1808.] 
Lo the Editer of the Monthly Magazine. 
SIR, 
N your Magazine for August, 1806 
(vol. xxi. p. 6), there is an observa- 
tion from Mr. Wesley, ona passage taken 
from Ovid’s story of Phaéton. The tine is, 
s¢ Excipit Eridanus, fumantiaque abluit ora.” 
This appears to Mr. Wesley as an ab- 
surdity ; for a few lines before, the same 
poet says, 
“* Sors eadem Ismarios Hebrum cum Stry- 
mone siccat, 
Hesperiosque Ammnes, Rhenum, Rodanum- 
que, PADUMQUE.” 
Eridanus and Padus, (or the Po,) as 
Mr. W. says, are the same river certain- 
ly. Buc how can Ovid say, ‘* fuman- 
tiaque abluit ora,” when he previously 
tells us that the river isdry? This is 
Mr. Wesley’s question. With all de- 
ference to his investigation, and unwil- ~ 
ling to be thought dogmatical on the sub- 
ject, I merely desire to remind him that 
the present tense (such is siccat) never 
signifies a perfect action; and the words 
““ Sors eadem siccat Padum,” may be 
fairly translated, “ ‘The same calannty és 
drying the Po.” Ovid does not say the 
Po was completely dried up; if he had 
meant that, he would have used the per- 
fect tense, “ siccavit.” Giveme leave to 
quote Mr, Wesley another passage, 
which may appear as absurd to him as 
the one he has noticed. 
Euripides, in his admired Tragedy of 
the “ Phenisse,” has this line:— 
“¢ Nouv xenopeog, Aw mas, Acktou weeaweras,”? 
Nunc oraculum Apollinis, 0 filia, perficitur. 
This is the declaration of Gdipus to his. 
daughter Antigone. The Oracle he al- 
Judes to had foretold that he should die 
in Athens, whither he was about to be 
banished, when he spoke these words. 
But how absurd would it be to construe, 
“ meouweres, or “ perficitur,” is cont- 
leated ”” No! we should express it, 
“ Now the Oracle of Apollo, my daugh- 
ter, is in the act, or eve, of being com- 
pleated.” . That is, the actioui is imper- 
fect, asin Mr. Wesley’s quotation fom 
Ovid. 
Indeed, this use of the present wmper- 
fect tense, as it may be justly termed, has 
very peculiar beauty even in this-story of 
Phaéton, and the very line under our con- 
sideration; for the Poet thereby leads 
his reader by the hand, as it were, into 
the scene of action. ‘“ Behold (says he), 
this calamity 2s drying the Ismarian ri- 
vers, the Hebrus with the Strymon, the 
MontiLty Mae., No. 172. 
Defence of a Passage in Ovid. 
497 
Hesperian streams, the Rhine,the Rhone, 
and the Po; the sea is contracting itself, 
the fishes are seeking the lowest deep ; 
Jove is thundering; he has sent (iisit) 
his bolt at the charioteer!—The Erida- 
nus receives him, and washes his smoak- 
ing face.” 
Now, I submit it to Mr. Wesley, what 
inconsistency appears in giving this ac- 
ceptation to the dierent present tenses? 
Besides, it is to be observed that Ovid 
only requires as much water to be left in 
the Po or Eridanus, as'to wash poor Phacé- 
ton's scorched face. These considera- 
tions, f hope, will induce Mr. Wesley 
again to receive into favour a poet wham 
every lover of the classics admires. 
Your’s, &c. ; 
James WESTMAN. 
EO ee 
«lo the Editor of the Monthly Magazine. 
SIR, 
BEFORE I resume my critique on 
ED Dr. Kirwan’s logic, I shall give the 
reasons which have determined me to 
send you those observations, which some 
persons may think might, with more pro 
priety, have apreared in publications 
protessedly critical, They were these: 
I wished, for the sake of literature, that 
they might be considered as the tree and. 
liberal communications of an independent 
man, to a work which has been always 
considered by the public as unbiassed 
and impartial, and which, from the gene- 
ral interest it excites, would be the best 
vehicle for my opinions, 
Respecting the spirit with which these 
remarks have been written, or the mo- 
tives which have influenced me, your 
readers will form their own opinions. 
Jf at the close of the task 1 have un- 
dertaken, it shall appear that Dr. K. has 
recommended a method of forming judg- 
ments in courts of justice, which neither 
can, nor ought to be adopted—if ina 
work on logic, or the art of reasoning, [ 
shall have pointed out various errors in 
reasoning, which the author has tumself. 
committed—if I shail have shewn, by a 
few examples selected from avery few 
pages, that his style is loose and incor- 
rect, and his phraseology inelegant, I 
shall not, I trust, be accused of being 
actuated by malice or ili-nature. 
I shall now proceed to make a few 
more remarks on that part of his work, 
where he treats of the laws of chance, to 
the doctrine of probabilities. I beg it 
may be considered, that my reason for 
returning to this part of Dr. K’s work is 
becanse the author “hintself seeins ‘to tay 
3T aaa great 
April9, 1808. 
