pected always to vaccinate the poor without some remuneration," by remarking, that, “in all places of considerable population, the medical care of the poor is contracted for, at a fixed annual stipend; and though I fear, there are few instances of this kind, in which surgeons are paid with adequate liberality, yet when a parish or district, is taken, it becomes an object of oeconomy and policy to vaccinate every pauper, rather than risk the expense, trouble, and I may certainly add, the anxiety of attending them under so horrid a disease."

From the promptness with which vaccination was undertaken, in the autumn of 1812, as mentioned by Mr. Rigby, and from the considerable numbers which were immediately vaccinated, the spreading of the disease in the city seemed to have been effectually prevented. A case of natural small-pox, however, was traced from a neighbouring village; and an additional source of infection was subsequently introduced by variolous inoculation

"In the beginning of February, a soldier's wife, who had passed through London, with three children, came into the city-ber eldest boy was full of the small-pox, and the two other children were sickening with it, all of them having caught it in London. This unfortunate fact was soon made public, and the vaccination immediately again had recourse to; but the small-pox, on this occasion, soon found its way among the unvaccinated, and several children were sacrificed to it within a few weeks; for it had appeared, nearly at the same time, in a different part of the city, and it was ascertained to have been, also, brought hither by another unfortanate communication with the metropolis, The number of persons who had not profited of the vaccination in the preceding autumn, proved now to be greater than was expected; for calculating on the probable average number of annual births in the lower classes, and on the supposed number of individuals who had the small-pox in the years 1808 and 1809, I had estimated the number liable to the disease, in the beginning of August, 1812, not to have execeded thirteen hundred.

"Though many of the poor were daily vaccinated, more, indeed, than I still calenlated to be liable to the small-pox, there was an unfortunate number who yet neglected the boon, and among these the disease has, from that time to the present, spread itself, and I regret to record that, from the 10th of Feb. to the 2d of Sept. sixty-five deaths have occurred from it."

That the number of deaths would have been far greater, had not so many been previously vaccinated, there can be no doubt. "Had those, who were vaccinated," says Mr. Rigby, "been liable to take the infection, the deaths would, probably, have exceeded four hundred."

public houses, the resort of country persons, and thence communicated to some neighbouring villages;" and "that he fail ed, in an application to the acting magisstrate, to take some steps to ascertain what public houses were thus infected, and to guard strangers, liable to the disease, against entering them, as he [the magistrate] conceived there was no law to countenance such an interference.”

"The vaccination, in the preceding autumn, having been so completely successful in preventing the spread of the small-pox, was, unquestionably, a most gratifying circumstance; but though during the subsequent vaccination, from February to Augast, the disease still made a fatal progress, the melancholy fact has afforded an irrefragable proof of the protecting power of vaccination: during this period, probably not fewer than four hundred individuals have had the small-pox; there has likewise been no intermission of the disease-it has been constantly spreading, and on many occasions, patients, as before observed, have been publicly exposed. Of the two thousand, three hundred, and ninety-one vaccinated during the year, it may be assumed, that at least two thousand have been resident in the city since Febru ary, and consequently equally exposed to an infectious atmosphere as the unvaccinated, and yet but one single instance, in that number, has occurred, in which the protecting influence of vaccination has been suspected, and this has been clearly ascertained to have been a case of premature vesicle, which suddenly rose, sooner disappeared, and evidently produced no constitutional affection. Whereas every unvaccinated person, thus exposed, has probably taken the disease, and I should fear, of those remaining at present uninfected, if not promptly vacci nated, that very few will escape."

On the instance of failure, mentioned above, Mr. Rigby has the following very important note:

"This was a child of Mrs. Gostling, in Grant's Yard, St. John's of Maddermarket; it had been vaccinated in April; I visited it on the 29th of July; there were many recent vestiges of distinct variola upon it. On examining the vaccinated arm, I could detect no cicatrix, and Mrs. Gostling, unasked, said she attributed the failure to the vesicle having risen sooner, subsided sooner, and having been less than those in her other three children, who were vaccinated at the same time, and who have all resisted the infection."

This statement speaks for itself.

"From the intercourse between Norwich and the neighbouring villages, the small-pox was soon introduced into them, and has since spread into various parts of the country;, it has also prevailed much, and been very fatal at Yarmouth, where few have been vaccinated; many of the Local Militia were infected there, and communicated it, on their return to their respective villages. Its progress has also been much accelerated, and its diffusion promoted, by the unjus tifiable, and much to be reprobated practice of variolous inoculation. I lament to say, that some professional men have allowed themselves to inoculate for small-pox; but it has been principally done by despicable empirics, itinerants, even shoemakers, and old women; and in some instances, it has been ordered by ignorant overseers of parishes."

Mr. Rigby is a warm advocate for legislative interference, on these grounds ;→

variolous inoculation is the grand source of the evil; whilst any pecuniary gain results therefrom, individuals will be found to practise it; and, whilst any prejudices remain against vaccination, which it is the obvious interest of such individuals to Inaintain, and increase, there will be no difficulty in finding subjects to practise upon.

Under these circumstances there appears no resource but in legislation; and the accumulated mischiefs which have already resulted from the practice, together with its direct tendency to destroy life, by diffusing a pestilential and dangerous disease, will surely justify the passing a law, imposing a severe penalty on any one, directly or indirectly concerned in the act of variolous inoculation."

Mr. Rigby notices the French Report, "in which it is affirmed, that of 2,671,622 subjects, properly vaccinated in France, only seven cases appear of patients having afterwards taken the small-pox; which is as 1 to 381,666."-Most of the cases of imputed failure, which have been brought forward by ignorant, prejudiced, or interested individuals, Mr. Rigby considers to have been satisfactorily explained; notwithstanding which they have made an unfayourable impression on the public mind, have impeded the progress of vaccination, and have excited doubts and alarms in the minds of those who have been vaccinated.

"On this account," observes the reporter, "1 have no hesitation in saying, the opposers to vaccination have much to answer for. Admitting their adduced cases of failure to their utmost extent, vaccination would still be a blessing; it would be no reason for abandoning vaccination, but a powerful one for preventing the introduction of small-pox, and for increasing our efforts to exterminate it: and assuming it possible that the failures were even one in twenty, the means of effecting this important purpose would, obviously, be still increased in the proportion of 19 to 1. I will say farther, and say it gravely, that on a fair comparison of the two inoculations, no man of sound intellect, of correct moral feeling, and who does not prefer his individual interest to the general and more important ingerests of society, will hesitate to prefer vaccination to variolation. When no other means of lessening the fatality of small-pox than inoculation were known, the practice was justifiable; and had the security which individuals obtained from it, been extended to all classes of society, and no injury done to any, it would have been a general blessing. It is well known, however, that its benefits were ever limited to certain orders, and that the poor never having been inoculated to any extent, not only failed to profit of it, but the disease being constantly kept up by a rever-ceasing partial inoculation of their richer neighbours, they were, more than ever, exposed to

infection, and the average mortality from it, though almost exclusively confined to them, became even greater than before the discovery of inoculation: population proportionately suffering. With vaccination this could not have been--the protection it gives is without alloy; with it, the security of one is not obtained by exposing others to danger: it is got an infectious disease."

Mr. Rigby employs several other argu

ments, or rather facts, in favour of the practice of vaccination, which it is not within our limits to embrace; and then concludes his Report as follows:

"Under a conviction, therefore, that the de-, structive progress of the small-pox cannot be arrested, unless variolons inoculation be completely put down; and that no measure is so calculated to produce the general vaccination of the poor, (which seems equally necessary to the extinction of smallpox) as the giving to each person vaccinated a small peenniary reward; and being not less satisfied that neither of these measures can be carried into any extensive effect without legislative interference, I trust the subject, important as it is in a morgl, and in a national view, will in due time, engage the atten tion of Parliament."

Towards the close of the last Session of Parliament, if our memory be correct, Lord Boringdon introduced a Bill, in the House of Peers, for the purpose of restraining the propagation of the small-pox; but it was withdrawn, on the suggestion of Lord Ellenborough, who considered that the prosecutions at common law, which might at any time be instituted, were sufficient to restrain, or punish, the propagation of the small-pox, or of any other pestilential disease. A Bill, however, was afterwards introduced, in a modified state, and left for the consideration of the House. It may, therefore, be presumed, that, in the course of the present Session, the subject will be brought regularly, and fully, before the legislature.

Since the publication of Mr. RIGBY'S Report, a letter from that gentleman has appeared in the public papers, addressed to Mr. Bailey, Surgeon, of Thetford, in which the writer observes as follows:

"I am aware that the most unfavourable impres sions on the public have been derived from the supposed cases of failure, but though many have been reported, and put forth most conspicuously, few, very few indeed, in comparison with numbers, have been established as unequivocal ones, and of these, none have proved fatal." In all of them the virulence of the disease seems to have been subdued. LordGrosvenor's son's case is a striking proof of this: the patient was very full of a confluent sort, so as to give but too just apprehension for his safety; but the crisis soon arrived, no secondary fever accompanied it, and the recovery was more rapid and complete than ever known under such an appearance of disease. In all other reported cases not the slightest danger has appeared.-It is, I know, the opinion of some medical inen, that in a few iustances of extraor dinary exposure, and even of inoculation, a sort of Pseudo-Variola, unattended with danger, is pro duced; I confess I have seen none of these, and bave no doubt that many of the alleged cases of eruption have been Varicella, and which being of several spe cies, in some of which the pustules remain many days, maturate and leave cicatrices, no wonder that many are mistaken for Variola, (see Bateman on Cutaneous Diseases.)-It is highly important that these cases should not be mistaken for Variola, and surgeons should ou no account inoculate from them,

The arch enemy of Vaccination, in this neighbourhood, has had a melancholy proof of the danger of acting on an erroneous opinion of the nature of these eruptions:- A patient, who had been vaccinated, was brought to him last Summer, with an eruption of this kind; he pronounced it to be small-pox, and said he would prove it by inoculating three chitdren from it; he did this, and a similar eruption was produced, but they have since all taken the smallpox, and one fell a victim to it."

By way of note to his letter to Mr. Bailey, Mr. Rigby adds the following statement:

"Since the above was written, I have seen a young Lady at Thetford under one of the eruptions; like other varicellous ones, in its first appearance, it resembled small-pos, but it was but of few days' continuance, and as I saw it on its decliue, I can say unequivocally that it was not small-pox.

"I have also the authority of the respectable Medical Gentlemen of Thetford to say, they are not less friendly to Vaccination than heretofore. Since November they have successfully vaccinated great Bambers in and round Thetford, and though among the unvaccinated some sacrifices have been made to small-pox, they have to a very considerable extent secured the inhabitants from its ravages."

Norwich, March 2d, 1814.”

English Synonyms discriminated by W. Taylor, jun. of Norwich, 12mo. 1813.

If an author be not better qualified than any other person, to be the reviewer of his own work, he is at least more competent to inform the reader of his object, and of his intentions. Possessed of this information, the reader is at liberty to form his opinion, as to how far the proposed object have been attained, how far the author's intentions have been fulfilled, how far his talents appear to have been commensurate with his resources. On this principle, we are always gratified, when, consistently with justice and propriety, we can permit an author to speak for himself. Such an opportunity now presents itself; and we shall most willingly allow Mr. Taylor to introduce himself to the readers of The EAST ANGLIAN, before we enter upon an examination of his performance. He very properly commences with defining the subject which he has selected for the purpose of illustration.

"The word synonym," says he, "is compounded of the Greek preposition sun, cum, and nunma, nomen: it means, therefore, a fellow-name. Those terms are called synonymous, which describe the same things by other names: to synonymice is to express one thought in different phrases: synonymy is the use, a synony mist the user of synonymns, and synonymicon describes a dictionary of them."

What follows, is interesting to the critical and scholastic reader:

"Some languages, like the greek and german, are self-derived. When they have occasion to designate fresh objects, they do it by joining, in a new and definitive manner, terms already in use. They

have been taught, for instance, to name the elenrents of modern chemistry by internal resources: ongen, sauerstoff. In such languages no two words are equipoffent, no distinct expressions have quite the same significance.

"Other languages, like the english, have been formed by the confluence of several tongues. A gothie dialect, the caledonian probably, fortus the basis of our speech; and the french, wh eh with the italian and spanish may be considered as a latio dialeet, has mixed with it so abundantly, that it depends on a writer's choice, whether the northern orsouthern diction shall predominate. In such languages many words are wholly equivalent.

"Our tongue abounds especially with duplicates, one of which is borrowed from some gothic, and the other from some roman, dialect. Freedom, happiness, are saxon, liberty, felicity, are latin, terms,' which are not merely similar, but ideutical, in meaning so are the adjectives friendly, amical; and the verbs to lesson, to diminish. In commercial nations, in sea-port towns, in hybrid families, it often happens, that the names given to the same things in different countries both become current. Wherein lies the' difference between a gotch and a pitcher, but that the one is a hollandish and the other a french term for a water-crock: or between a sharoot and a segar, but that the first is an east-indian and the second a west-indian name for a rolled tobacco leaf.. Such. double terms are always at first commutable, and ̧ may continue so for generations: but when new objects are discovered, or new shades of idea which such words are fitted to depict, it at length happens that a separation of meanings is made between them. Thus to blunch and to whiten are insensibly acquiring a distinct purport; to blanch being now only applied where some stain, or colouring matter is withdrawn which concealed the natural whiteness. Thus again whole and entire; worth and merit; understanding and intellect; are tending to a discriminable ineauing.

"A language begins with being too poor. In' rude ages the same word performs many services. Thus in Hebrew ruakh spirit, stands for breath, for temper, for soul, and for ghost. During periods of intercourse, whether occasioned by conquest or by commerce, many foreign expressions are imported, which enrich but encumber the national vocabulary. At this stage of growth a language may become too wealthy. After a further advance of circulation, of record, of selection, and of refinement, a distinct of-* fice comes to be assigned to every individual term.' The english language has not yet completed this last spire of the progress. Our double nomenclature is still too numerous; it frequently tempts our writers into idle pleonasm, and favours a useless tautology. Once in a while an echo may amuse, but it is usually an unwelcome companion."

After quoting the analysation of the substantives labor and dolor, and the contrast of the verbs amore and diligere, by Cicero; with an instance of Quintilian's examination of synonymns, in his sixth book, Mr.' Taylor proceeds to notice the more modern writers who have treated of this subject.

"Nonius Marcellus of Tibur, by his work De Proprietate Sermonum, attained eminence as a grammariau about the close of the fourth century. Many latin synonymns are examined in his fifth section, and instructively distinguished.

"The earliest book, however, which was expressly devoted to the discrimination of synonyms, is greek work of Ammonius, the son of Hermias, whe flourished in the sixth century.”.

"Under the reign of Harold, and about the year 1040, flourished John Garland, an Englishman, whose manuscript treatise entitled Synonyma et Equivoca was long much in request, and was printed at Cologne in 1490. Among the Auctores Linguæ Latine, collected and edited by Dionysius Gothofredus, there is a chapter on synonymy picked from ancient grammarians. Several moderns, Popina, Richter, Braun, have compiled in this department of latin glossology, additional materials: of the continental writers, Dumesnil is the most celebrated; of our native writers, Hill.

"The earliest regular treatise of the moderns, exclusively consecrated to the comparison of vernacular synonyms, seems to have been that of the abbé Girard; the publication of which obtained for him a seat amid the academicians of France: its first cdition is dated in 1718, the enlarged edition in 1747."

"This work was republished in 1770, and in 1776, with additional articles by Beauzée; and with other supplementary matter derived from the Encyclopedy.”

Girard's performance is generally known; but it appears to have escaped Mr. Taylor's notice, that, in the posthumous works of D'Alembert, published about twelve or thirteen years ago, were several articles, intended as additions to the treatise by Girard. 1

"A distinct treatise on french synonyms by the more careful and more learned Roubaud appeared in 1785 at Paris, and again in 1787 at Berlin. Girard had relied too much on metropolitan and social usage; half his distinctions are since gone out of fashion. Roubaud relied preferably on latin usage: though assailed at first as pedantic, ho is now obeyed by every writer, and is even become the canon of fasliionable conversation; so versatile custom, so immutable is etymology. The more lively, satisfactory, and enduring articles of these several french synonymists have been collected by M. de Levizac at London in 1807, and republished with neat abbrevia

tion.

"At Bologna in 1733 appeared Sinonimi ed aggiunti Italiani raccolti da Carlo Costanzo Rabbi, of which a secoud augmented edition was given at Venice in 1764 by Alessandro Maria Bandiera. As records of practice these volumes have a value, which they do not assert as authorities for conduct. Imprecision however is not often chargeable on the authors of southern Europe. A Frenchiman or an Italian has only to learn latin in order to know thoroughly his whole narrow range of words. But an english writer, in order completely to understand his vocabulary, must study so many languages, that he less frequently accomplishes the task."

Mr. Taylor next notices Dr. TRUSLER'S "Distinction between Words esteemed Synonimous," first published in 1766, and secondly in 1783; which he properly characterises as a "neat and useful"-the utmost praise to which it seems entitled-but "not wholly trust-worthy" book. However, he justly remarks, that "it will not be superseded by the subsequent, but inferior attempt of Mrs. Piozzi."- On perusing the latter, some years ago, it struck us as an absurd, ridiculous, and contemptible performance. What would the great lexicographer have said, had he lived to witness the erudite and profound

labours of his protegée? We fear the wor thy Dr. had much to answer for, in marring the household accomplishments of his good friend, the brewer's wife!

"The Germans," observes Mr. Taylor, "have not neglected this branch of grammatical literature, and have furnished perhaps the completest european treatises on the subject. In 1783 was printed Stosch's Essay toward defining German Words of like Meaning. Without Girard's dexterous choice of examples, which makes instruction both amuse and tell, the german synonymist has produced a work of sounder information. It may be scholastic, diffuse, and too metaphysical; but it frequently explains the reason of the collected facts. So much of meaning as inheres in the radical and primary signification of a word is necessarily immortal; but that which has accrued from casual application may die out and dis

appear.

Eberhard, another German glossologist, published at Halle, in 1802 and the following years, a still more comprehensive Synonymicon of his language. The previous labors of Stosch he has emploved and condensed; the masterly dictionary of Adelung he has consulted for corrective and additional matter; and by the composition of new arti. cles he has extended to more than eight volumes his instructive work. Yet even Eberhard leans too much on usage, which is transient, too little on etymology which is immutable; he oftener supplies the what than the why of practice, and sharpens instinct instead of unfolding reason. He is a neater not a clearer writer than Stosch; his matter is ampler, not purer; his instances are more lively, not always more convincing; he excels Stosch in taste of redaction, and comprehension of terms.

66

Considering, that "our english books of synonymy would perhaps admit of some amendment, by an approximation_to_foreign models," Mr. Taylor says, he has thought fit at least to make the experi ment, and to write anew several definitions. of the terms, which are most commonly examined and compared in the circulating catalogues of synonyms." With becoming candour, he observes, that

Many of the ensuing pages travel over the ground of Dr. Trusler: whenever," says he, "our estimates agree, I have preferred to avail myself of his instances: whenever they disagree, I have thought some note of precaution against my own decision due to his established authority."

Having allowed Mr. Taylor to present his credentials, we are under the necessity of requesting him to make his bow of retirement, for the present month. In April, we shall be happy to attend him on another audience.

Literary Notices, for the East Anglian District.

The following works, we understand, are in a state of great forwardness: An Inquiry respecting the Author of CAVENDISH'S "Life of Cardinal Wolsey"The Village Cobler; or, a History of the Life and Adventures of Donald Gillibraston, with Poems on Yarmouth and Beccles; by Mrs. SERVICE, author of The Caledonian Herd-Boy ;-A Practical Essay on the Diseases of the Vessels and Glands of the Absorbent System; with an Appendix, contain ing Surgical Cases and Remarks; by Mr.WILLIAM GOODLAD, of Burg

LONDON THEATRES. Mr. KEAN continues to be the magnet at Drury Lane. On the eighth night of his performance of Richard the Third, notwithstanding the weather was exceedingly || unfavourable, the House was crowded in every part, and the applause was as loud and tumultuous, as though it had been the first appearance of some novel wonder.

The success of his Shylock, and Richard, induced the managers to bring him forward in the equally, or more, arduous character of Hamlet; in which he appeared, for the first time, on the 12th of March. The pleasure which he afforded by his personation of the royal Dane seems to have been of a more qualified nature, than that of his Richard. It has enabled some of the critics to discover, that his figure and gait are not sufficiently graceful and dignified to represent the rising pride of Denmark-"the glass of fashion and the mould of form;" and that his voice-which is described as not a fine one-loses its power, and becomes hoarse and unpleasing before the end of the play. What is very remarkable, he is said to fail, in the closet scene, with his mother. The author has done so much in this part, that it seems next to impossible for an actor, possessing even decent requisites, not to electrify his hearers. Another of Mr. KEAN'S failures was in the scene with Laertes, where he leaps into the grave, exclaiming—“ "Tis I, Hamlet, the Dane!" "It had not," says the writer in the Morning Chronicle, “the tumultuous and overpowering effect we expected from it." In the familiar scenesthe last with Guildenstern and Rosencrantz, in particular-he was least successful. The general impression, however, was excellent; displaying great taste, discrimination, and originality of thinking. “To point out the defects of Mr. KEAN's performance of the part," observes the writer, from whom we have already quoted, “is a less grateful but a much shorter task than to enumerate the many striking beauties which he gave to it, both by the power of his action and by the true feeling of nature. His surprise when he first sees the Ghost, his eagerness and filial confidence in following it; the impressive pathos of his action and voice in addressing it, I'll call thee, Hamlet, Father, Royal Dane,' were admirable. Mr. KEAN has introduced in this part a new reading, as it is called, which we think perfectly correct. In the scene where he breaks from his friends to obey the command of his father, he keeps his sword pointed behind him to prevent them from

following him, instead of holding it before him to protect him from the Ghost."-It was considered, that, had there been less vehemence of effort in his remonstrances to Ophelia, the effect would have been superior: "but whatever nice faults might be found in this scene, they were amply redeemed by the manner of his coming back, after he had gone to the extremity of the stage, from a pang of parting tenderness to press his lips to Ophelia's hand. It had an electrical effect on the house. It was the finest commentary that was ever made on Shakespeare. It explained the character at once (as he meant it) as one of disappointed hope, of bitter regret, of affection suspended, not obliterated by the distractions of the scene around him!" This is, indeed, high praise! The actor who can deserve it, must possess talents of the first order. This parting scene with Ophelia is one of the most-if not the most-difficult in the character of Hamlet. Never did we sce it performed, even by KEMBLE, with complete success. Too often is it the fate of poor Ophelia to be vulgarly bullied -treated rather as an unworthy fallen one, than as a fair and virtuous lady, the pride and honour of a noble stock.

Miss SMITH was Mr. KEAN's Ophelia ; but that lady's deficiency in musical talent was a heavy drawback on the performance.

In grateful consideration of his attractive merit, the managers of Drury-lane Theatre are said to have advanced Mr. KEAN'S salary from 10. to 201. a-weck, and to have presented him with the compliment of a bank-note for 1007.

66

Impelled by the spirit of rivalry, from which the public can scarcely fail of deriving advantage, the Covent Garden Managers have placed Mr. YOUNG'S Richard aud Hamlet in opposition to those of Mr.. KEAN. YOUNG's second performance of Richard is said to have evinced great improvement. Mrs. FAUCIT, late of the Norwich Company, was his Lady Anne; and, according to the Morning Chronicle, that lady's exhibition of the character was admirable piece of acting." For some reason, however, with which we are unacquainted, the very clever Lilliputian Miss S. BOOтн, has since been announced for, and, we believe, has played the character. Two or three years ago, we recollect, she played Juliet to CHARLES KEMBLE'S Romeo! We shall shortly expect to hear of Mrs. SIDDONS, or Miss LESERVE, in the delicate Ariel.

an

It has long been matter of surprise, amongst the judicious, that, amidst the