up.

his death. The papers therefore remained with Guarini. They descended to his son, from whom they passed to one of the Strozzi, and by him were sold to a Count Foppa, a man of letters, who some one hundred and sixty or two hundred years ago collected every thing he could get respecting the poet, with intent to write his life. Tasso's own papers passed by his testament to Cardinal Aldobrandini, from whose family Foppa obtained them also by purchase. Dying before he had made any progress in his work, the materials collected by Foppa fell into the hands of the Falconieri family. That they were authentic MSS. of Tasso, in the possession of Prince Falconieri in the time of Serassi, there is scarcely a doubt. Serassi himself, if I mistake not, mentions the fact, and must, from some notice he takes of them, have had access to these very papers; but they contradicted the hypothesis he was interested to maintain, and he forbore to bring them forward. Count Alberti obtained his mss. by purchase from Prince Falconieri, and it only remains to be seen whether he added nothing from them to the stock of the true. Fortunately, this too has been singularly attested. Prince Falconieri, who probably sold them as literary curiosities, without having any correct notion of their value, no sooner was apprized of his folly, than he instituted a criminal proceeding against Count Alberti, accusing him of having abstracted other Mss. of Tasso than those he had sold, pretending that of the latter there were but few. Alberti was arrested one morning, and his papers taken and sealed Conducted before the tribunal, he learned the nature of the charge against him, and in the course of the proceedings was obliged to prove, and did succeed in proving, by the notarial contract, and the testimony of witnesses, to the satisfaction of the judges, that all the Mss. he had were purchased from the Falconieri, and included in their contract. Of course he was honorably acquitted, his papers restored to him, and thus, by the sentence of a judicial tribunal, as far as can be reasonably expected, the identity of these mss., with those admitted by Serassi to be in the possession of the Falconieri, is established. I have mentioned only a few which were requisite to connect the narrative. There are about one hundred and twenty published pieces of verse, mostly short, and several billets and letters. Among other curious relics is a common-place book, containing parts of a diary, and stanzas of the Gerusalamme, with alterations and corrections. The cover of this volume is richly embroidered with silver, gold, and silk, according to the fashion of that day, and, as it would seem, by the hands of Donna Lucrezia, the Dutchess of Urlino. There is another book thus embroidered for Tasso by Leonora herself. It is the Labyrinth of Love, by Boccaccio, lent her by Tasso. She returns it to him thus ornamented, with a note alluding to a similar gift of her sister, and excusing herself for thus addorning a volume reflecting on her sex: she says it is in obedience to the evangelists, returning good for evil. This note must have been among the first written, from its style, and from its bearing the princess's signature, which most of the others want. In the volume are some lines written by Tasso on the occasion of receiving the present; and in a picture of Leonora by Titian, in the possession of Count Alberti, she is represented with this book in her hand. That the portrait is by Titian, is generally conceded by judges of his style of painting. Another curious relic is the safe conduct given to the poet by the formidable bandit and assassin, Marco Sciarro. After his liberation from Sant' Anna, and his ineffec

tual attempt to recover some part of his patrimony at Naples, he set out for Rome, and, always unfortunate, fell into the hands of this too notorious brigand, who not only liberated him and his companions, and treated them honorably, but gave him a passport to protect him against all other banditti. The circumstance is mentioned by Marco, I am sure, and I think by Serassi. The original is here, and is expressed to have been given 'to Torquato Tasso, out of gratitude for the pleasure afforded by his immortal poems, Rinaldo and the Gerusalamme, and to show how different was the treatment he received from Duke Alphonso and the robber Marco Sciarro.' On the back is a note, in Tasso's own hand, stating that he had preserved this paper, esteeming it a singular honor, coming as it did from a man who sealed it with blood.' Part of the paper has perished, and the stain of blood is no longer to be seen, but the hand-writing of Tasso may be considered sufficient to authenticate what would otherwise be certainly difficult to establish, that of Marco Sciarro. The general effect of these Mss. is not merely to elucidate a most curious and obscure part of literary history. It is to increase our admiration for the principal personages concerned. The genius, the love, the imprudence and the misery, of Tasso — the noble, gentle, tender, and spirited character of Leonora - the heroic generosity of Guarini, and even the feelings of Alphonso, the avenger, and to some extent the victim, of wounded pride and prejudice, make up altogether a most affecting and instructive chapter in the secret annals of the human heart.

The reading of these мss. was among the most interesting scenes I ever witnessed. All the company but myself were of those whose mother tongue is Tuscan,' familiar with the known events in the life of the poet, skilled in the delicacies of his language, and giving themselves up to their feelings with the unreserve that belongs to their country. A finer exhibition of true, deep, natural sensibility I never witnessed, and doubt whether one could be seen, out of Italy. But I spare you a description of the company and the reading. It was not for any such purpose I began my letter, but to give you some faint idea of these most interesting papers.

You have my consent to make any discreet use of this letter the occasion may require. But if you publish it or any extracts, I beg you to correct the style and the press. I write in haste and without any other change or revision than I can make currente calamo,' and have been held answerable in my time for so much nonsense of other people's, that I would gladly escape farther responsibility even for my own.

BEGONE! thou bastard tongue, so base, so broken-
By human jackalls and hyenas spoken;

Form'd for a race of infidels, and fit

To laugh at truth, and skepticize in wit;

What stammering, snivelling sounds, which scarcely dare
Bravely through nassal channels meet the ear!

Yet, helped by apes' grimaces, and the devil,

Have ruled the world, and ruled the world for evil.

T.

ORNITHICHNOLOGY RECONSIDERED.

“Πάκανθις ἐπειγομένη τυφλὰ τίκτει,

SAITH the proverb of the ancient Hellenist; and it contains an important truth, which we endeavored to impress upon the mind of our friend, the learned professor of Amherst College, in a brief review of his Ornithichnology, in the June number of this work. But our benevolent intentions are like to be altogether unavailing, judging from the declarations of his Ornithichnology Defended,' in the number of the Knickerbocker for September, inasmuch as he has passed that fatal climacteric, 'the fortieth year,' when contradiction ceases to be availing.

But we cannot help flattering ourselves, malgré these declarations, that the review alluded to will accomplish its intended and desired effect that it will induce greater care in his composition. Already, indeed, we fancy we can perceive the influence of its operation, in those polished, well-turned periods in his Defence,' in which he has attempted, and not without considerable success, to blend an Addisonian ease and elegance, with a vein of Johnsonian wit and satire. We think, too, that we have a just claim upon him for his thanks; and we should have, were our review less kind than he represents it, for thus giving him occasion to introduce himself into a wide circle, and among new society, by one of his happiest literary efforts.

We are sorry the professor has put it out of our power to say as much for his candor and kindness, as for his knowledge of belles-lettres; but this is impossible—and we regret it the more, on account of the position he has taken; for our principles will not permit us to enter into an argument with a man whose first postulate is, 'I will not be convinced.'

A few suggestions, therefore, for the consideration of an enlightened public,' to whom the professor has appealed, will be the only notice we can give the defence.

The reader will probably recollect the praise bestowed by the reviewer on the performances of the professor: he will undoubtedly bear in mind. the kindness with which he spoke of our author; and he will look in vain for that passage, where any one of the professor's errors are attributed to early disadvantages,' as the professor misunderstood us, and he will find himself in nubibus, before he can discover where those early disadvantages' are 'offered as an apology in his behalf.' Nor was it quite generous in the professor to disclaim at first the proffered meed of praise, in order, as it would seem, to enable him to charge the reviewer with enmity;' more especially, as he afterward appears to receive and rejoice in the same; but inasmuch as he has passed the Rubicon, and undoubtedly knows his own demerits best, we shall spend no time in contradicting him. Yet, could any possible concurrence of events render it necessary for us to undertake an exculpation of ourselves from the charge of unkindness, or enmity, we should appeal with the utmost confidence to the unbiased judgment of every intelligent reader. We did not, however, bestow upon him quite the extent of 'decisive authority' he seems to suppose; and hence, by his own rule of judging, we are not chargeable with quite the amount of enmity alleged against us.

But we will dwell no longer on this theme. The facts are within

reach of the public, to whom the professor has appealed and we respond, let them decide. Ours is no personal controversy. To elucidate the truth, is our only aim, however short we may fall of accomplishing it. We simply remark, therefore, for the benefit of those unskilled in the Greek, that the termination ite is abbreviated from lite, derived from 005, a stone, and signifies resembling stone, partaking of the nature of stone, stony; and that ornithichnite literally denotes the track of a bird [in] stone; (the genitive case of ornis being used, according to our ideas of tichnology, in the composition of the word.) We hope, too, that the professor will retain ornithichnite, believing it a better word than the proposed substitute, ornithichnolite.

Waiving all further consideration of the second head of the review, we will dwell but a moment on those objections which are of a scientific nature. And here we candidly confess, that the professor's defence has reduced us to a dilemma.

Heretofore, we have been accustomed to believe with Professor Silliman, with Gideon Mantell, Esq., with Robert Bakewell, M. De La Bache, and with the North American Reviewers, that Professor Hitchcock's Report on the Geology, etc. of Massachusetts, was 'a great work, the most elaborate and complete in its kind which this country has produced;' and on the supposed accuracy of the statements there made, many and the most considerable of our objections to his ornithichnology were based.

From that we learned, that 'the proof was quite conclusive, that the new red sand stone formation, in which these tracks occur, (American Journal of Science and Arts, v. 29, pp. 307, 308, etc.,) was deposited beneath the ocean, and subsequently elevated; (Rep., pp. 223, 244;) that this elevation probably took place suddenly and at once,' (Rep., pp. 219, 224,) and that it was very obvious, that the finer varieties, in which these tracks occur, (American Journal of Science and Arts, v. 29, p. 308,) were deposited in still waters;' (Rep. p. 218.) If these were facts, we could not imagine how 'the eight hundred feet of rock, which overlies the ornithichnites,' (American Journal of Science and Arts, v. 29, p. 334; Rep., pp. 221, 224,) could be deposited in any less depth of water; unless, like the fabled Atalantis, it rose and sunk, as occasion required. But of this we knew of no evidence, and hence could not suppose it to have been the case. We could not, therefore, imagine how a bird of some sixteen feet in height could contrive to make its mark on the bottom of an ocean at least eight hundred feet deep! But we are relieved on this point by the last edition of the professor's opinions, though somewhat at the expense of our former belief- for what we had before understood the professor to assert as matter of fact, is now reduced to a mere 'theoretical inference.'

Inasmuch, therefore, as our supposed facts are likely to prove not to be facts our supposed well established principles in science, to become inferences from some uncertain theory—and the 'silicious concretions' of the Connecticut valley to be transformed to nodules of limestone we desire the reader to consider that we enter a nolle as to all our objections founded on any thing the professor has said, and that, should occasion require, we might be in readiness to commence de novo. To the charge of misrepresentation, so often repeated, we declare ourselves not guilty, with the exception of saying the O. giganteus had only two toes, for which lapsus linguæ we must humbly beg the pro