- 
312 
try the name of ** He/peria,”” whereas tha 
natives called it, ** Italia” — 
nunc fama minores 
Ligliam dixifte, ducis de nomine, gentem. 
In the paflage 
————Strophades Graio ftant nomine die, 
fEn, li. 210, 
the cafe is altogether different; for the 
Romans retained the ancient Greek appel- 
Jation ; and the addition of the epithet 
Graic, if not abfclutely neceflary, was at 
Jeaft extremely proper on the part of the 
poet, for the fake of informing or remind- 
ing his readers from what language the 
name was derived, and thus, en paffant, 
dire@ting their attention to the hiftoric an- 
ecdote which had given rife to it. 
Begging Mr. Cogan’s pardon for the 
freedom with which I have ventured to 
animadvert on his criticifm, I conclude, 
' (Ooeber.1, 1800. Sir, Yours, &c. 
ji 'Gs 
: ' ee : 
- Fo the Editor of the Monthly Magazine. 
SIR, . 
HE jufily celebrated Dr. Herfchel. 
conceives the fun not to be a body 
of folid or grofsly liquid fire, as has been 
ufuaily imagined, but an opaque, habitable 
globe, fursounded by a deep, clear, harm- 
lefs, luminous atmofphere; of the nature 
perhaps of the Aurora Borealis. I have 
7 
however feen it advanced in fome aftrone- 
mical works, that the fun looks brighteft 
in the centre. If this be a fadé?, how can it 
be reconciled to Dr. Herfchel’s theory? For 
if the degree of brightnefs depend oa the 
quantity and depth of the fun’s atmofphere, 
the edge, and not the centre, of the difc 
would appear brighteft, for zhere the vilual 
ray pafics through the greateft quantity of 
atmofphere. I do not mean to difpute the 
exiftence of the folar atmofphere, called the 
zodaical light ; but if Dr. Herfchel’s hy- 
pothefis be true, the fun has two atmo- 
{pheres ! . 
With regard to the Juzar atmofphere— 
; Ought we not toa imit the phenomena of 
lunar volcanoes ameng the proofs of its 
exiffence? for what idea can we form of 
the combufiible fire which has no air to 
feed on? Iam, Sir, Your’s, &c. 
RC. 
! 
» —aseeg Qy ire 
To the Editor of the Monthly Magazine. 
SIR, 
AM confident that your correfponcent 
who figns himfelt G in your Magazine 
for Jaft month, 1s actuated by a benevelent 
principle. He merits inceed the thanks of 
his country, fox his thare in the attempt 
~ 
Atmofphere of the Sun—Allowance to the Por. (Nov. 1, 
to introduce a plan for the effeétual relief 
of the labouring clafies. But furely there 
is fomething objeétionable in the rule 
which he has exhibited for eftimating the 
wants of that defcription of perfons. Let 
us examine it according to his own expla- 
nation. He ftates (or rather his Berk- 
fhire table fiates) that the income of a 
man, who has a wife and one child aged 
two years, ought to be 13s. 1d. per week, 
when bread feils at 4d. perlb. He allows 
that thefe perfons fhall confume 31 |b. of 
bread each weck, viz. 
Man - 14 lb. 
Woman -— 12 
Child = 5 
31 
And Tthink the quantity is fairly rated; 
certainly it is not exceffive, if it be the 
only food. This 311d. of bread will coft 
ros. 4d. To procure other neceffaries 
there remains then 2s. 9d. per week, or 
qi. 38. per annum, of which he thus dif- 
pofes : ‘ 
Rent per annnm—s- = 2 Toss 
Cloaths . =) iy 2 10 
Soap, candles, firing, and all 
_ etcaeteras - - I 10 
Beer and animal food — - 0 13 

£93 
Now I am aftonifhed that any perfon, 
pofieffing the fmalleft portion of liberality, 
fhould affent to the propriety of fucha 
ftatement.. If no more than 2l. 10s. be 
expended by this family for cloathing, the 
variety of their garments muft be imall 
indeed. Is your correfpondent prepared 
to prove, that it will not colt a labouring 
man and bis wife one half of that furs for 
fhees, if they be allowed to wear thofe ar- 
ticles? But, fuppofing the expence of this 
necefjary to be only 20s. will the remain- 
ing fum enable them to provide them- 
felves with any, the cheapeft, covering that 
m-y in the leaft preteé&t them from the in- 
clemency of the weather, and ce rrefpond 
wit) the commonly received notions of 
decency? This queftion muft, I think, 
without a moment’s hefitation, be decided 
in the negative. Frugal induftry ts op- 
prefled and infulted when it is compelled 
to appear in rags. The perfons of whom 
we are {peaking ought always to be com+ 
fortably clad; and who that deferves to 
fill a higher tation in fociety would object 
to their having a fuit rather cleaner and 
beter for Suncays? Upon this principle 
then, L fhould think, that for Ba 
this 

