If it were necessary, we could easily show how the same thing has happened to the vocabularies of the two countries that has befallen the two nomenclatures. We smile when a Yankee says, “I guess,” “I calculate,” and “I reckon;” but when we read in the Epistle of St. Paul the sentence “_I reckon_ that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us,” do we always reflect, as we might do, that our translators and revisers of 1611 were simply putting into the mouth of the apostle a phrase which was then colloquial English, but now survives, in all its familiarity, only in the United States, whither the Puritan Fathers had carried it? This comparison we might easily extend, but it is not our subject. As for American baptismal nomenclature in general, it is all but entirely Biblical. The only book the refugee took with him was his English Bible. His piety was fed from its pages, his life was likened to its histories, his surroundings had the same cast of primeval simplicity; he discovered a resemblance between his own new life and that of the patriarchs, and it pleased him to stereotype the resemblance by the adoption of their names. From out that Book alone he named his offspring, and thus to this day,—such is the power of tradition,—“Brother Jonathan” and “Uncle Sam” are but representatives of a class of names which well-nigh engrosses every other. A single instance will suffice to show how this great mass of Biblical nomenclature arose. Charles Chauncy died in New England, 1671. He emigrated from Hertfordshire, where the family had been settled for centuries. His children were Isaac, Ichabod, Sarah, Barnabas, Elnathan, Nathaniel, and Israel. All these grew up and settled in New England. It has been well said, that were it not for our English Bible the two languages of the United States and England would slowly but surely separate themselves into two distinct dialects, possibly tongues. Certainly it is to that book which Wycliffe,—whom we commemorated in 1877,—wrote into English, we owe the fact that in no respect is there a closer bond and deeper sympathy betwixt England and America than in that which concerns the nomenclature of the two countries. In what respect they differ I have shown. While _we_ have dropped some names that marked eccentricity, and restored some of the older and more pagan cognomens from the oblivion that seemed so certainly to await them, _they_ have clung tenaciously to that more quaint and large class of names of Scriptural origin, which their forefathers of Puritan stock bore with them across the ocean in days when America was as yet a portion of the British dominions.