1888.] 315 
those characteristics toward which Aryan speech has for thousands of 
years been trending. 
It seems to us that any one who denies the latter principle can have 
no proper conception of the philosophic relation of speech to thought, 
of logic to grammar, of grammatic matter to grammatic form, and 
must be blind to the indisputable fact that the changes in language 
mean the evolution of language from lower to higher stages, from inad- 
equate to adequate expression. It seems incredible that any one ac- 
quainted with the distinction between form-languages, like the English, 
and formless languages, like the Ural-Altaic group, could give the 
preference to the latter; and yet Volapiik distinctly associates itself 
with the latter. 
Its deficiencies have been repeatedly pointed out since the publication 
of our Report. Our fellow-member, Mr. Horatio Hale, has dealt with 
it trenchantly in The Critic (October, 1888); Prof. Addison Hoge, in 
The Nation (Feb. 9, 1888), has exhaustively analyzed it and shown its 
weak points; and a number of other periodicals have been forwarded 
the Society containing similar expressions of opinions, 
Certainly if we have not accomplished more, we have aided in dis- 
playing the ineffective character of the claims of Volapiik to become 
a world-language; and that we have accomplished this is the true 
secret of the labored attack of Mr. Ellis and the London Philological 
Society. 
The justice of our strictures has been recognized both at home and 
abroad. Thus Leopold Einstein, of Nuremberg, in a work on ‘* The 
International World-Language Problem’’—himself for years a zealous 
advocate and teacher of Volapiik—says that of all the critics of that 
scheme, ‘‘ especially the American Philosophical Society” has pointed 
out where its short-comings are, and himself renounces it in favor of 
the Aryan principles (La Linguo Internacia, p. 1, Niirnberg, 1888). Dr. 
F. 8. Krauss, of Vienna, fully acknowledges that the defects we 
pointed out will prove fatal to Mr. Schleyer’s scheme, and adds, *‘ Bei 
uns ist fiir Volapiik kein Boden!” 
Herr Julius Lott, another Vienna linguist, for years a zealous apostle 
of Volapiik, has been so completely converted, chiefly by the Report 
of your Committee, that in his late work on the world-language prob- 
lem, he expresses himself thus: ‘‘I consider that any substantial bet- 
terment of Schleyer’s language, on the plan of the Volapiik, is wholly 
impossible, because the inventor, in its very construction, pursued a 
false route, or, plainly, he put the halter on the horse’s tail,” p. 7. He 
therefore passes over entirely to the Aryan system which we have so 
strongly urged, and is now publishing a work in numbers to explain 
the scheme—and a work, we are glad to add, of signal merit. 
Whether Mr. George J. Henderson, whose book, ‘‘ Lingua, an Inter- 
national Language,’’? which appeared in London last spring, was fa- 
miliar with our Report or not, he does not say; at any rate, he fully 
