempting to vouch for its effect on the minds of others, and without intending the slightest detrac tion from the distinguished and well earned reputation of its author, we will be permitted to say, that his comparison has entirely failed to convince us of the original identity of the languages spoken by the nations of Asia and America. In one branch of his inquiry he has been more fortunate. His success