in the United States of America. 445 
“from the purity of the English idiom, which we have been more 
“ disposed to censure than to wonder at. The common speech of the 
“United States has departed very considerably from the standard 
“adopted in England, and in this case it is not to be expected that 
“ writers, however cautious, will maintain a strict purity. Mr. Mar- 
“ shall deviates occasionally, but not grossly,” &c. 
The Critical Review (for September 1809) in remarks upon Zrav- 
els through France, by Col. Pinckney, says of the author’s style— 
“ He falls into occasional inaccuracies. .... but the instances are rare, 
‘“‘and by no means so striking as we have freguent occasions of re- 
~ “marking in most American writers.” 
The same Reviewers (in July 1807) in speaking of Marshail’s 
Life of Washington, have the following, among other remarks on the 
style of that work—that “ it abounds with many of those idioms which 
** prevail on the other side of the Atlantic.” 
The Annual Review, for 1808, in speaking of the same work, af- 
ter pointing out mecocsish instances of sae eigen enon Gs a to many 
of u yhich, however. the Re 
richie: OF thé English edidion of thavwork; ¢ as. Will Dedeen sa: thiciellows 
ing Vocabulary,) has the following observations ; which, if they had 
been made in a manner somewhat different, would probably have been 
more favourably received by those, for whose benefit they seem to be 
intended :—‘* We have been more particular in noticing these faults in 
“« Mr. Marshall’s language, because we are not at all certain that the A- 
“‘ mericans do not consider them as beauties ; and because we wish, 
“ if possible, to stem that torrent of barbarous phraseology, with which 
“the American writers threaten to —_ —— the —— 
oe ae 
The Monthly eciasedeags in talaga ofa little workyenttled 
A Political Sketch of America, cite, with approbation, the following 
