Our author’s stay in England appears to have drawn his attention to the differences between the two languages of Scotland and England, which he distinguishes as North and South. He certainly shows, in some instances, the greater correctness of the Scotch with regard to the spelling of words derived from the Latin; as, retine instead of retain, corage instead of courage, etc. (p. 20), in which words the redundant letters that we Southerners have introduced are thrown out. He is, however, by no means partial, and gives us praise when he thinks we deserve it. Page 9. The arguments in favour of the sound given by the English Universities to the Latin _i_ are curious: it is stated to have its value in the Greek ει; but the author seems to have been in error as to the English sounding mihi and tibi alike, or our pronunciation must have changed since his time. P. 10. The author speaks of the letter _y_ as being used by the South for the sound now symbolized by _i_ with a final _e_ following the succeeding consonant, as _will_ with an _i_, and _wile_ with a _y_ in place of the _i_ and final _e_; thus in the same way he spells write, _wryt_. P. 11 (7). He gives food, good, blood, as examples of the same sound, thus inferring that the English pronounced the two latter so as to rhyme with food. P. 11 (8). He objects to the use of _w_ for _u_ in the diphthongal sound of _ou_, and therefore spells _how_, _now_, etc., _hou_, _nou_. P. 11 (10). It is difficult here to see what the pronunciation of _buu_ would be, which the author gives as the sound of bow (to bow). Probably the sound he meant would be better represented by _boo_. P. 13 (12). The author here recommends the distinction both of sound and symbol of _j_ and _v_ as consonants, and _i_ and _u_ as vowels, and proposes that we should call _j_ _jod_ or _je_, and _v_ _vau_ or _ve_, and not single _u_, “as now they doe” (p. 16), and _w_ he would call _wau_ or _we_, and moreover he places them in his alphabet on the same page. If this proposal was originally his own, it is curious that the name _ve_ should have been adopted, though not the _we_ for _w_. Ben Jonson points out the double power of _i_ and _v_ as both consonant and vowel, but he does not attempt to make them into separate letters as Hume does. P. 15 (12). He gives as an anomaly of the South that while the _d_ is inserted before _g_ in hedge, bridge, etc., it is omitted in age, suage, etc. He does not see that the short vowel requires a double consonant to prevent it from being pronounced long.