_Guessing and Reckoning_. Right merry have the people of England made themselves at the expense of us their younger brethren of this side of the Atlantic, for the manner in which we are wont to use the verbs, to guess and to reckon. But they have unjustly chided us therefor, since it would not be difficult to find in many of the British Classics of more than a century's standing, instances of the use of these words precisely in the American manner. In the perusal of Locke's Essay on Education a short time since, I noticed the word guess made use of three times in _our_ way. In section 28 he says, "Once in four and twenty hours is enough, and no body, _I guess_, will think it too much;" again, in section 167, "But yet, _I guess_, this is not to be done with children whilst very young, nor at their entrance upon any sort of knowledge;" and again, in section 174, "And he whose design it is to excel in English poetry, would not, _I guess_, think the way to it was to make his first essay in Latin verses." Was John Locke a Yankee? Or have the people of the United States preserved one of the meanings of the verb _to guess_ which has become obsolete in England? In several passages of the English version of the New Testament the word _reckon_ is used as the people in many parts of the United States are in the habit of using it. In the Epistle to the Romans, chapter 8, verse 18, is an instance, "For _I reckon_ that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed to us." "_Take and tell_." "If you do so I will _take and tell_ father," such is the constant language of children. What will they take? Is the expression a contraction of some obsolete phrase? Who can tell me if it is to be met with in print? _Had have_. I have for some time noticed this corruption in conversation. It has lately crept into print. Here are instances of it, "Had I have gone, I should not have met her," "If I had have been at the sale I would not have bought it at that price." I have a suspicion that a rapid pronunciation of "would have," "should have," and "could have," has given rise to this. "I'd have gone," "I'd have come," and similar phrases have probably introduced it, the contraction answering as well for _had_ as _would_, _could_, and _should_. It is very awkward and incorrect. _Fully equal_. This is a tautologous expression in constant use. "This work is _fully equal_ to its predecessor." The writer means to say that the last work is equal to the first; but what is the use of the _fully_, unless there can be an equality which is _not full_ and perfect?