Oh! but male, proud male,

Dressed in a little brief authority, &c.

Measure for Measure.

An honest male's the noblest work of God.

Pope.

The lamps shone o'er fair females and brave males.

Then, if we come to the plain prose of common life, we should see accounts of the males who had robbed the mail being arrested; of a drunken male taken up for insulting a female; of an honest male returning some valuable article he had found; of a noble male who had given largely for the relief of the poor, distressed males thrown out of employment, &c.

Should this phraseology be adopted by journalists, and the term male for man be used, as female now is for woman, the ridiculous impropriety of the language would be seen at once. It would be a good subject for satire.

We have looked chiefly at the serious results of the misnomer. One is that it degrades the woman, and thus deprives her of the sympathy and respect of men.

Editors are not, however, the only writers in fault. Our swarming works of fiction are nearly all infected by this low taste of using female for woman or lady. The word occurs so often in some of these books, that it alone

would give vulgarity to the style. Many, perhaps most of these works, are written by women, whose lack of self-respect in this is the more remarkable, except we consider that the writers are not aware of the effect of this style.

There is still another source of this popular corruption of words which we are considering, more important and more to be lamented than any we have mentioned. We allude to the almost universal habit of the clergy of our country to speak of woman only as a female. Thus, the term, "female hearers," "female converts," "females of the Church," "female Bible Societies," "female associations," &c., are constantly enunciated from the pulpit; while rarely is the beautiful Bible name of woman pronounced by a preacher of the gospel, except it happen to occur in his text.

Might not a Brahmin, if he could hear from our preachers this oft-repeated word "female," applying equally to all of that sex which brings young, from the elephant to the emmet, draw the conclusion that Christian ministers held the Eastern doctrine of woman's inferiority, even that she had no soul?

Has an animal a soul? Is it not strange that the order of men whose province it is to refine, purify, and exalt language as well as morals should adopt the lowest term of designation for the largest portion of their friends and followers? Christ did not speak thús. The apostle did not so teach. The terms they used were WOMAN and

LADY. These are the Scriptural modes of defining man's companion, not for earth only, but for an immortality of glory.

Would it not be as easy to say, "Women of the Church," "Women of the congregation," "Women converts," "Ladies' Bible Societies," "Ladies' Associations," &c., as to use the present vulgar style? We would humbly present this question to the clergy of the United States. They might, by their influence and example, soon correct the present improper, inelegant, and unscriptural modes of expression.

Nor is this a matter of small importance. Language is a powerful instrument for good or evil. Words are things of mighty influence. The manner of speech indicates the habit of mind.

A

If we seek to improve our taste, we must be careful that our expressions are appropriate and refined. vulgar word will often destroy the good effect of a moral lecture whilst "words fitly spoken are like apples of gold in pictures of silver.”

NOTE.

Bonum nomen bonum omen. — Besides this proverb, that a good name is a good omen, we may say that the right name, when human beings are in question, is required both by reason and justice. Not only the name or synonym, but the best term that signifies the person, should be used. This correct mode of language is now especially required in designating places of education for men and for women, the profession, in which either sex may engage, and the offices which they may discharge. In these cases the masculine and the feminine should be so clearly distinguished by the name or title, as not to require an explanation. 'Young Ladies' College," lately established in one of our cities: this is a definite title. You feel it is designed to give the advantages of high culture to the daughters of America who are fitted to gain admission.

66

"A Female College" is announced as re-opening on the next page of the newspaper. "What Female?" is the involuntary comment. The number of female animals so vastly preponderates over the feminine human, that, when the sexual term female is used to signify a woman, it seems to refer to the lowest class of human beings; as if only such as these would go to a female institution.

Bear in mind that the term female does not certainly mean a woman, and never designates a lady; and that a "School or College for Females,"" literally offers-even when we confine its meaning with or to feminine humanity-a place for all the sex, from little girls to aged women, married and single, and widows, - all are included in this term Female. Yet these seminaries and colleges are only intended for girls and young ladies, from twelve years old to twenty-five.

Why not be as careful in America to designate our institutions rightly, with good names, as we find is the rule in Europe? On the Continent such an absurdity as using female to designate the human feminine would not be tolerated. Nor in England is it found connected with education. There is a "College for Ladies;" also seminaries for "Maidens," "Girls," and " Young Women; " but not one institution is degraded to the animal level of "Fe

male."

When this class of seminaries was first commenced in America, it was but natural that those who began the good work should seek to distinguish it from the colleges for boys, and thus, without weighing the matter, bestowed a title intended to make such distinction; failing to see that they were lowering with one hand her whom they were seeking to raise with the other; for must it not be lowering to woman to confound her with the brute creation ?

This bad custom is now changing. The new "colleges for young women" are rightly named; and several of the first class institutions, like Vassar College, have dropped the "Female," from their titles.

IV.—OUR NATIONAL THANKSGIVING DAY.

"Then he said unto them, Go your way, eat the fat, and drink the sweet, and send portions unto them for whom nothing is prepared; for this day is holy unto our Lord: neither be ye sorry; for the joy of the Lord is your strength."-NEHEMIAH, viii. 10.

UCH was the order given to the people of Israel.

SUCE

for the celebration of their national and religious festival, the "Feast of Weeks." We learn from this that a day of yearly rejoicing and giving of gifts was not only sanctioned but enjoined by divine authority on God's chosen people. Such yearly festival is not positively enjoined on Christians; but that it is both expedient and beneficial may safely be argued, when we find that the practice was approved by our God and Father in heaven.

Our day of thanksgiving represents, in many striking coincidences, the Jewish Feast of Weeks: only make our day national, and we should then represent the union of joy that was the grand proof of the divine blessing. Such social rejoicings tend greatly to expand the generous feelings of our nature, and strengthen the bond of union that binds us brothers and sisters in that true sympathy of American patriotism which makes the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans mingle in our mind as waters that wash the shores of kindred homes, and mark from east to west the boundaries of our dominion.