karah, 'to dig,' would produce the substantive michretheth, or perhaps the plural michrathoth. The formation of such a noun runs counter to the rules of the language. Neither in the singular nor in the plural could michreh (ie., a digging) receive a reduplication of 'th.' Unto Karchah (lěkarchah) would be a corrupt and inadmissible expression in any Semitic dialect.

Lines 25, to 26,.-Smend and Socin have the reading (possibly the true one) baăsurin miyisrael—which is intended to signify by Israelite prisoners.' The Hebrew prepositions ba and mi convey a very different sense. Ba could not here be rightly employed in the sense of 'by,' nor could the ablatival mi (out of' or 'from') be used as a substitute for the genitive case. This phrase has not been mended in the divergent readings of other editors of the inscription.

Line 27,7-Banithi beth bamoth ki huras hu. I built the house (or the temple) of Bamoth (altars), for it is (sic) destroyed.' The scribe was not aware that in speaking of a past event the Hebrew word hu cannot be used. Hu only represents the third person of the present tense.

Line 28,-Ki col dibon mishma'ath. For all Dibon is obedient' (sic). In looking for Biblical passages in which Moab is mentioned, the scribe struck upon one in Isaiah xi. 14. This verse ends with the words uběne 'ammon mishm'atom. 'And the children of Ammon shall be obedient to them' (i. e., to the Israelites). He did not know that without an appended pronoun the word 'mishma'ath' conveys no sense.

4-7

Line 29, +7. Asher jasafti al haarez. Which I added upon (sic) the land.' Here the scribe followed a statement of King Ashmunazar, who says in the epitaph, lines 19 and 20, that he had added certain conquests to his own territory.

The lines from 30 to the end of the inscription are more or less indistinct, and leave but little scope for further observations. In line 33 the pretended Mesha uses for the last time his favourite expression beyamaï, ‘in my days' (I was engaged in certain exploits), and so Mesha reiterates to the last that he was the witness of his own doings.

Our analysis is brought to a conclusion, and addresses itself to the impartial judgment of unprejudiced readers. The

adherents to historic truth will concur in the verdict, that the stone of Moab, notwithstanding its world-wide glorification, is nothing but a stone of stumbling,' and must be consigned to the limbo of marvellous impositions.

ALBERT LÖWY.

ART. II.-FRENCH CANADA.

1. The Old Régime in Canada. By FRANCIS PARKMAN. Boston: 1884.

2. Histoire du Canada depuis sa découverte. Par F. X. GARNEAU. 4 volumes. Montreal: 1882.

3. Le Canada sous l'Union, 1841-1867. Par LOUIS TURCOTTE, Quebec 1881.

4. Histoire des Canadiens-Français, 1608-1880, 8 volumes. Par BENJAMIN SULTE. Montreal: 1882-84.

5. Transactions of the Royal Society of Canada, 1882-1886. Section I-1. Littérature Française, Histoire, etc. Montreal. 6. Census of Canada, 1881.

7. Songs of Old Canada. Translated by W. M'LENNAN. Montreal: 1886.

8. Chansons Populaires du Canada, Recueillies et publiées, par ERNEST GAGNON. Quebec: 1880.

A

BOUT a century and a quarter has passed since the Treaty of Paris was signed, and France formally ceded Canada to Great Britain. Of all the vast domain she once possessed in North America, there remain to her only some rocky islets on the southern coast of Newfoundland, to which she has always clung as a nursery for her seamen, and as a headquarters for the fishing fleet that has resorted to the waters of the Gulf of St. Lawrence for several centuries. Of all the formidable fortresses which she erected to environ the old English colonies, in pursuance of her ambitious designs in the valleys of the St. Lawrence and Mississippi, only one is now standing to recall her former glory in America. Fort Niagara is no more than a memory, and were it not for a few mounds of earth and stone, we could

hardly tell the situation of Ticonderoga, where Montcalm once repulsed the British army under Abercromby. The site of Fort Duquesne, at the forks of the Ohio, is covered by the iron mills of the 'smoky city' of Pittsburg, so named in honour of the illustrious Chatham, whose genius gave the final blow to the magnificent scheme conceived by Richelieu of founding a French Transatlantic Empire. Louisbourg, on the eastern coast of Canada, and her nearest port to Europe, was at one time the strongest fortified town in America, with the exception of Quebec, but of its walls and fortifications hardly a stone. remains. Sheep pasture above the graves of the French garrison, and fishermen hang their nets on the grass covered mounds which indicate the position of the fortress to which the eminent Vauban devoted all his skill. The picturesque walls which crown the heights of Quebec are the only memorials of those piles of masonry which were so long a menace to the English possessions in many places throughout North America.

Though the fortifications of Louisbourg and Ticonderoga, of Niagara and other historic places which recall the days of the French régime in America, have been razed to the ground, and the French flag is never seen except on some holiday in company with other national colours, nevertheless on the continent where she once thought to reign supreme France has been able to leave a permanent impress. But this impress is not in the valley of the Mississippi. It is true that a number of French still live on the banks of that great river, that many a little village where a French patois is spoken, lies hidden in the sequestered bayous of the South, and that no part of the old city of New Orleans possesses so much interest for the European stranger as the French or Creole quarter, with its quaint balconied houses and luxuriant gardens; but despite all this, it is generally admitted that the time is not far distant when the French language will disappear from Louisiana, and few evidences will be found of the days of the French occupancy of that beautiful State of the Union. In the valley of the St. Lawrence, however, France has left behind her what seem likely to be more permanent memorials of her occupation. Wherever we go in the Dominion of Canada we see the names

of her kings and statesmen, of her priests and saints, of her soldiers and sailors, clinging to many a bay and river. The picturesque banks of the St. Lawrence, from the Atlantic to the great lakes of the West, are the home of a large population whose language and customs are so many memorials of the old régime.

Since the conquest of Canada in 1759-60, the seventy thousand people who then inhabited the country, have increased to a million and a quarter of souls, without taking into account the many thousands who have made their homes in the United States during the last thirty or forty years. This people still speak the French language, profess the Roman Catholic religion, and adhere with remarkable tenacity to the civil law and other institutions of the land of their origin. The history of the growth of this French Canadian population is exceedingly instructive. It proves very clearly the beneficial operation of the liberal system of government which Canada has now enjoyed for many years. About three centuries have elapsed since Cartier sailed up the St. Lawrence and gave to France the control of an immense territory on the northern half of America. During the French régime, which lasted until 1760, the Canadians were constantly at war with the Indians or the English Colonists. At no time did they possess even a semblance of the representative institutions always enjoyed by the colonies of Great Britain in America. The rule of the king was as arbitrary in Canada as in France. Even a town meeting for ordinary municipal purposes was forbidden as at entire variance with the principles of government laid down by the King and his ministers. Trade slumbered in the absence of capital and enterprise, and the only signs of comfort or wealth were found in the towns of Montreal and Quebec, or in a few manor houses of the Seigniors who inherited small fortunes from Old France, or managed their large possessions with some skill and energy. The educational facilities of the people were such as would be given by the institutions controlled by the priests and sisters of the associations, who have always devoted themselves with great assiduity and faithfulness to the mental and

spiritual improvement of the people; but despite the labours of these, the mass of the inhabitants were in a condition of deep ignorance. Agricultural development was necessarily very slow in a country so constantly harassed by war and destitute of facilities for selling the produce of the farm.

The French Canadian youth found in the adventurous furtrade an excitement which carried them away too often from the monotonous work of the farm. As we review the history of the French Canadian, we cannot fail to admire his love of adventure, his spirit of endurance, his courage under very discouraging circumstances, but all these qualities availed him. little as long as his country was badly governed by the king and his ministers, so often deeply absorbed in their ambitious schemes on the continent of Europe.

When the fleur de lis at last gave place to the Red Cross of England on the citadel of Quebec, the French Canadians for a while deeply mourned the humiliation of the country they had loved so well. Many of the wealthiest and best-born of the people sailed away to France and never returned to the colony for which they had struggled for so many years. Though they knew it not at the time, the fall of Quebec was in reality the happiest event that could possibly have happened for the French Canadians. The Articles of Capitulation, which were signed by the Marquis de Vaudreuil in September, 1760, were very generous to the conquered people. They were guaranteed the free exercise of their religion as well as undisturbed possession of their property. By the Quebec Act of 1774, when Parliament intervened for the first time in the affairs of Canada, and made important constitutional changes in the country, the French Canadians obtained most valuable concessions, which are practically the basis of their present influence and power as a distinct nationality in British North America. Roman Catholics were no longer obliged to take the Test Oath, but only the Oath of Allegiance. They were permitted to observe their religion with perfect freedom, and their clergy were to enjoy their accustomed dues and rights,' —that is, the tithe system which still exists-with respect to such persons as professed that creed. It was also enacted that