120 
gress and objects of the tithing system ; 
in the devout hope, that I may be the 
humble mean of stirring up “labourers 
in the vineyard” to read and think and 
ponder for themselves, upon a subject 
deeply involving the interests of their 
families and posterity. 
The work of reformation, as regards 
tithes, is begun with energy, and hearty 
wishes of the people, that it may end 
with “beneficial results,” in the parishes 
of St. Andrew, Holborn, and St. Dun- 
stan’s in the West. In the New Times 
(a “ church-and-constitution”’ paper), it 
was lately stated, that a grant of tithes, 
of the parish of St. Botolph, Aldgate, 
was made by King James I.; soon after 
which grant, the same was conveyed for 
the consideration of £400. That the 
Rev. Thomas Kynaston, the ancestor of 
the present impropriator, purchased the 
impropriation and right of advowson 
for £11,410; at which time, the annual 
amount of tithes, for both divisions of 
the.parish, namely, in London and Mid- 
dlesex, was under the sum of £600. 
That the said Rev. Thomas Kynaston 
offered the same to the parish, with the 
right of presentation of the minister, for 
a perpetual annuity of 500 guineas. 
That the same amount of tithes was 
continued for a series of years after- 
wards. In 1804, they were increased to 
about £1,000 per annum; since then, 
to between £4,000 and £5,000 a-year, 
in the London division alone. That the 
present impropriator, in addition to a 
rent-charge on the tithes, in 1804, of 
£640 per annum, did, in 1817, mort- 
gave the same for £23,000! and, in 
1818, for £10,000! and subsequently, 
for a sum not stated in the memorial of 
registry. That, in 1805, he redeemed 
the land-tax upon the tithes, upon an 
estimation of the same, at the rate of 
£350 per annum!!! 
Mark, Mr. Editor :—£400, the pur- 
chase-money for a perpetuity of tithes, 
now amounting to £4,000 or £5,000 a- 
year, in one division of the parish only ! 
and, if the tithes be equal in both divi- 
sions, they amount to £8,000 or £10,000 
a-year! But presuming that in both 
divisions they produce £6,000 a-year 
only (a presumption in favour of the 
impropriator), where was the tithe- 
taker’s conscience, when he proposed to 
redeem the land-tax on only one-eigh- 
teenth part of that sum? Surely, “ it 
must have been asleep, or on a journey.” 
But where was it when the contract was 
completed ? Tue Hermit. 
Under Ham-hill. 
The Anatomy of Speech. 
(Mar. 1, 
For the Monthly. Magazine. 
The Anatomy of Sprrcn. The Sub- 
stance of a Series of Disquisitions on 
the physiological Facts and Principles 
that constitute the Basis of Elocu- 
tionary Science. 
RIMARY Propositions. — The 
objects of human Speech, and 
consequently of Elocutionary Science 
and Instruction are three: 1. Intelli- 
gibility—by which we appeal to the un-- 
derstanding ; 2. Impressiveness — by 
which we appeal to the feelings and 
the passions; 3. Grace, or harmony— 
which superadds to intelligibility and 
impressiveness, the sensible gratifica- 
tion of the ear. The utterance of an 
accomplished speaker will have con- 
stant reference to each and all of these; 
and the attainment of all will be facili- 
tated by a due attention to the fol- 
lowing 
Derinition. — The perfection of 
Speech consists in a mode of utterance 
which combines the utmost contradistinct- 
ness of elementary and syllabic enuncia- 
tion with the most uninterrupted flow of 
vocal sound. 
This definition necessarily infers a 
division of the natural implements of 
speech into two distinct classes—the 
Organs of tunable sound, or voice ; and 
the Organs of elementary (or literal) 
enunciation. 
In order fully and practically to un- 
derstand this distinction, it will be 
necessary to extend our inquiries into 
the structure and’ physiology of those 
organs; and to mark with all the pre- 
cision which the complication of their 
reciprocal action, and the consequent 
phenomena of speech, will permit, the 
functions they respectively perform. 
The investigation will necessarily lead 
into some detail, and into the consi- 
deration of some distinctions nothitherto 
sufficiently noted, either by teachers of 
Elocution or of anatomy ;* but without 
which it is perhaps impracticable to 
proceed, with any scientific certainty, 
in removing the defects, or improving 
the graces and accomplishments of 
Elocutionary utterance. This part of 
the subject, it should be premised, is 
not without its difficulties ; some of the 
organs performing a double office, mi-: 
nistering, 
* There isa table, however, in Wilkins’s 
* Real Character,” p. 359, which I had 
not seen when this passage was written out, 
but which shews that a part of this distinc- 
tion was folerably clearly in his mind. 
