or (for the present say) a fortnight, let another hatching of the fame number be made. These would be ready to take to the mulberry leaves after the former brood had begun to fpin. And if another hatching fucceeded these, and fo on through the whole feafon, it is plain, that thus the mulberry plantation (a fufficient fupply of lettuce being always kept up at the fame time) could rear in one feason, at leaft eight (it might be fixteen) broods; but we fhall call it ten, that is, one million of worms in a feason. Whereas, in the way they are at prefent managed in Italy, that plantation could have fubfifted no more than one hundred thoufand; because, in as far as we can learn, the natives of thefe countries never have been in the practice of trying to preferve the eggs beyond the time the natural heat of the climate produces them; fo that the whole brood comes into life at one time; and that number never can exceed that which their food is capable to fustain at once, which by the fuppofition was a hundred thoufand.

We are now alfo brought to fee of what importance it is to be able to preferve an inexhaustible store of eggs, without any expence, because these are always in readiness to be hatched in any quantities that the fupply of food may indicate to be neceffary and in cafe of the deftruction of any part of the brood by thunder, or any other accident, that lofs could be fpeedily retrieved, by hatching a new brood to fupply their place.

We may also obferve, that confidered as a manufacture, calculated to give employment to women and children, many would be the advantages from rearing them in fucceffive broods, as is here propofed, for Great Britain, in comparison of having the whole at once, as in other countries. In the first way, conftant employment would be given for the neceffary hands, for many months, without any extraordinary hurry at one time, the feveral broods coming in regular fucceffion; fo that the cones of one brood would juft be finifhed when another was ready to begin: whereas in the other cafe, all the work comes only at one time, which then occafions a great hurry, and idlenes afterwards muft enfue.

We have enlarged a little on this important article, with a view to bring the fubject as generally as poffible under the confideration of the Public, and to induce fome enterprifing individual to make trial of a plantation of mulberries on the plan here develloped. We fhall briefly mention a few other particulars, taken notice of by our amiable conductress in this pleafing excurfion.

Mifs R. found by accurate experiment, that a fingle cone of her filk, produced from a worm that had been fed only one week on mulberry leaves, yielded a thread of four hundred and four yards in length, which when dry weighed three grains. But,

upon

upon an average, the found that it required about three hundred and fixty cones to yield an ounce of filk; independent of the loofe filk round the cones, and other refufe filk, that must be carded, which is at leaft equal in weight to the pure filk; fo that, in all, 360 cones yield about two ounces of filk, fine and refuse together.

Mifs Rhodes takes notice of one peculiarity attending the mulberry leaves, that was new to us. It is, that no animal feems to prey upon that leaf except the filk-worm alone. Nor did the find any other vegetable common with us that was wholesome to the filk-worm excepting lettuce only. It is probable, however, fome other plants may be found which will answer the tame purpofes; and it is worth while to continue to try if fuch can be difcovered. She found that neither Elm, Afh, Vine, Hazel, Lime, Currant, Chefnut, Kidney-bean, Strawberry, nor Raspberry would do, nor common Cabbage. Lettuce is one of the lacieicent femiflofculous plants, and among thefe, trials fhould be made; especially when it is obferved that thefe plants in general, like the mulberry, are very little liable to be eat by any kind of caterpillars. Have Dandelion, Scw-thifle, and others of the fame nature, been tried? Though moft quadrupeds refufe thefe, we have obferved that rabbits prefer them to moft kinds of plants.

We congratulate Mifs Rhodes on the honour that he has acquired by these experiments; and hope fhe will have the happinefs of feeing many follow her example.

MECHANICS.

Under this head we find a defcription of a new chime-clock, invented by Mr. Robert Simpfon, of Ship Court, Westminster, on a principle that is fimple, and it appears to be eafily kept in order; but it could not be underflood without a drawing. The fame may be faid of a contrivance, by Mr. Bunce, for flopping the wheel crane, by means of a ball-of which no figure is given. Two contrivances alfo are mentioned for a temporary canvass covering to be thrown over hay-ricks while building; one by the Rev. Mr. Warren of Pomphlet, near Plymouth, and the other by Mr. Ailway; for an account of which we must refer the curious reader to the book itself, Mr. John Adams, teacher of mathematics, at Edmonton, Middlefex, also gives a defcription of an artificial horizon for determining the apparent altitudes of celeftial bodies with great exactness, of his own invention. The principle of this improvement confifts in adapting a glafs with parallel planes, inftead of a plane concave glafs, to a level. As this difcovery was communicated to Mr. Dollond long ago, who has fince made many of them, which are now fold under the name of the Dollondian horizon; and as thefe are now well known over moft parts of Europe, a more particular defcription of it is unnecefiary.

COLONIES

COLONIES and TRADE.

We are here told that the Mango-tree, and the true Cinnamon, are now flourishing in the Weft-India iflands, having both produced feeds, fo that there is no probability of their ever being loft there; as well as the Nankeen cotton; with which we fuppofe most of our Readers are in fome measure acquainted. The plants of the Cinnamon-tree, and the Nankeen cotton, were both captured laft war on board a French Eaft Indiaman, by Lord Rodney, and presented by him to the Governor of Jamaica, where we are told they now thrive abundantly. With regard to the Mango-tree, we meet with two accounts, which differ in some respects fo far, that we are at a lofs how to reconcile them. By the first account we are told, that "Walter Maynard, being a native of the island of Nevis, in the West Indies, and failing from Madras, touched at the island of Bourbon, in his way to Europe; and having tafted the Mangos of that ifland, and finding they were a moft delicious fruit, was induced to have fome Mango plants put into pots with earth, in order, if poffible, to plant them in the Weft Indies, and was happy enough to meet with a Weft-India packet at sea, which induced. him, at that time, to go in her to the Weft Indies, and was fo fortunate as to establish them in the island of St. Vincent; fince which they have fruited, and are now propagated in almost all the Weft-India islands." This happened in the year 1770. The original tree was deftroyed by the hurricane 1780; but we are told, “there are now many trees from the feeds of it that will bear this year" (1784).

yet

By another account, we are told that the Mango-tree was planted at a place called the Guinea, in Barbadoes, about the year 1742 or 1743, which did not produce any fruit till the year 1760 or 1761, eighteen or nineteen years after it was planted; and that none of the young trees raised from this feed have produced fruit: whereas the St. Vincent's tree feems to have produced fruit in five or fix years from the time of its being planted. Are thefe different kinds of Mangos? It does not appear that the natives knew any thing of the Mangos of Barbadoes about the year 1776; though the original tree had then carried fruit at leaft nine years.

The remainder of this volume confifts of lifts of premiums offered-Prefents given to the Society-Members, &c. &c. of which no abridgment can be given.

ART. IV. Dr. EDWARDS's Edition of XENOPHON's Memorabilia, concluded. See Review for October, p. 298.

SCH

CHOLARS only are interefted in the merits of the edition which is now before us; and by fcholars, doubtless, we fhall not be condemned for aiming at that exactness, which tends

to

to afcertain the sense of Xenophon, and to determine the ability of his editor.

On compofitions, indeed, in the learned languages, and on fubjects of verbal criticifm, we think it neither juit nor becoming to employ general obfervation. In defcending, however, to particulars, we cannot always feparate accuracy from minutenefs; and in examining the opinions of learned men, we fhail feldom venture to object, without attempting, at least, to confute, Having made this apology to our Readers, we proceed in the farther felection of notes from Dr. Edwards.

Page 53. 1. 10. ὅταν τί ποιήσωσι. ] 4 Fortaffe τί ὅταν ποιήσωσι. Habet enim Plato λéye, τí nj novτá σe. Euthyph. § 2. Ed. Forfter. Of this tranfpofition we approve, and it is fully fupported by the paffage from Plato.

Page 55. 1. 11. καὶ ἅμα πάντων ἐπιμελεῖθαι αυτές.] Sic et apud Scriptores Sacros pronomen fæpiffime abundat. Conf. Math. iv. 16. v. 40. viii. 1. 23. A&. Ap. vii. 35.' The inftances to which Dr. E. refers, are not fimilar to the paffage in Xenophon. Aulos, we know is, in appearance, often redundant in the facred writers; but it is always in the fame cafe with fome word in the preceding part of the fentence; which is commonly faid to be a dative abfolute, and is really governed by a prepofition underftood, Any one of the paffages, if produced, will fhew the dif-. ference: τοῖς καθημένοις ἐν χώρα και σκιᾷ θανάτε, φῶς ἀνέτειλεν autos. The redundant aurès in St. Matthew is generally in the dative: but in the Acts, x. 38. it is found in the accufative. Kypke has illuftrated this ufage, by one paffage from Herodotus, two from Arrian, and one from Jofephus. Vid. Obferv. Sac. vol. ii. p. 54. As to the paffage in Xenophon, we would expunge duras, which, indeed, is rejected by Zeunius and Erneftus, and is not to be found in feveral manufcripts.

Page 64. 1. 10. διατίθεθαι εἶναι. ] • Pro εἶναι legendum arbitror av ut vim potentialem inferat propofitioni.'. This alteration is unneceffary, becaufe var is put for

2

Page 72. 1. 9. is Tas siguras.] Verte, partes domorum prohibitas. This interpretation he illuftrates from the preface of Cornelius Nepos" Neque fedet mater familias nifi in interiore parte ædium, quae yuvaixoviris appellatur." We take the liberty, of referring our Readers to the Crepundia Jani Gebhardi, lib. iii.

cap. 15..

Page 72. 1. 10. &, TE O VOμOS άTTER, &c.] Cautum eft in Jure Attice, ἐὰν τὶς μοιχὸν λάβη, ὅτι ἂν βέληται, χρήθαι. He refers to Taylor upon Lyfias, in whofe note we find, that the laws of the Vifigoths were fimilar in feverity, and almoft in their terms, to the laws of the Athenians. By the Lex Julia, we add, among the Romans, the husband might deftroy an adulterer vilioris conditionis, fi triduana denuntiatio interceffiffet: but the

father

father might put to death his daughter, and an adulterer cujufcunque conditionis, if they were detected in his own houfe, or in that of his fon-in-law. Vide Heineccii Elem. Jur. Civ. part 7. par. 184.

Page 77. 1. 1. devov máλaisua.] he properly tranflates foti artificium,' and refers to the oration of fchines c. Ctefiphon-as Dr. E. in this, and fome other inftances, does not point out the page, we fhall fupply the omiffion-See page 645, edit Cant. Demofth. vol. 2. by Taylor. Taylor adopts the explication from Victorius, and refers to his Varia Lectiones.

P. 81. 1. 8. μpeo.] forfan μvwed. Vid. Odyf. A. v. 287, et Toup. Emend. in Suid. part ii. p. 193.' Though we find not any notice of a typographical error, we fuppofe Dr. E. to have written to and fo it is fpelled by Toup, and by Zeunius, who, as well as Dr. E. refers to Toup, and admits the emendation.

6

P. 82. 1. 1. ἐξελθόντα εἰς ἡσυχίαν] he properly tranfates nouxía, locus defertus,' and refers us to his friend Taylor's Notes on the speech of Echines con. Timarch. p. 51. which we correct for 41.

Ρ. 84. 1. 5. δι δὲ μισόλες με, υποκοριζόμενοι, &c.] This is one of the most difficult and moft difputed paffages in Xenophon. Dr. E. is content with adopting the conjecture of Erneftus, who would infert un. Dr. Owen abides by Suidas, and interprets Szоnopi Copεvoi, obtrectantes, invidiofo nomine appellantes.-Our own opinion has long ago been formed, and in order to form it properly, we had read with care the very full and learned notes on the word in Maris, Thomas Magifter, and Timæus in Lex. Platonic. To thefe writers, whom Dr. Edwards does not appear to have confulted, and to the note in Zeunius's edition of the Memorabilia, we refer the curious reader. Of Toup's emendation we do not approve, becaufe we have doubts as to the admiffibility of un, with the power which is here affigned to it. We agree with Erneftus, in rejecting the opinion of Ruhnkenius, who would carry back υποκοριζόμενοι τo φίλοι; though it is not impoffible, we confefs, that Xenophon fhould, from inadvertency, have put this word into the mouth of Kania. We do not agree with him in oppofing Valckenaer, who would reject it from the text. But muft this be done in oppofition to the united authorities of Suidas, and the Etymol. Mag. where the word is interpreted diacups, and where this paffage is exprefsly referred to? Had other paffages been produced, or hinted at, we should have acquiefced; but we believe the text to have been early corrupted, and that Suidas, to folve the difficulty, had recourfe to this violent mode of interpretation *. Erneftus tells

* We are aware that fome words have different fignifications in different writers or different ages. Thus Banxes is ftrong in Pindar, and weak in Homer. Vid. Etymol. mag. & Carm. Pindar. Fragm. by Schneider, page 22.

us,