Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2008 with funding from Microsoft Corporation http://www.archive.org/details/englishgrammarofOOcobbrich A GRAMMAR OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE, THE ENGLISH GRAMMAR OF WILLIAM COBBETT. CAREFULLY REVISED AND ANNOTATED BY ALFRED AYRES, AUTHOR OF "THE ORTHOEPIST," " THE VERBALIST," ETC. The only amusing grammar in the world. — Henry Lvtton Bulwer. Interesting as a story-book. — Hazlitt. I know it well, and have read it with great admiration. — Richard Grant White. NEW YORK AND LONDON D. APPLETON AND COMPANY 1919 Copyright, 1883, by D. APPLETON AND COMPANY Copyright, 1911, by FRANK E. TREMAIN Printed in the United States of America Q.G.- EDITOR'S NOTE. Cobbett's Grammar is probably the most read- able grammar ever written. For the purposes of self- education it is unrivaled. Persons that studied gram- mar when at school and failed to comprehend its principles — and there are many such — as well as those that never have studied grammar at all, will find the book specially suited to their needs. Any one of average intelligence that will give it a careful reading will be rewarded with at least a tolerable knowledge of the subject, as nothing could be more simple or more lucid than its expositions. The first edition of the book was published in Lon- don, in December, 1818 — sixty-four years ago. In preparing this edition, I have called attention — 1. To the points in which Cobbett's teachings differ from what is now considered the best usage ; 2. To the few errors of diction found in its pages ; and, 3. To a JT7.orettiest : but who could tolerate delicater and delicatestl viii.] OF VERBS. $$ LETTER VIII. etymology of verbs. My dear James . 82. The first thing you have to do in beginning your study, as to this important Part of Speech, is to read again very slowly and carefully paragraphs 23, 24, 25, and 26, in Letter III. Having, by well attending to what is said in those paragraphs, learned to distinguish Verbs from the words belonging to other Parts of Speech, you will now enter, with a clear head, on an inquiry into the variations to which the words of this Part of Speech are liable. 83. Sorts of Verbs. Verbs are considered as active, passive, or neuter. A Verb is called active when it ex- presses an action which [that] is produced by the nomina- tive of the sentence ; as, " Pitt restrained the Bank." It is passive when it expresses an action which [that] is received, or endured, by the person or thing which [that] is the nom- inative of the sentence ; as, " the Bank is restrained" It is neuter when it expresses simply the state of being, or existence, ot a person or thing ; as, " Dick lies in bed ; " or, when it expresses an action confined within the actor. [The most modern classification of verbs is into active- transitive, active-intransitive, and neuter^\ 84. It is of great consequence that you clearly under* stand these distinctions, because I shall, by-and-by, use these terms very frequently. And in order to give you a [omit] proof of the necessity of attending to these distinc- tions, I will here give you a specimen of the errors which [that] are sometimes committed by those who [that] do not understand Grammar. This last-mentioned Verb, to lie, becomes, in the past time, lay. Thus : " Dick lies on a 54 ETYMOLOGY [letter bed now, but some time ago, he lay on the floor." This Verb is often confounded with the Verb to lay, which is an active Verb, and which becomes, in its past time, laid. Thus : " I lay my hat on the table to-day, but, yesterday, I laid it on the shelf." Let us take another instance, in order the more clearly to explain this matter. A Verb may some- times be what we call a neuter Verb, though it expresses an action ; but this happens when the action is confined within the actor ; that is to say, when there is no object to which the action passes. Strike is clearly an active Verb, because something is stricken [struck] ; a stroke is given to, or put upon, something. But in the case of to rise, though there is an action, it passes on to no object ; as, I rise early. Here is no object to which the action passes. But to raise is an active Verb, because the action passes on to an ob- ject ; as, I raise a stick, I raise my hand, I raise my head, and also, I raise myself ; because, though in this last in- stance the action is confined to me, it is understood that my mind gives the motion to my body. These two Verbs are, in speaking and writing, incessantly [continually] confound- ed ; though one is a neuter and the other an active Verb, though one is regular and the other irregular, or [and] though they are not, in any person, time, or mode, com- posed of the same letters. This confusion could never take place if attention were paid to the principle above laid down. 85. Having thus given you the means of distinguishing the sorts of Verbs, I now proceed to matters which [that] are common to all the sorts. There are four things to be considered in a verb : the person, the number, the time, and the mode. 86. The Person. — Read again Letter VI, on the Ety« mology of Pronouns. You will there clearly see the use of viii.] OF VERBS. 55 this distinction about Persons ; and, as I have told you, you will find that it is a matter of great consequence ; because it will now, at once, be evident to you that, unless the dis- tinction of person be attended to, almost every sentence must be erroneous. 87. The Verb must agree in person with the Noun or the Pronoun which [that] is the nominative of the sentence. Look back at Letter V, and at paragraphs 44, 45, 46, and 47, in order to refresh your memory as to the nominative and other cases. The Verb, then, must agree with the nominative : as, "I write ; he writes.'" To say, " I writes ; he write," would be both erroneous. 88. Look back at the explanation about the persons in the Etymology of Pronouns in Letter VI. There are three persons ; but our Verbs have no variation in their spelling, except for the third person singular. For we say, " I write, you write, we write, they write ;" and only "he, she, or it writes." This, then, is a very plain matter. 89. Number is a matter equally plain, seeing that our Verbs do not, except in one or two instances, vary their endings, to express number. But when several nouns or pronouns come together, care must be taken to make the Verb agree with them : as, " Knight and Johnstone resist the tyrants." Not resists. But this will be more fully dwelt on in the Syntax. 90. The Time. — The Verb has variations to express the time of an action : as, " Sidmouth writes a Circular Letter ; Sidmouth wrote a Circular Letter ; Sidmouth will write a Circular Letter." Again : " The Queen defies the tyrants ; the Queen defied the tyrants ; the Queen will defy the ty- rants." The Times of a Verb are, therefore, called the present, the past, and the future. 91. The Modes.— The Modes [or Moods] of Verbs arc 56 ETYMOLOGY [letter the different manners of expressing an action or a state of being, which manners are sometimes positive, sometimes conditional, and sometimes indeterminate ; and there are changes or variations in the spelling or writing of the Verb, or of the little words used with the Verb, in order to express this difference in manner and sense. I will give you an instance : " He walks fast." " If he walk fast, he will fatigue himself." In most other languages the Verb changes its form very often and very much, to make it ex- press the different modes. In ours it does not ; because we have little words called signs, which we use with the Verbs instead of varying the form of the Verbs themselves. To make the matter clear, I will give you an example of the English compared with the French language in this re- spect. E. F. I march Je marche. I marched Je marchais. I might march Je marchasse. I should march Je marcherais. There are other variations in the French Verb ; but we ef- fect the purposes of these variations by the use of the signs, shall, may, might, could, would, and others. 92. The Modes are four in number : the infinitive, the indicative, the subjunctive, and the imperative. Besides these there are the two participles, of which I shall speak presently. 93. The Infinitive Mode is the Verb in its primitive state : as, to march. And this is called the Infinitive be. cause it is without bounds or limit. It merely expresses the action of marching, without any constraint as to person or number or time. The little word to makes, in fact, a pari of the Verb. This word to is, of itself, a Apposition ; but, V*X\ OF VERBS. 57 ** prefixed to Verbs, it is merely a sign of the Infinitive M' de. In other languages there is no such sign. In the Fp nch, for instance, a// t rmeans to go ; ecrire means to write. Thus, then, you will bear in mind that in English, the to makes a part of the Verb itself, when in the Infinitive Alode. 94. The Indicative Mode is that in which we express m action, or state of being, positively : that is to say, with- out any condition, or any dependent circumstance. It merely indicates the action or state of being, without being subjoined to anything which [that] renders the action or state of being dependent on any other action or state of being. Thus : " He writes ." This is the Indicative. 95. But the Subjunctive Mode comes into use when I say, " If he write, the guilty tyrants will be ready with their dungeons and axes." In this case there is something sub' joined ; and therefore this is called the Subjunctive Mode. Observe, however, that in our language there is no very great use in this distinction of modes ; because, for the most part, our little signs do the business, and they never vary in the letters of which they are composed. The distinction is useful only as regards the employment of Verbs without the signs, and where the signs are left to be understood ; as in the above case, " If he should write, the guilty tyrants would be ready." And observe, further, that when the signs are used, or understood, the Verb retains its original or primi- tive form throughout all the persons, numbers, and times. 96. The Imperative Mode is mentioned here merely for form's sake. It is that state of the Verb which [that] com* mands, orders, bids, calls to, or invokes : as, come hither ; be good ; march away ; pay me. In other languages there are changes in the spelling of the Verbs to answer to this mode ; but in ours there are none of these ; and therefore the mat- ter is hardly worth notice, except as a mere matter of form, 58 ETYMOLOGY [letter 97. The Participles, however, are different in point of importance. They are of two sorts, the active and the passive. The former ends always in ing, and the latter is generally the same as the past time of the Verb out of which it grows. Thus : working is an active participle, and worked a passive participle. They are called participles because they partake of the qualities of other Parts of Speech as well as of Verbs. For instance : " I am working ; work- ing is laudable ; a working man is more worthy of honor than a titled plunderer who [that] lives in idleness." In the first instance working is a Verb, in the second a Noun, in the third an Adjective. So in the case of the passive participle : I worked yesterday ; that is worked mortar. The first is a Verb, the last an Adjective. 98. Thus have I gone through all the circumstances of change to which Verbs are liable. I will now give you the complete conjugation of a Verb. To conjugate, in its usual acceptation, means to join together ; and, as used by Gram- marians, it means to place under one view all the variations in the form of a Verb ; beginning with the Infinitive Mode and ending with a Participle. I will now lay before you, then, the conjugation of the Verb to 7uork, exhibiting that Verb in all its persons, numbers, times, and modes. INFINITIVE MODE. To Work. INDICATIVE MODE. Singular. Plural. f 1st Person. I work, We work. 1 2d Person. Thou workest, You work. ' 1 3 d Person. \ He ' she > or h I They work. / works. VIII.] OF VERBS. 59 Past Time. Future Time. — I worked, — Thou workedst, — He worked, — I shall or will work, — Thou shalt or wilt work, — He shall or will work, We worked. You worked. They worked. We shall or will work. You shall or will work. | They shall or will C work. SUBJUNCTIVE MODE. \i I work, or may, might, could, would, or should work. If thou work, or may work. If he, she, or it work, or may - work. If we work, or may work. If you work, or may work. If they work, or may work. IMPERATIVE MODE. Let me work, Let us work. Work thou, Work you. Let him work, Let them work. PARTICIPLES. A dive. — Working. Passive. — Worked. 99. Some explanatory remarks are necessary here. The third person singular of the Indicative present used to be written with eth ; as, worketh ; but this spelling has long been disused. The past time may be formed by [with] did : as, did work, instead of worked ; and do work may be used in the present time ; but, in fact, these little words are a great deal more than mere marks of the times. They are 60 ETYMOLOGY [letter used in one time to express the negative of another, or to affirm with more than ordinary emphasis. 100. Grammarians generally make a present and a past time under the Subjunctive Mode ; but the truth is that any of the signs may apply to the present, past, or future of that Mode. These are little words of vast import and of constant use ; and though that use is so very difficult to be learned by foreigners, we ourselves never make mistakes with regard to it. The Verb to be alone changes its form in order to make a past time in the Subjunctive Mode. 101. As to the Imperative Mode, where the Pronouns thou and you are put after the Verb, we seldom put the thou and the you. We make use of the Verb only, which is quite sufficient. 102. Some Grammarians put in their conjugations what they call the compound times : as, I have worked, I had worked, I shall have worked, I may have worked, and so on. But this can only serve [serve only] to fill up a book ; for all these consist merely in the introduction of the use of the Verb to have in its various parts. In the above conjuga- tion all the changes or variations of the Verb are exhibited ; and it is those changes and variations which [that], under the present head, form the important object of our inquiry. 103. The Verbs to have and to be are of great use in our language. They are called auxiliary verbs. To let and to do are also called auxiliaries, but they are of far less im- portance than to have and to be. Before, however, I say more on the subject of these auxiliaries, I must speak of all the Verbs as regular or irregular, just observing here that the word auxiliary means helper, or helping. 104. Verbs are called regular when they have their changes or variations according to a certain rule or man- ner. Thus : " I walk, I walked ; I work, I worked? But vin.] OF VERBS. 61 I can not say, " I writed." I must say, " I wrote." Now observe that we call regular Verbs all those which [that] end their past time of the Indicative and their passive par- ticiple in ed ; and if you now look back at the conjugation of the Verb to work, you will find that it is a regular Verb. Indeed, this is the case with almost all Verbs. But, there are some little irregularities even here, and they must be very well attended to, because a want of attention to them leads to very great errors even as to spelling. 105. These little irregularities I shall notice under five separate heads ; and if you should forget at any time what has been said on the subject, a reference to these will in a moment set you right : I. The Verb to work is perfectly regular, for it has ed added to it in order to form the past time, and also in order to form the passive participle. It is the same with the Verbs to walk, to turn, to abandon, and many others. But if the Infinitive, that is to say, the primitive or original word, end in e, then d only is added in the past time and participle, and st instead of est after thou : as in the case of to move, which becomes moved and movest. You have seen, also, in the case of the Verb to work, that we add only an s to form the third person singular of the present of the Indicative : he works. But if the Infinitive end in h, s, x, or z, then es must be added ; as, to wish, he wishes ; to toss, he tosses ; to box, he boxes ; to buzz, he buzzes. II. When the Infinitive ends in^, and when that y has a consonant immediately before it, the y is changed into ie, to form the third person singular of the present of the In- dicative ; as, to reply, he replies. But (and I beg you to mark it well) if the ending y have a vowel immediately be- fore it, the Verb follows the general rule in the formation of the third person singular of the present of the Indicative; 62 E T YMOL OGY [letter as, to delay, he delays, and not he delaies. It is the same in the second person singular ; as, to reply, thou rep lies t ; to delay, thou delayest. III. When the Infinitive ends in y with a consonant im- mediately before it, the past time of the Indicative and the passive participle are formed by using an i instead of the y ; as, to reply, he replied ; to deny, it was denied. But if the y be preceded by a vowel, ed is added to the y in the usual manner : as, to delay, he delayed. IV. The active participle, which always ends in ing, is in general formed by simply adding the ing to the Infini- tive ; as, to work, working ; to talk, talking. But if the In- finitive end in a single e, the e is dropped : as, to move, mov- ing. The Verb to be is an exception to this ; but then that is an irregular Verb. It is when the Infinitive ends in a single e, mind ; for if the e be double, the general rule is followed ; as, to free, freeing. When the Infinitive ends in ie, those letters are changed into y in the forming of the active participle ; as, to lie, lying. V. When the Infinitive ends in a single consonant, which [that] has a single vowel immediately before it, the final con- sonant is doubled, not only in forming the active participle, but also in forming the past time of the Indicative, and the passive participle ; as, to rap, rapping ; I rapped, it was rapped. But, observe well, this rule holds good only as to words of one syllable ; for if the Infinitive of the Verb have more than one syllable, the consonant is not doubled unless the accent be on the last syllable ; and the accent means the main force or weight, or sound of the voice in pronouncing the word. For instance, in the word to open, the accent is on the first syllable ; and therefore we write, opening, opened. But when we come to the Verb to refer, where we find the accent on the last syllable, we write, referring, referred. VIII.] OF VERBS. 63 106. These irregularities, though very necessary to be attended to, do not prevent us from considering the Verbs which [that] are subject to them as regular Verbs. The mark of a regular Verb is that its past time and passive par- ticiple end in ed : every Verb which [that] does not answer to this mark is irregular. 107. There are many of these irregular Verbs, of which I shall here insert a complete list. All the irregularities (except the little irregularities just mentioned) which [that] it is possible to find in an English Verb (the auxiliary Verbs excepted) are in the past time and the passive participle only. Therefore, it will be sufficient to give a list, show- ing, in those two instances, what are the irregularities of each Verb ; and, in order to render this list convenient, and to shorten the work of referring to it, I shall make it alpha- betical. With the past time of the several Verbs I shall use the first person singular of the pronoun, in order to make my examples as clear as possible. List of Irregular Verbs. INFINITIVE. PAST TIME. PARTICIPLES. to abide, I abode, abode. to be, I was, been. to bear, I bore, borne. to beat, I beat, beaten. to become, I became, become. to befall, it befell, befell. to beget, I begot, begotten. to begin, I began, begun. to behold, I beheld, beheld. to bend, I bended [or bent], bent. to beseech, I besought, besought. to bid, I bade, bidden. 54 ETYMOLOGY [letter INFINITIVE. PAST TIME. PARTICIPLES. to bind, I bound, bound. to bite, I bit, bitten. to bleed, I bled, bled. to break, I broke, broken. to breed, I bred, bred. to bring, I brought, brought. to buy, I bought, bought. to catch, I caught, caught. to choose, I chose, chosen. to cleave, I clove, cloven. to come, I came, come. to cost, I cost, cost. to cut, I cut, cut. to die, I died, died. to do, I did, done. to drink, I drank, drunk. to drive, I drove, driven. to eat, I ate, eaten. to fall, I fell, fallen. to feed, I fed, fed. to feel, I felt, felt. to fight, I fought, fought. to find, I found, found. to flee, I fled, fled. to fling, I flung, flung. to fly, I flew, flown. to forbear, I forbore, forborne. to forbid, I forbade, forbidden. to forget, I forgot, forgotten. to forgive, I forgave, forgiven. to forsake, I forsook, forsake*. to get, I got, gotten [or got]. VIII.] OF VERBS. 65 INFINITIVE. to give, to go, to grind, to have, to hear, to hide, to hit, to hold, to hurt, to keep, to know, to lay, to lead, to leave, to lend, to let, to lie, to lose, to make, to meet, to overcome, to overdo, to pass, to pay, to put, to read, to rend, to ride, to ring, to rise, to run, to say, 5 I gave, I went, I ground, I had, I heard, I hid, I hit, I held, I hurt, I kept, I knew, I laid, lied, I left, I lent, I let, Hay, I lost, I made, I met, I overcame, I overdid, I passed, I paid, I put, I read, I rent, I rode, I rang, I rose, I ran, I said, PARTICIPLES. given. gone. ground. had. heard. hidden. hit. held. hurt. kept. known. laid. led. left. lent. let. lain. lost. made. met. overcome. overdone. past [or passed], paid. put. read. rent. ridden. rung. risen. run. said. 66 ETYMOLOGY [letter INFINITIVE. to see, to seek, to sell, to send, to set, to shake, to shear, to shed, to show, to shrink, to shoe, to shoot, to shut, to sing, to sink, to sit, to slay, to sleep, to slide, to slit, to smite, to speak, to speed, to spend, to spin, to spit, to spread, to stand, to steal, to stick, to stink, to strike, PAST TIME. PARTICIPLES, I saw, seen. I sought, sought. I sold, sold. I sent, sent. I set, set. I shook, shaken. I sheared, shorn [01 sheared]. I shed, shed. I showed, shown. I shrank, shrunk. I shod, shod. I shot, shotten [shot]. I shut, shut. I sang, sung. I sank, sunk. I sat, sitten [sat]. I slew, slain. I slept, slept. I slid, slidden [slid]. I slit, slit. I smote, smitten. I spoke, spoken. I sped, sped. I spent, spent. I span [or spun], spun. I spat [or spit], spitten [spit]. I spread, spread. I stood, stood. I stole, stolen. I stuck, stuck. I stunk, stunk. I struck, stricken for struckl VIII.] OF VERBS. 6: INFINITIVE. PAST TIME. PARTICIPLES. to swear, I swore, sworn. to take, I took, taken. to teach, I taught, taught. to tear, I tore, torn. to tell, I told, told. to think, I thought, thought. to tread, I trod, trodden [or trod}. to understand, I understood, understood. to wear, I wore, worn. to win, I won, won. to wind, I wound, wound. to write, I wrote, written. 108. It is usual with Grammarians to insert several Verbs in their List of Irregulars which [that] I have not inserted here. But I have, in the above list, placed every Verb in our language which [that] is really irregular. However, I will here subjoin a list of those Verbs which [that] are, by some Grammarians, reckoned irregular ; and then I will show you, not only that they are not irregular, strictly speaking, but that you ought by all means to use them in a regular form. List of Verbs which [that], by some Persons, are erroneously deemed irregulars. INFINITIVE. to awake, to bereave, to blow, to build, to burn, to burst, to cast, PAST TIME. PARTICIPLES. I awoke [or awaked], awaked [or awoke]. I bereft [or bereaved], bereft [or bereaved]. I blew, I built [or builded], I burnt [or burned], I burst, I cast, blown. built [or builded]. burnt [or burned], burst. cast. 68 ETYMO'JOGY [letter INFINITIVE. PAST TIME. PARTICIPLES. to chide, I chid, chidden. to cling, I clung, clung. to creep, I crept, crept. to crow, I crew, crowed. to curse, I curst [or cursed], curst [or cursed]. to dare. I dared, dared. to deal, I dealt, dealt. to dig, I dug [or digged], dug [or digged]. to dip, I dipt [or dipped], dipt [or dipped]. to draw, I drew, drawn. to dream, I dreamt [or dreamed] , dreamt [or dreamed], to dwell, I dwelt, dwelt. to freeze, I froze, frozen. to geld, I gelt, gelt. to gild, I gilt [or gilded], gilt [or gilded]. to gird, I girt, girt. to grow, I grew, grown. to hang, I hung, hung. to help, I helpt [or helped], helpt [or helped]. to hew, I hewed, hewn. to kneel, I knelt, knelt. to knit, I knit [or knitted], knit [or knitted]. to lade, I laded, laden [or laded]. to leap, I leaped, leapt [or leaped]. to light, I lit [or lighted], light [?], [lighted]. to load, I loaded, loaden or laden [befc ter, loaded]. to mean, I meant, meant. to mow, I mowed, mown. to overflow, I overflowed, overflown [?]. to saw, I sawed, sawn [or sawed]. to shave, I shaved, shaven [or shaved], VIII.] OF VERBS. 69 INFINITIVE. PAST TIME. to shine, I shone, to shred, I shred, to sling, I slung, to slink, I slunk, to slip, I slipt [or slipped], to smell, I smelt [or smelled], to snow, it snowed, to sow, I sowed, to spell, I spelt [or spelled], to spill, I spilt [or spilled], to split, I split, to spring, I sprang, to stamp, I stampt [or stamped], to sting, I stung or stang, to strew, I strewed, to stride, I strode, to string, I strung, to strip, I stript [or stripped], to strive, I strove, to strow, I strowed, to sweep, I swept, to swell, I swelled, to swim, I swam, to swing, I swung or swang, to thrive, I throve, to throw, I threw, to thrust, I thrust, to wax, I waxed, to weave, I wove, to weep, I wept, to whip, I whipt [orwhipped], PARTICIPLES. shone. shred. slung. slunk. slipt [or slipped]. smelt [or smelled], snown [snowed]. sown [or sowed]. spelt [or spelled]. spilt [or spilled]. split. sprung. stampt [or stamped], stung. strewn. stridden. strung. stript [or stripped]. striven. strown. swept. swollen [or swelled], swum. swung. thriven. thrown. thrust. waxen [waxed], woven. wept. whipt [or whipped]. 70 ETYMOLOGY [letter 109. The greater part of these verbs have become ir< regular by the bad practice of abbreviating or shortening in writing. We are always given to cut our words short ; and, with very few exceptions, you find people writing lov'd, movd, walk'd ; instead of loved, moved, walked. They wish to make the pen correspond with the tongue ; but they ought not then to write the word the at full length, nor the word of, nor any other little word ; for scarcely ever are these words fully sounded in speaking. From lov'd, movd, walk'd, it is very easy to slide into lovt, movt, walkt. And this has been the case with regard to curst, dealt, dwelt, leapt, helpt, and many others in the last inserted list. It is just as proper to say jumpt, as it is to say leapt ; and just as proper to say walkt as either ; and thus we might go on, till the orthography of the whole language were changed. When the love of contraction came to operate on such Verbs as to burst and to light, it found such a clump of consonants already at the end of the words that it could add none. It could not enable the organs even of English speech to pronounce burst'd, light'd. It therefore made really short work of it, and, dropping the last syllable altogether, wrote burst and light in the past time and passive participle. But is it not more harmonious, as well as more correct, to say, "The bubble is almost bursted," than it is to say, "The bubble is almost burst?" And as to hang, is it not better to say hanged than hung? " I will be hanged if I do," is a very common phrase ; and is it not better than it would be to say, " I will be hung if I do " ? Many of these Verbs, by being very difficult to contract, have, as in the case of to hang, to swing, and the like, reduced the shorteners to the necessity of changing almost all the letters of the words : as, to dare, durst : but, is it not better to say I dared than I durst? This LaMt of contracting or shortening is a verv vni.] OF VERBS. 71 mischievous habit. It leads to the destruction of all pro* priety in the use of letters ; and instead of a saving of time, it produces, by the puzzling that it gives rise to, a great loss of time. Hoping that what I have here said will be a warn- ing to you against the cutting of words short, I have only to add, on the subject of irregular verbs, that those in the last list are to be used in the regular form, and that the only real irregulars are those of the first list. Nay, I have, after all, left some Verbs in the first list which [that] may be used in the regular form : as, past, which may be, in the partici- ple, passed, and with full as much propriety. 110. AUXILIARY VERBS.— In the present Letter, paragraph 103, I open this part of my subject. The word let is the past time and the passive participle of the Verb to let. It is used as an auxiliary, however, in the present time ; and only in the imperative mode : as, Let me go ; let us go ; let him go. That is to say, Leave me to go, leave us to go r leave him to go. Perhaps the meaning, fully expressed, would be, Act in such a way that I may be left to go, or suffered to go. 111. The auxiliary do, which, for the past time, becomes did, is part of the Verb to do, which in its past time is did, and in its passive participle done. In this sense, it is not an auxiliary but a principal Verb, and its meaning is equal to that of to execute, or to perform : as, I do my work, I execute my work, I perform my work. As an auxiliary or helper, it seems to denote the time of the principal Verb : as, I do walk ; I did walk ; and, we may say, I do execute my work % or, I do do my work. In this last example, the first do is an auxiliary, and the last do a principal Verb. However, as I said before, do and did, used as auxiliaries, do a great deal more than merely express time. In fact, they are not often used for that purpose only. They are used for the purpose 72 ETYMOLOGY [letter of affirming or denying in a manner peculiarly strong : as, I do work, means, that I work, notwithstanding all that may be, or may have been said, or thought, to the contrary ; or it means, that I work now, and have not done it at some other stated or supposed time. It is the same, with the ex. ception of time, as to the use of did. These are among those little words of vast import, the proper force and use of which foreigners scarcely ever learn, and which we learn from our very infancy. 112. The Verbs to have and to be are the two great auxiliaries. These words demand an extraordinary portion of your attention. They are /; incipal Verbs as well as aux* iliaries. The Verb to have, as a principal Verb, signifies possession : as, / have a pen, that is to say, I possess a pen. Then, this is a word of very great use indeed in its capacity of principal Verb ; for we say, / have a headache, I have a hatred of such a thing, / have a mind to go ; and hundreds of similar phrases. I possess a headache has the same mean- ing ; but the other is more agreeable to the natural turn of our language. As auxiliary this Verb is absolutely neces- sary in forming what are called the compound times of other Verbs, and those times are called compound because they ace formed of two or more Verbs. Suppose the subject to be of my working, and that I want to tell you that my work is ended, that I have closed my work, I can not, in a short manner, tell you this without the help of the Verb to have. To say, / work, or / worked, or / will work ; these will not answer my purpose. No : I must call in the help of the Verb to have, and tell you I have worked. So, in the case of the past time, I must say, I had worked ; in the future, I shall have worked ; in the subjunctive mode, I must say, I may, might, could, or should have worked. If you reflect a little, you will find a clear reason for employing the Verb viil] OF VERBS. 73 to have in this way ; for when I say, " I have worked," my words amount to this : that the act of working is now in my possession. It is completed. It is a thing / own, and there- fore I say, / have it. 113. The Verb to be signifies existence, when used as a principal Verb. " To be ill, to be well, to be rich, to be poor,'" mean to exist in illness, in health, in riches, in poverty. This Verb, in its compound times, requires the help of the Verb to have : as, I have been, I had been, I shall havt been, and so on. As auxiliary, this Verb is used with the participles of other Verbs : as, to be working, he is working, it is worked. Now you will perceive, if you reflect, that these phrases mean as follows : existing- in work, he exists in work, it exists in a worked state. Both these Verbs are sometimes used, at one and the same time, as auxiliaries to other principal Verbs : as, I have been writing ; I have been imprisoned ; and so on ; and, upon patient attention to what has already been said, you will find that they re- tain upon all occasions their full meaning, of possession in the one case, and of existence in the other. 114. Now, my dear James, if I have succeeded in mak- ing clear to you the principle out of which the use of these words, as auxiliaries, has arisen, I have accomplished a great deal ; for, if well grounded in that principle, all the subse- quent difficulties will speedily vanish before you. 115. I now proceed to close this long and important Letter, by presenting to you the conjugation of these two Verbs, both of which are irregular, and every irregularity is worthy of your strict attention. 74 E T YMOLOG Y [letter INFINITIVE MODE. To Have. INDICATIVE MODE. C ist ) 2d Singular. Plural. . ist Person. I have, We have. ) 2d Person. Thou hast, [hath, You have. ( 3d Person. He, she, or it has, or They have. ( — I had, We had. Past Thou hadst, You had. Time, j He, she, or it had, They had. ( — I shall, or will have, We shall, or will have. -? — Thou shalt, or wilt have, You shall, or will have. ( — He, she, or it shall, or will They shall, or will have, have, SUBJUNCTIVE MODE, f If I have, or may, might, could, or should have. J If thou have, or may have. Present j If he, she, or it have, or may have. Time, j If we have, or may have. I If you have, or may . have. [ If they have, or may have. IMPERATIVE MODE. Let me have, Let us have. Have thou, Have you. Let him, her, or it have, Let them have. PARTICIPLES. Active. — Having. Passive. — Had. 116. Though I have inserted hath in the third person singular of the present of the indicative, it is hardly evef used. It is out of date, and ought to be wholly laid aside. VIII.] OF VERBS. 75 117. The Verb to be is still more irregular, but a little attention to its irregularities will prevent all errors in the use of it. INFINITIVE MODE. To Be. INDICATIVE MODE. Singular. Plural. ( i st Person. I am, We are. } 2d Person. Thou art, You are. ( 3d Person. He, she, or it is, They are. ( — I was, We were. _. < — Thou wast, You were. Time, i ( — He, she, or it was, They were. _, ( — I shall, or will be, We shall, or will be. Future \ _,. < — Thou shalt, or wilt be, You shall, or will be. ( — He, she, or it shall, or will be, They shall, or will be SUBJUNCTIVE MODE. f If I be, or may, might, could, would, or should be. If thou be, or may Present J If he, she, or it be, or may Time. > If we be, or may If you be, or may [_ If they be, or may be. be. be. be. be. Past Time. «J If I were. If thou wert. If he, she, or it were. If we were. If you were. If they were. IMPERATIVE MODE. Let me be, Let us be. Be thou, Be you. Let him, her, or it be, Let them be. f6 ETYMOLOGY [letter PARTICIPLES. Present. — Being. Past.— Been. 118. In the Subjunctive Mode I have made use of the conjunction if throughout all the conjugations of Verbs. But a Verb may be in that mode without an if before it. [And a verb may have an if before it, and yet be properly in the Indicative Mode.] The if is only one of the marks of that mode. A Verb is always in that mode when the action or state of being expressed by the Verb is expressed conditionally \ or when the action or state of being is, in sdme way or other, dependent on some other action or state of being. But of this I shall speak more at large when I come to the Syntax of Verbs. 119. There remain a few words to be said about the signs, the defective Verbs, and the impersonal Verbs. The signs, may, might, can, could, will, would, shall, should, and must, have all, originally, been Verbs, though they are now become defective in almost all their parts, and serve only as signs to other Verbs. Will, indeed, is part of a regular Verb : as, to will, they willed, they are willing, they will be willing. The word would is certainly the past time and passive participle of the same Verb ; and, indeed, it is used as a principal Verb now, in certain cases : as, " I would he were rich.'' That is to say, I desire, or am willing, or, it is my will, that he should be rich. But deep inquiries re- garding the origin of these words are more curious than useful. A mere idea of the nature of their origin is enough. The Verb ought is a Verb defective, in most of its parts. It certainly, however, is no other than a part of the Verb to o-ve, and is become ought by corruption. For instance : " I ought to write to you," means that " I owe the per viii.] OF VERBS. *11 formance of the act of writing to you." Ought is made use of only in the present time, and for that reason a great deal has been lost to our language by this corruption. As to the Verbs which [that] some grammarians have called impersonal, there are, in fact, no such things in the English language. By impersonal Verb is meant a Verb that has no noun or pronoun for its nominative case ; no person or thing that is the actor, or receiver of an action, or that is in being. Thus : " it rains" is by some called an impersonal Verb ; but the pronoun it represents the person. Look -again at Letter VI, and at paragraphs 60 and 61. You will there find what it is that this it, in such cases, represents. [According to some other grammarians, the impersonal verbs are verbs defective in the persons, being used only in the third person singular.] 120. Thus I have concluded my Letter on the Etymol- ogy of Verbs, which is by far the most important part of the subject. Great as have been my endeavors to make the matter clear to you, I am aware, that, after the first reading of this Letter, your mind will be greatly confused. You will have had a glimpse at everything in the Letter, but will have seen nothing clearly. But, my dear James, lay the book aside for a day or two ; then read the whole Letter again and again. Read it early, while your mind is clear, and while sluggards are snoring. Write it down. Lay it aside for another day or two. Copy your own writ- ing. Think as you proceed ; and, at the end of your copy- ing, you will understand clearly all the contents of the Let* ter. Do not attempt to study the Letter piece by piece. In ycur readings, as well as in your copyings, go clean throughout. If you follow these instructions, the remain ing pait of your task will be very easy and pleasant. 78 E T YMOLOG Y [letteb LETTER IX. ETYMOLOGY OF ADVERBS. 121. In Letter III, and in paragraphs 27 and 28, you will find a description of this Part of Speech. Read again those two paragraphs, in order to refresh your memory. There is not much to be said about Adverbs under the head of Etymology. They are words liable to few varia- tions. Adverbs are very numerous, and may be divided into five principal classes : that is to say, Adverbs of lime, of place, of order, of quality, and of manner. This last class, which is the most numerous, is composed of those which [that] are derived immediately from adjectives, and which [that] end in ly : as, especially, particularly, thank- fully. 122. These Adverbs, ending in ly, are, for the most part, formed by simply adding ly to the adjective: as, espe- cial becomes especially ; but, if the adjective end \ny, that y is changed into i in forming the Adverb : as, happy, hap- pily ; steady, steadily. If the adjective end in le, the e is dropped in forming the Adverb : as, possible, possibly. 123. Some few Adverbs have degrees of comparison : as, often, oftener, oftenest ; and those which [that] are de- rived from irregular adjectives, are irregular in forming their degrees of comparison : as, tuell, better, best. 124. Some Adverbs are simple or single ; others com- pound. The former consist of one word, the latter of two or more words: as, happily; at present j now-a-days ; which last means at the days that now are. Another Ad- verb of this description is, by-and-by ; which is used to express, in a short time ; and literally it means near and near ; because by itself, as an Adverb, means, near, close, X.] OF PREPOSITIONS. 79 beside. When Adverbs are compound, the words compos- ing them ought to [should] be connected by a hyphen, or hyphens, as in the above examples of now-a-days and by- and-by. [Ought — Should. These two words, though they both imply obligation, should not be used indiscriminately. Ought is the stronger term ; what we ought to do, we are morally bound to do. We ought to be truthful and honest.] LETTER X. ETYMOLOGY OF PREPOSITIONS. 125. Letter III, paragraphs 29 and 30, has taught you of what description of words Prepositions are. The chief use of them is to express the different relations or connec- tions, which [that] nouns have with each other [one another], or, in which nouns stand with regard to each other [one another] : as, John gives money to Peter ; Peter receives money front John. It is useless to attempt to go into curi- ous inquiries as to the otigin of Prepositions. They never change their endings ; they are always written in the same manner. Their use is the main thing to be considered ; and that will become very clear to you, when you come to the Syntax. 126. There are two abbreviations or shortenings, of Prepositions, which I will notice here, because they are in constant use, and may excite doubts in your mind. These are a and o' : as, I am a hunting ; he is a coming ; it is one o'clock. The a thus added, is at, without doubt : as, I am at hunting ; he is at coming. Generally this is a vulgar and redundant manner of speaking ; but it is in use. So ET YMOLOG Y [letter In mercantile accounts you will frequently see this a made use of in a very odd sort of way : as, " Six bales marked I a 6." The merchant means, " Six bales marked from I to 6." But this I take to be a relic of the Norman French, which was once the law and mercantile language of Eng- land ; for, in French, a, with an accent, means to or at. I wonder that merchants, who are generally men of sound sense, do not discontinue the use of this mark of affectation. And, I beg you, my dear James, to bear in mind, that the only use of words is to cause our meaning to be clearly un- derstood ; and that the best words are those which [that] are familiar to the ears of the greatest number of persons. The o\ with the mark of elision, means, of, or of the, or on, or on the ; as, two o'clock, is the same as to say two of the clock, or two according to the clock, or two on the clock. 127. As to the Prepositions which [that] are joined to verbs or other words ; as, to outlive, to undei'value, to be overdone, it would be to waste our time to spend it in any statements about them ; for, these are other words than to live, to value, to be done. If we were to go, in this way, into the subject of the composition of words, where should we stop ? Thankful, thankless, without, within ; these are all compound words, but, of what use to us to enter on, and [to] spend our time in, inquiries of mere curiosity? It is for monks and for Fellows of English Colleges, who live by the sweat of other people's brows, to spend their time in this manner, and to call the result of their studies learning ; for you, who will have to earn what you eat and what you drink and what you wear, it is to avoid everything that tends not to real utility. XI. } OF CONJUNCTIONS. 8 1 LETTER XI. ETYMOLOGY OF CONJUNCTIONS. 128. In Letter III, paragraph 31, you have had a de= scription of this sort of words, and also some account of the uses of them. Some of them are called copulative Conjunc- tions, and others disjunctive. They all serve to join together words, or parts of sentences ; but the former express an [a] union in the actions, or states of being, expressed by the verb ; as, you and I talk. The latter a disunion ; as, you talk, but I act. The words of this Part of Speech never vary in their endings. They are always spelled in one and the same way. In themselves they present no difficulty ; but, as you will see by-and-by, to use them properly, with other words, in the forming of sentences, demands a due portion of your attention and care. LETTER XII. CAUTIONARY REMARKS. My dear James: 129. Before we enter on Syntax, let me give you a caution or two with regard to the contents of the foregoing LETTERS. 130. There are some words which [that], under differ- ent circumstances, belong to more than one Part of Speech, as, indeed, you have seen in the Participles. But this is by no means confined to that particular description of words. I act. Here act is a verb ; but the act performed by me shows the very same word in the capacity of a noun. The message was sent by him ; he stood by at the time. In the 82 CAUTIONARY REMARKS. [letter first of these examples by is a. preposition ; in the last an adverb. Mind, therefore, that it is the sense in which the word is used, and not the letters of which it is composed, that determines what is the Part of Speech to which it belongs. 131. Never attempt to get by rote any part of your in- structions. Whoever falls into that practice soon begins to esteem the powers of memory more than those of reason ; and the former are despicable indeed when compared with the latter. When the fond parents of an eighth wonder of the world call him forth into the middle of the parlor to repeat to their visitors some speech of a play, how angry would they be if any one were to tell them that their son's endowments equaled those of a parrot or a bullfinch ! Yet a German bird-teacher would make either of these more perfect in these [this?] species of oratory. It is this mode of teaching, which [that] is practiced in the great schools, that assists very much in making dunces of Lords and Country Squires. They "get their lessons " ; that is to say, they repeat the words of it : but, as to its sense and mean- ing, they seldom have any understanding. This operation is sometimes, for what reason I know not, called getting a thing by heart. It must, I should think, mean by hear't ; that is to say, by hear it. That a person may get and re- tain and repeat a lesson in this way, without any effort of the mind, is very clear from the fact, of which we have daily proof, that people sing the words and the tune of a song with perfect correctness, at the very time that they are most seriously thinking and debating in their minds about matters of great importance to them. 132. I have cautioned you before against studying the foregoing instructions piecemeal ; that is to say, a little bit at a time. Read a letter all through at once ; and, now that you have come to the end of my instructions on Ety- XTI.] SYNTAX GENERALLY CONSIDERED. S3 mology, read all the Letters through at once : do this re- peatedly ; taking care to proceed slowly and carefully ; and, at the end of a few days, all the matters treated of will form a connected whole in your mind. 133. Before you proceed to the Syntax, try yourself a little, thus : copy a short sentence from any book. Then write down the words, one by one, and write against each what Part of Speech you think it belongs to. Then look for each word in the dictionary, where you will find the several Parts of Speech denoted by little letters after the word : s. is for substantive, or noun ; pro. for pronoun ; a, for article ; v. a. for verb active ; v. n. for verb neuter ; adj. for adjective ; adv. for adverb ; pre. for preposition ; con. for conjunction ; int. for interjection. It will give you great pleasure and encouragement when you find that you are right. If you be [are] sometimes wrong, this will only urge you to renewed exertion. You will be proud to see that, without any one at your elbow, you have really ac- quired something which [that] you can never lose. You will begin, and with reason, to think yourself learned ; your sight, though the objects will still appear a good deal con- fused, will dart into every part of the science ; and you wall pant to complete what you will be convinced you have suc= cessfully begun. LETTER XIII. syntax generally considered. My dear James : 134. In Letter II, paragraph 9, I shortly [briefly] ex- plained to you the meaning of the word Syntax, as that word is used in the teaching of Grammar. Read that paragraph again. 84 SYNTAX. [letter 135. We are, then, now entering upon this branch ot your study ; and it is my object to teach you how to give all the words you make use of their proper situation [posi- tion] when you come to put them into sentences. Because, though every word that you make use of may be correctly spelled ; that is to say, may have all the letters in it that it ought to have, and no more than it ought to have ; and though all the words may, at the same time, be the fit words to use in order to express what you wish to express ; yet, for want of a due observance of the principles and rules of Syntax, your sentences may be incorrect, and, in some cases, they may not express what you wish them to express. 136. I shall, however, carry my instructions a little further than the construction of independent sentences. I shall make some remarks upon the manner of putting sen- tences together ; and on the things necessary to be under- stood, in order to enable a person to write a series of sen- tences. These remarks will show you the use of figurative language, and will, I hope, teach you how to avoid the very common error of making your writing confused and unintelligible. LETTER XIV. SYNTAX. The Points and Marks made use of in Writing. My dear James: 137. There are, as I informed you in paragraph 9, Let- ter II, Points made use of in the making, or writing, of sentences ; and, therefore, we must first notice these ; be- cause, as you will soon see, the sense, or meaning, of the xiv.] SYNTAX. 85 words is very much dependent upon the points which [that] are used along with the words. For instance : " You will be rich if you be [are] industrious, in a few years." Then again : " You will be rick, if you be [are] industrious in a few years." Here, though in both sentences the words and also the order of the words are precisely the same, the meaning of one of the sentences is very different from that of the other. The first sentence means that you will, in a few years' time, be rich, if you be [are] industrious now. The second means that you will be rich, some time or other, if you be [are] industrious in a few years from this time. And all this great difference in meaning is, as you must see, produced solely by the difference in the situation of the comma. Put another comma after the last word indus- trious, and the meaning becomes dubious. A memorable proof of the great importance of attending to Points was given to the English nation in the year 1817. A committee of the House of Lords made a report to the House, re- specting certain political clubs. A secretary of one of those clubs presented a petition to the House, in which he de- clared positively, and offered to prove at the bar, that a part of the report was totally false. At first their Lord- ships blustered : their high blood seemed to boil : but, at last, the Chairman of the Committee apologized for the report by saying that there ought to have been a full-point where there was only a comma ! and that it was this which [that] made that false which [that] would otherwise have been, and which [that] was intended to be, true ! 138. These Points being, then, things of so much con- sequence in the forming of sentences, it is necessary that I explain to you the use of them, before I proceed any far. then There are four of them : the Full-point, or Period; the Colon : the Semicolon : the Comma. 86 SYNTAX. [letter 139. The Full-point is a single dot, thus [.], and it is used at the end of every complete sentence. That is to say, at the end of every collection of words which [that] make a full and complete meaning, and is not necessarily connected with other collections of words. But a sentence may consist of several members or divisions, and then it is called a compound sentence. When it has no division, it is called a simple sentence. Thus : " The people suffer great misery." This is a simple sentence; but, "The people suffer great misery, and daily perish for want," is a com- pound sentence ; that is to say, it is compounded, or made up, of two simple sentences. 140. The Colon, which is written thus [:], is next tt> the full-point in requiring a complete sense in the words. It is, indeed, often used when the sense is complete, but when there is something still behind, which [that] tends to make the sense fuller or clearer. 141. The Semicolon is written thus [;], and it is used to set off, or divide, simple sentences, in cases when the comma is not quite enough to keep the meaning of the sim- ple sentences sufficiently distinct. 142. The Comma is written thus [,], and is used to mark the shortest pauses in reading, and the smallest di' visions in writing. It has, by some grammarians, been given as a rule to use a comma to set off every part of a compound sentence, which part has in it a verb not in the infinitive mode ; and, certainly, this is, in general, proper. But it is not always proper ; and, besides, com- mas are used, in numerous cases, to set off parts which [that] have no verbs in them ; and even to set off single words which [that] are not verbs : and of this the veiy sen- tence which [that] I am now writing gives you ample proof. The comma marks the shortest pause that we make xiv.] SYNTAX. 87 in speaking ; and it is evident that, in many cases, its use must depend upon taste. It is sometimes used to give em- phasis, or weight, to the word after which it is put. Ob- serve, now, the following two sentences : "I was very well and cheerful last week ; but, am rather feeble and low- spirited now." " I am very willing to yield to your kind requests ; but, I will set your harsh commands at defiance." Commas are made use of when phrases, that is to say, por- tions of words, are throwed [thrown] into a sentence, and which [that] are not absolutely necessary to assist in its grammatical construction. For instance : " There were, in the year 1817, petitions from a million and a half of men, who [that], as they distinctly alleged, were suffering the greatest possible hardships." The two phrases, in italics, may be left out in the reading, and still the sentence will have its full grammatical construction. 143. Let us now take a compound sentence or two con- taining all the four points. " In a land of liberty it is ex- tremely dangerous to make a distinct order of the profession of arms. In absolute monarchies this is necessary for the safety of the prince, and arises from the main principle of their constitution, which is that of governing by fear ; but in free states the profession of a soldier, taken singly and merely as a profession, is justly an object of jealousy. In these no man should take up arms, but with a view to de- fend his country and its laws : he puts off the citizen when he enters the camp : but it is because he is a citizen, and would continue so, that he makes himself for a while a sol- dier. The laws therefore and constitution of these king- doms know no such state as that of a perpetual standing soldier, bred up to no other profession than that of war ; and it was not till the reign of Henry VII that the kings of England had so much as a guard about their persons.'" 88 SYNTAX. [letter This passage is taken from Blackstone's Commentaries, Book I, Chap. 13. Here are four complete sentences. The first is a simple sentence. The other three are com- pound sentences. Each of these latter has its members, all very judiciously set off by points. The word so, in the third sentence, ought to be such, or the words a citizen ought to be repeated. But, with this trifling exception, these are very beautiful sentences. Nothing affected or confused in them : all is simple, clear, and harmonious. 144. You will now see that it is quite impossible to give any precise rules for the use of these several points. Much must be left to taste ; something must depend upon the weight which [that] we may wish to give to particular words, or phrases ; and something on the seriousness, or the levity, of the subject on which we are writing. 145. Besides these points, however, there are certain grammatical signs, or marks, which [that] are made use of in the writing of sentences : the mark of parenthesis, the mark of interrogation, the mark of exc/amation, the apos- trophe, otherwise called the mark of elision, and the hyphen. 145. The mark of Parenthesis consists of two curved strokes, drawed [drawn] across the line of writing, or of print. Its use is to inclose a phrase throvved [thrown] in hastily to assist in elucidating our subject, or to add force to our assertions or arguments. But, observe, the paren- thesis ought to be very sparingly used. It is necessarily an interrupter : it breaks in upon the regular course of the mind : it tends to divert the attention from the main object of the sentence. I will give you, from Mr. Tull,* Chap. * Mr. Tull, the inventor of the drill and horse-hoeing husbandry, and the author of " New Horse-hoeing Husbandry," was born about 1680, died 1740. An edition of the " New Horse-hoeing Husbandry" was brought out by Cobbett in 1822. " From this famous book." he xiv.] SYNTAX. 89 XIII, an instance of the omission of the parenthesis, and also of the proper employment of it. " Palladius thought also, with others of the ancients, that Heaven was to be frightened with red cloth, with the feathers or the heart of an owl, and a multitude of such ridiculous scarecrows, from spoiling the fruits of the fields and gardens. The ancients having no rational principles, or theory of agriculture, placed their chief confidence in magical charms and enchantments, which he, who [that] has the patience or curiosity to read, may find, under the title aforementioned, in Cato, in Varro {and even Columella is as fulsome as any of them), all written in very fine language ; which is most of the erudi- tion that can be acquired as to field husbandry, from the Greek and Latin writers, whether in verse or prose." For want of the mark of parenthesis in the first of these sen- tences, we almost think, at the close of it, that the author is speaking of the crows, and not of Heaven, being fright- ened from spoiling the fruits of the fields and the gardens. But with regard to the use of the parenthesis, I shall speak, perhaps, more fully by-and-by : for the employment of it is a matter of some importance. 147. The mark of Interrogation, which is written thus [?], is used when a question is asked : as, " Who has my pen?" " What tnan is that?" In these and [in] numer- ous other cases, the mark is not necessary to our clearly comprehending the meaning of the writer. But this is not always the case. " What does he say ? Put the horse into the stable." Again : " What does he say? Put the horse into the stable ? " In speaking, this great difference in the meaning, in this instance, would be fully expressed by the voice and manner of the speaker ; but, in writing, the mark says, M I learned al! my principles relative to farming, gardening, and planting. It really, without a pun, goes to the root of the subject." 90 SYNTAX. [letter of interrogation is, you see, absolutely necessary in order to accomplish the purpose. 148. The mark of Exclamation, or Admiration, is writ- ten thus [!], and, as its name denotes, is used to distinguish words or sentences that are exclamatory, from such as are not : " What do you say ! What do you say ? " The differ- ence in the sense is very obvious here. Again : " He is going away to-night ! He is going away to-night! 1 The last simply states the fact ; but the first, besides stating the fact, expresses surprise at it. 149. The Apostrophe, or mark of Elision, is a comma placed above the line, thus [']. Elision means a striking out ; and this mark is used for that purpose : as, don't for do not ; tho' for though ; lovd for loved. I have mentioned this mark, because it is used properly enough in poetry / but, I beg you never to use it in prose in one single in- stance during your whole life. It ought to be called the mark not of elision, but of laziness and vulgarity. It is necessary as the mark of the possessive case of nouns, as you have seen in Letter V, paragraph 47. That is its use, and any other employment of it is an abuse. 150. The Hyphen or Conjoiner is a little line drawed [drawn] to connect words, or parts of words : as in sea-jish, water-rat. For here are two distinct words, though they, in these instances, make but one. Sometimes the hyphen is used to connect many words together : " The never-to- be-forgotten cruelty of the Borough-tyrants." When, in writing, or in printing, a line ends with part of a word, a hyphen is placed after that part, in order to show that that part is to be joined, in the reading, with that which £that] begins the next line. 151. These are all the grammatical marks; but, there are others, used in writing for the purpose of saving time xiv.] SYNTAX. 91 and words. The mark of quotation or of citing. This mark consists of two commas placed thus : " There were many men." It is used to inclose words taken from other writ- ings, or from other persons' discourse ; and, indeed, it is frequently used to inclose certain sentences, or words, of the writer, when he wishes to mark them as wholly distinct from the general course of any statement that he is making, or of any instruction that he is giving. I have, for instance, in the writing of these Letters to you, set off many of my examples by marks of quotation. In short, its use is to notify to the reader that such and such words, or such and such sentences, are not to be looked upon as forming part of the regular course of those thoughts which [that] are at the present time coming from the mind of the writer. 152. This mark [*j"] is found in the Bible. It stands for paragraph. This [£] is sometimes used instead of the word section. As to stars [*] and the other marks which [that] are used for the purpose of leading the eye of the reader to notes, in the same page, or at the end of the book, they are perfectly arbitrary. You may use for this purpose any marks that you please. But let me observe to you here, that notes ought seldom to be resorted to. Like pa- rentheses, they are interrupters, and much more trouble- some interrupters, because they generally tell a much longer story. The employing of them arises, in almost all cases, from confusion in the mind of the writer. He finds the matter too much for him. He has not the talent to work it all up into one lucid whole ; and, therefore, he puts part of it into notes. Notes are seldom read. If the text, that is to say, the main part of a writing, be of a nature to engage our earnest attention, we have not time to stop to read the notes : and if our attention be not earnestly engaged by the 92 SYNTAX. [letter text, we soon lay down the volume, and of course read neither notes nor text. 153. As a mark of abbreviation, the full-point is used: as, " Mr., Mrs." But I know of hardly any other words that ought to be abbreviated ; and if these were not it would be all the better. People may indulge themselves in this practice, until at last they come to write the greater part of their words in single letters. The frequent use of abbreviation is always a mark of slovenliness and of vul- garity. I have known Lords abbreviate almost the half of their words : it was, very likely, because they did not know how to spell them to the end. Instead of the word and, you often see people put &. For what reason I should like to know. But to this & is sometimes added a c : thus, &c. And is, in Latin, et, and c is the first letter of the Latin word ccetera, which means the like, or so on. Therefore this dfc. means and the like, or and so on. This abbrevia- tion of a foreign word is a most convenient thing for such writers as have too much indolence or too little sense to say fully and clearly what they ought to say. If you mean to say and the like, or and so on, why not say it ? This ab- breviation is very frequently made use of without the writer ['s] having any idea of its import. A writer on Grammar says, " When these words are joined to if, since, &C, they are adverbs." But where is the like of if, or of since? The best way to guard yourself against the com- mitting of similar errors is never to use this abbreviation. 154. The use of capitals and italics I will notice in this place. In the books printed before the middle of the last century, a capital letter was used as the first letter of every noun. Capitals are now used more sparingly. We use them at the beginning of every paragraph, let the word be what it may ; at the beginning of every sentence which xw.] SYNTAX. 93 [that] follows a full-point ; at the beginning of all proper names ; at the beginning of all adjectives growing out of the names of countries, or nations : as, the English lan- guage ; the French fashion ; the American government. We use capitals, besides, at the beginning of any word, when we think the doing of it likely to assist in elucidating our meaning, but in general we use them as above stated. The use of italic characters in print is to point out, as worthy of particular attention, the words distinguished by those characters. In writing with a pen, a stroke is drawn under such words as we wish to be considered to be in italics. If we wish words to be put in small capital?, we draw two strokes under them: if in FULL CAPI- TALS, we draw three strokes under them. 155. The last thing I shall mention, under this head, is the caret [a], which is used to point upward to a part which [that] has been omitted, and which [that] is inserted between the line, where the caret is placed, and the line above it. Things should be called by their right names, and this should be called the blunder-mark. I would have you, my dear James, scorn the use of this thing. Think before you write ; let it be your custom to write correctly and in a. plain hand. Be as careful that neatness, grammar, and sense prevail, when you write to a blacksmith about shoeing a horse, as when you write on the most important subjects, and when you expect what you write to be read by persons whose good opinion you are most anxious to obtain or secure. Habit is powerful in all cases ; but its power in this case is truly wonderful. When you write, bear constantly in mind that some one is to read and to understand what you write. This will make your hand- writing, and also your meaning, plain. Never think of mending what you write. Let it go. No patching ; no 94 SYNTAX, [letter after-pointing. As your pen moves, bear constantly in mind that it is making strokes which [that] are to remain forever. Far, I hope, from my dear James will be the ridiculous, the contemptible affectation, of writing in a slovenly or illegible hand ; or, that of signing his name otherwise than in plain letters. 156. In concluding this Letter let me caution you against the use of what, by some, is called the dash. The dash is a stroke along the line : thus, " I am rich — I was poor — I shall be poor again." This is wild work indeed ! Who is to know what is intended by the use of these dashes? Those who [that] have thought proper, like Mr. Lindley Murray, to place the dash among the grammatical points^ ought to give us some rule relative to its different longitu- dinal dimensions in different cases. The inch, the th7-ee- quarter-inch, the half-inch, the quarter-inch : these would be something determinate ; but, u the dash," without meas- ure, must be a most perilous thing for a young grammarian to handle. In short, " the dash " is a cover for ignorance as to the use of points, and it can answer no other purpose. A dash is very often put in crowded print, in order to save the room that would be lost by the breaks of distinct para- graphs. This is another matter. Here the dash comes after a full-point. It is the using of it in the body of a sentence against which I caution you [that I caution you against. Better : The using of it in the body of a sentence is what I caution you against]. xv.] AS RELATING TO ARTICLES. 95 LETTER XV. syntax, as relating to articles. My dear James: 157. Before you proceed to my instructions relative to the employing of Articles, you will do well to read again all the paragraphs in Letter IV. Our Articles are so few in number, and they are subject to so little variation in their orthography, that very few errors can arise in the use of them. But, still, errors may arise ; and it will be neces- sary to guard you against them. 158. You will not fall into very gross errors in the use of the Articles. You will not say, as in the erroneous pas- sage cited by Doctor Lowth,* "And I persecuted this way unto the death," meaning death generally ; but you may commit errors less glaring. " The Chancellor informed the Queen of it, and she immediately sent for the Secretary and Treasurer." Now, it is not certain here, whether the Secretary and Treasurer be not one and the same person ; which uncertainty would have been avoided by a repetition of the Article: "the Secretary and the Treasurer": and you will bear in mind that, in every sentence, the very first thing to be attended to is clearness as to meaning. 159. Nouns which [that] express the whole of a species do not, in general, take the definite Article : as, " Grass is good for horses, and wheat for men." Yet, in speaking of the appearance of the face of the country, we say, " The grass looks well : the wheat is blighted." , The reason of * Dr. Robert Lowth, 1710-1787, best known as the author of " Lec- tures on the Sacred Poetry of the Hebrews," originally written in Lat- in. In 1763 he published a " Short Introduction to English Grammar," often since reprinted, and for many years much used in schools. Mur* ray's Grammar is but an enlarged copy of Lowth's. 96 SYNTAX, [letter this is that we are, in this last case, limiting our meaning to the grass and the wheat, which [that] are on the ground at this time. " How do hops sell ? Hops are dear ; but the hops look promising." In this respect there is a passage in Mr. Tull which [that] is faulty : " Neither could weeds be of any prejudice to corny It should be " the corn " ; for he does not mean corn universally, but the standing corn, and the corn among which weeds grow ; and, therefore, the definite Article is required. 160. "Ten shillings the bushel," and like phrases, are perfectly correct. They mean, " ten shillings by the bushel, ox for the bushel." Instead of this mode of expression we sometimes use, " ten shillings a bushel " : that is to say, ten shillings for a bushel, or a bushel at a time. Either of these modes of expression is far preferable to per bushel ; for the per is not English, and is, to the greater part of the people, a mystical sort of word. 161. The indefinite Article a, or an, is used with the words, day, month, year, and others : as, once a day ; twice a month ; a thousand pounds a year. It means in a day, in a month, in, or for, a year ; and though per annum means the same as this last, the English phrase is, in all respects, the best [better]. The same may be said of per cent, that is per centum, or, in plain English, the hundred, or a hundred : by ten per centum we mean ten for the hun- dred, or ten for a hundred ; and why can we not, then, say, in plain English, what we mean ? 162. When there are several nouns following the indefi- nite article, care ought to [should] be taken that it accord with them : " a dog, cat, owl, and sparrow." Owl requires an ; and, therefore, the Article must be repeated in this phrase : as, a dog, a cat, an owl, and a sparrow. 163. Nouns, signifying fixed and settled collections of xvi. j AS RELATING TO NOUNS. g) individuals, as thousand, hundred, dozen, score, take the in- definite Article, though they are of plural meaning. It is a certain mass, or number, ox multitude, called a score ; and so on ; and the Article agrees with these understood words, which are in the singular number. LETTER XVI. syntax, as relating to nouns. My dear James: 164. Read again Letter V, the subject of which is the Etymology of Nouns. Nouns are governed, as it is called, by verbs and prepositions ; that is to say, these latter sorts of words cause nouns to be in such or such a case ; and there must be a concord, or an agreement, between the Nouns and the other words, which [that], along with the Nouns, compose a sentence. 165. But these matters will be best explained when I come to the Syntax of Verbs, for, until we take the verb into account, we can not go far in giving rules for the form- ing of sentences. Under the present head, therefore, 1 shall content myself with doing little more than to give some further account of the manner of using the possessive case of Nouns ; that being the only case, to denote which, our Nouns vary their endings. 166. The possessive case was pretty fully spoken of by me in the Letter just referred to ; but there are certain other observations to make with regard to the using of it in sentences. When the Noun which [that] is in the pos- sessive case is expressed by a circumlocution, that is to say by many words in lieu of one, the sign of the possessive 7 98 SYNTAX, [letter case is joined to the last word : as, "John, the ord farmer's, wife." " Oliver, the spy's, evidence." It is however much better to say, " The wife of John, the old farmer." " The evidence of Oliver, the spy." 167. When two or more Nouns in the possessive case follow each other, and are joined by a conjunctive conjunc- tion, the sign of the possessive case is, when the thing pos- sessed is the same, put to the last Noun only : as, " Peter, Joseph, and Richard's estate." In this example, the thing possessed being one and the same thing, the sign applies equally to each of the three possessive Nouns. But, " Peter's, Joseph's, and Richard's estate," implies that each has an estate ; or, at least, it will admit of that meaning ['s] being given to it, while the former phrase will not. 168. Sometimes the sign of the possessive case is left out, and a hyphen is used in its stead : as, " Edwards, the government-spy." That is to say, " the government's spy " ; or, " the spy of the government." These two words, joined in this manner, are called a compound Noun : and to this compounding of Nouns our language is very prone. We say '■'•chamber-floor, horse-shoe, dog-collar" y that is to say Sl chamber s floor, horse's shoe, dog's collar." 169. This is an advantage peculiar to our language. It enables us to say much in few words, which always gives strength to language ; and, after clearness, strength is the most valuable quality that writing or speaking can possess. *' The Yorkshiremen flew to arms." If we could not com- pound our words we must [should have to] say, " The men of the shire of York flew to arms." When you come to learn French, you will soon see how much the English language is better than the French in this respect. 170. You must take care when you use the possessiv« case, not to use after it words which [that] create a confu- XVI.] AS RELATING TO NOUNS. 99 sion in meaning. Hume has this sentence : " They flew to arms and attacked Northumberland 's house, whom they put to death." We know what is meant, because whom can relate to persons only ; but if it had been an attack on Northumberland's men, the meaning would have been that the men were put to death. However, the sentence, as it stands, is sufficiently incorrect. It should have been : " They flew to arms, and attacked the house of Northum- berland, whom they put to death." [Not so, for house and not Northumberland, as the sen- tence stands, is the antecedent of whom. Hume should have written : " They flew to arms and attacked the house of Northumberland, putting him to death," or " They flew to arms, attacked the house of Northumberland, and put him to death." The latter wording is the better.] 171. A passage, from Doctor Hugh Blair,* the author of Lectures on Rhetoric, will give you another in- stance of error in the use of the possessive case. I take it from the 24th Lecture : "In comparing Demosthenes and Cicero, most of the French critics are disposed to give the preference to the latter. P. Rapin, the Jesuit, in the paral- lels which [that] he has drawn between some of the most eminent Greek and Roman writers, uniformly decides in favor of the Roman. For the preference which [that] he gives to Cicero, he assigns and lays stress on one reason, of a pretty extraordinary nature, viz., that Demosthenes could not possibly have so clear an insight as Cicero into the manners and passions of men. Why? because he had not the advantage of perusing Aristotle's Treatise on Rhetoric, * Dr. Hugh Blair, 1710-1800, a native of Edinburgh and Professor of Rhetoric and Belles-Lettres in the University of that city. His celebrated Lectures on Rhetoric and Belles-Lettres, many editions of which have appeared, were first published in 1783. roo SYNTAX, [letter wherein, says our critic, he has fully laid open that mys- tery ; and to support this weighty argument, he enters ir*to a controversy with A. Gellius, in order to prove that Aris- totle's Rhetoric was not published till after Demosthenes had spoken, at least, his most considerable orations." It is surprising that the Doctor should have put such a passage as this upon paper, and more surprising that he should leave it in this state after having perused it with that care which [that] is usually employed [exercised] in examining writings that are to be put into print, and especially writ- ings in which every word is expected to be used in a proper manner. In Bacon, in Tull, in Blackstone, in Hume, in Swift, in Bolingbroke : in all writers, however able, we find errors. Yet, though many of their sentences will not stand the test of strict grammatical criticism, the sense gen- erally is clear to our minds ; and we read on. But, in this passage of Dr. Blair, all is confusion : the mind is puz- zled : we at last hardly know whom or what the writer is talking about, and we fairly come to a stand. 172. In speaking of the many faults in this passage, I shall be obliged to make here observations which [that] would come under the head of pronouns, verbs, adverbs, and prepositions. The first two of the three sentences are in themselves rather obscure, and are well enough calcu- lated for ushering in the complete confusion that follows. The he, which [that] comes immediately after the word because, may relate to Demosthenes ; but to what Noun does the second he relate? It would, when we first look at it, seem to relate to the same Noun as [that ?] the first he relates to ; for the Doctor can not call Aristotle's Treatise on Rhetoric a he. No : in speaking of this the Doctor says " wherein " : that is to say, in which. He means, I dare say, that the he should stand for Aristotle / but it does not XVI.] AS RELATING TO NOUNS. 101 stand for Aristotle. This Noun is not a nominative in the sentence ; and it can not have the pronoun relating to it as such. This he may relate to Cicero, who may be supposed to have laid open a mystery in the perusing of the treatise *, and the words which [that] follow the he would seem to give countenance to this supposition ; for ivhat mystery is meant by the words " that mystery" ? Is it the mystery of Rheto>ic, or the mystery of the manners and passions of men? This is not all, however; for the Doctor, as if be- witched by the love of confusion, must tack on another long member to the sentence, and bring forward another he to stand for P. Rapin, whom and whose argument we have, amid the general confusion, wholly forgotten. There is an error also in the use of the active participle perusing. " Demosthenes could not have so complete an insight as Cicero, because he had not the advantage of perusing." That is to say, the advantage of being engaged in perusing. But this is not what is meant. The Doctor means that he had not had the advantage of perusing ; or, rather, that he had not the advantage of having perused. In other words, that Demosthenes could not have, or possess, a certain kind of knowledge at the time when he made his orations, be- cause, at that time, he had not, or did not possess, the ad- vantage oi having perused, or having finished to peruse the treatise of Aristotle. Toward the close of the last sen- tence the adverb "at least" is put in a wrong place. The Doctor means, doubtless, that the adverb should apply to considerable, and not to spoken; but, from its being im- properly placed, it applies to the latter, and not to the former. He means to say that Demosthenes had spoken the most considerable, at least, of his orations ; but as the words now stand, they mean that he had done the speaking part to them, if he had done nothing more. There is an f02 SYNTAX, [lettef error in the use of the word " insight" followed, as it is s by "into." We may have a look, or sight, into a house, but not an insight. This would be to take an inside view of an inside. [Cobbett's criticism of the word insight here is not well founded. Milton says, " Fraught with a universal insight into things," which, as insight is the equivalent of deep view, is a correct use of the word.] 173. We have here a pretty good proof that a knowl- edge of the Greek and Latin is not sufficient to prevent men from writing bad English. Here is ^.profound scholar, a teacher of Rhetoric, discussing the comparative merits of Greek and Latin writers, and disputing with a French critic ; here he is writing English in a manner more incor- rectly [incorrect] than you will, I hope, be liable [likely] to write it at the end of your reading of this little book. Lest it should be supposed that I have taken great pains to hunt out this erroneous passage of Doctor Blair, I will inform you that I have hardly looked into his book. Your broth- ers, in reading it through, marked a great number of er- roneous passages, from among which I have selected the passage just cited. With what propriety, then, are the Greek and Latin languages called the " learned languages " ? LETTER XVII. syntax, as relating to pronouns. My dear James : * 174. You will now read again Letter VI. It will bring you back to the subject of Pronouns. You will bear in mind that personal Pronouns stand for, or in the place of xvil] AS RELATING TO PRONOUNS. 103 nouns ; and that the greatest care ought always to be taken in using them, because, being small words, and in frequent use, the proper weight of them is very often unattended to, 175. You have seen in the passage from Dr. Blair, quoted in the foregoing Letter, what confusion arises from the want of taking care that the Pronoun relate clearly to its nominative case, and that it be not left to be understood to relate to anything else. Little words, of great and sweep- ing influence, ought to be used with the greatest care ; be- cause errors in the using of them make such great errors in point of meaning. In order to impress, at the outset* these precepts on your mind, I will give you an instance of this kind of error from Addison ; and, what is well cal- culated to heighten the interest you ought to feel upon the occasion, is, that the sentence, which [that] contains the error, is by Dr. Blair held forth to students of languages, in the University of Edinburgh, as a perfect model of cor- rectness and of elegance. The sentence is from Addison's Spectator, Number 411 : " There are, indeed, but very few, who [that] know how to be idle and innocent, or have a relish of any pleasures that are not criminal ; every diver- sion they take is at the expense of some one virtue or other, and their very first step out of business is into vice or folly." Dr. Blair says: "Nothing can be more elegant, or more finely turned, than this sentence. It is neat, clear, and musical. We could hardly alter one word, or displace one member, without spoiling it. Few sentences are to be found more finished, or more happy." See Blair's 20th Lecture on Rhetoric. 176. Now, then, my dear little James, let us see whether we plain English scholars have not a little more judgment than this professor in a learned University, who could not, you will observe, be a Doctor, until he had 104 SYNTAX, [letter preached a sermon in the Latin language. What does the pronoun they mean in this sentence of Mr. Addison? What noun does it relate to; or stand for? What noun is the nominative of the sentence ? The nominative of the sentence is the word few, meaning feiu persons. Very well, then, the Pronoun they relates to this nominative ; and the meaning of the sentence is this: "That but few persons know how to be idle and innocent ; that few persons have a relish of any pleasures that are not criminal ; that every diversion these few persons take is at the expense of some one virtue or other, and that the very first step of these few persons out of business is into vice or folly." So that the sentence says precisely the contrary of what the author meant ; or, rather, the whole is perfect nonsense. All *.his arises from the misuse of the Pronoun they. If, instead of this word, the author had put people in general, or most people, or most men, or any word or words of the same meaning, all would have been right. 177. I will take another instance of the consequence of being careless in the use of personal Pronouns. It is from Judge Blackstone, Book II, Chapter 6: " For, the cus- tom of the manor has, in both cases, so far superseded the will of the Lord, that, provided the services be performed, or stipulated for by fealty, he can not, in the first instance, refuse to admit the heir of his tenant upon his death ; nor, in the second, can he remove his present tenant so long as he lives." Here are lord, heir, and tenant, all confounded. We may guess at the Judge's meaning ; but, we can not say that we know what it is ; we can not say that we are cer- tain whose life, or whose death, he is speaking of. 178. Never write a personal Pronoun, without duly considering what noun it will, upon a reading of the sen- tence, be found to relate to. There must be a noun, ex- xvii.] AS RELATING TO PRONOUNS. 105 pressed or understood, to which the Pronoun clearly relates, or you will not write sense. " The land-holder has been represented as a monster which [that] must be hunted down, and the fund-holder as a still greater evil, and both have been described as rapacious creatures, who [that] take from the people fifteen pence out of every quartern loaf. They have been told that Parliamentary Reform is no more than a half measure, changing only one set of thieves for another ; and that they must go to the land, as nothing short of that would «avail tkem." This is taken from the mem- orable report of a committee of the House of Lords, in 181 7, on which report the cruel dungeon bill was passed. Now, to -what nouns do these Pronouns relate ? Who [which] are the nominatives in the first sentence ? The land-holder and the fund-holder, to be sure ; and, therefore, to them do the Pronouns relate. These lords mean, doubtless, that the people had been told that the people must go to the land ; that nothing else would avail the people ; but, though they mean this, they do not say it ; and this part of their report is as false in Grammar as other parts of the report were in fact. 179. When there are two or more nouns connected by a copulative conjunction, and when a personal Pronoun is made use of to relate to them, or stand for them, you must take care that the personal Pronoun agree with them in number. " He was fonder of nothing than of wit and raillery: but, he is far from being happy in it." This Doctor Blair, in his 19th Lecture, says of Lord Shaftesbury. Either wit and raillery are one and the same thing, or they are different things: if the former, one of the words is used unnecessarily ; if the latter, the Pronoun ought to [should] have been them and not it. 180. When, however, the nouns take the disjunctive 1 06 S YNTA X, [letter conjunction or, the Pronoun must be in the singular : as, •' When he shoots a partridge, a pheasant, or a woodcock, he gives it away." 181. Nouns of number, or multitude, such as A/ob, Parliament, Rabble, House of Commons, Regiment, Court of King's Bench, Den of Thieves, and the like, may have Pronouns agreeing with them either in the singular or in the plural number ; for we may, for instance, say of the House of Commons, " They refused to hear evidence against Castlereagh when Mr. Maddox accused him of hav- ing sold a seat " ; or, " // refused to hear evidence." But, we must be uniform in our use of the Pronoun in this re- spect. We must not, in the same sentence, and applicable to the same noun, use the singular in one part of the sen- tence and the plural in another part. We must not, in speaking of the House of Commons, for instance, say, " They, one year voted unanimously that cheap corn was an evil, and the next year, it voted unanimously that dear corn was an evil." There are persons who [that] pretend to make very nice distinctions as to the cases when these nouns of multitude ought to take the singular, and when they ought to take the plural, Pronoun ; but these distinc- tions are too nice to be of any real use. The rule is this : that nouns of multitude may take either the singular, or the plural, Pronoun ; but not both in the same sentence. 182. As to gender, it is hardly possible to make a mis- take. There are no terminations to denote gender, except in the third person singular, he, she, or it. We do, how* ever, often personify this. Speaking of a nation, we often say she ; of the sun, we say he ; of the moon, we say she. We may personify things at our pleasure : but, we must take care to be consistent, and not call a thing he, or she, in one part of a sentence, and it in another part. The oc« xvil] AS RELATING TO PRONOUNS. 107 casions when you ought to [should] personify things, and when you ought [should] not, can not be stated in any pre- cise rule. Your own taste and judgment will be your best guides. I shall give you my opinion about figures of speech in a future Letter. 183. Nouns which [that] denote sorts, or kinds, of liv- ing creatures, and which [that] do not of themselves dis- tinguish the male from the female, such as rabbit, hare, hog, cat, pheasant, fowl, take the neuter Pronoun, unless we happen to know the gender of the individual we are speaking about. If I see you with a cock pheasant in your hand, I say, "Where did you shoot him?" but, if you tell me you have a pheasant, I say, " Where did you shoot it? " 184. The personal Pronouns in their possessive case must, of course, agree in number and gender with their cor- respondent Nouns or Pronouns : " John and Thomas have been so foolish as to sell their land and to purchase what is called stock ; but their sister, who has too much sense to depend on a bubble for her daily bread, has kept Jier land ; theirs is gone forever ; but hers is safe." So they must, also, in their objective case : " John and Thomas will lose the interest of their money, which will soon cease to be paid to them. The rents of their sister will regularly be paid to her ; and Richard will also enjoy his income, which is to be paid to him by his sister." If there be nouns of both gen- ders used before Pronouns, care must be taken that no con- fusion or obscurity arise from the misuse of the Pronoun. Hume says : " They declare it treason to attempt, imagine, or speak evil of the king, queen, or his heirs." This has, at least, a meaning, which shuts out the heirs of the queen. In such a case the feminine as well as the masculine pro- noun should be used : " his or her heirs." 185. Take care, in using the personal Pronouns, not to 108 SYNTAX, [lettem employ the objective case where you ought to employ thi nominative ; and take care also of the opposite error. " Him strikes I ; Her loves he." These offend the ear at once. But when a number of words come in between the discord- ant parts, the ear does not detect the error. " It was some of those who [that] came hither last night, and went away this morning, who [that] did the mischief, and not my brother and me." It ought to be " my brother and /." For, I am not, in this instance, the object but the actor, or supposed actor. " Who broke that glass? " " It was me" It ought to [should] be I ; that is to say, " It was / who [that] broke it." Fill up the sentence with all the words that are understood ; and if there be errors, you will soon discover them. After the words than and as, this error, of putting the objective for the nominative, is frequently com- mitted : as, " John was very rich, but Peter was richer than him ; and, at the same time, as learned as him, or any of his family." It ought to be richer than he ; as learned as he ; for the full meaning here is, richer than he was ; as learned as he was." But it does not always happen that the nominative case comes after than or as : " I love you more than him " j "I give you more than him " ; "I love you as well as him " : that is to say, I love you more than 1 love him j I give you more than I give to him ; I love you as well as / love him. Take away him and put he, in all these cases, and the grammar is just as good, only the mean- ing is quite differe?it. " I love you as well as him," means that I love you as well as I love him ; but " I love you as well as he" means, that I love you as well as he loves you. 186. You see, then, of what importance this distinction of cases is. But you must not look for this word, or that word, coming before or coming after, to be your guide. It is reason which [that] is to be your sole guide. When the xvn] AS RELATING TO PRONOUNS. 109 person or thing represented by the Pronoun is the object, then it must be in the objective case ; when it is the actor, or when it is merely the person or thing said to be this or that, then it must be in the nominative case. Read again paragraphs 46, 47, and 48, of Letter V. 187. The errors committed with regard to the con- founding of cases arise most frequently when the Pronouns are placed, in the sentences, at a great distance from the words which [that] are connected with them, and which [that] determine the case. " He and his sister, and not their uncle and cousins, the estate was given to." Here is nothing that sounds harsh ; but, bring the Pronoun close to the preposition that demands the objective case ; say the estate was given to he ; and then you perceive the gross- ness of the error in a moment. " The work of national ruin was pretty effectually carried on by the ministers ; but more effectually by the paper-money makers than they" This does not hurt the ear ; but it ought to be them ; " more effectually than by them." 188. The Pronouns mine, thine, theirs, yours, hers, his, stand frequently by themselves ; that is to say, not followed by any noun. But then the noun is understood, " That is hers." That is to say, her property ; her hat, or whatever else. No difficulty can arise in the use of these words. 189. But the use of the personal Pronoun it is a subject of considerable importance. Read again paragraphs 60 and 61, Letter VI. Think well upon what you find there ; and when you have done that, proceed with me. This Pro- noun with the verb to be, is in constant use in our language. To say, " Your uncle came hither last night," is not the same thing as to say, " It was your uncle who came hither last night," though the fact related be the same. "It is 1 who write" is very different from "/ wtite," though in no S YN TA X, [letter both cases, my being writing is the fact very clearly ex- pressed, and is one and the same fact. " // is those men who [that] deserve well of their country," means a great deal more than, " Those men deserve well of their coun- try." The principal verbs are the same ; the prepositions are the same ; but the real meaning is different. " // is the dews and showers that make the grass grow," is very different from merely observing, that, " Dews and showers make the grass grow." 190. Doctor Lowth has given it as his opinion that it is not correct to place plural nouns, or pronouns, after the it, thus used ; an opinion which [that] arose from the want of a little more reflection. The it has nothing to do, grammati- cally speaking, with the rest of the sentence. The it, together with the verb to be, express [expresses ?] states of being, in some instances, and in others this phrase serves to mark, in a strong manner, the subject in a mass, of what is about to be affirmed or denied. Of course, this phrase, which is in almost incessant use, may be followed by nouns and pro- nouns in the singular, or in the plural number. I forbear to multiply examples, or to enumerate the various ways in which this phrase is used, because one grain of reasoning is worth whole tons of memory. The principle being once in your mind, it will be ready to be applied to every class of cases, and every particular case of each class. 191. For want of reliance on principles, instead of ex- amples, how the latter have swelled in number, and gram- mar books in bulk ! But, it is much easier to quote examples than to lay down principles. For want of a little thought as to the matter immediately before us, some grammarians have found out " an absolute case," as they call it ; and Mr. Lindley Murray gives an instance of it in these words : " Shame being lost, all virtue is lost." The full meaning of xvii.] AS RELATING TO PRONOUNS. ill the sentence is this : " It being, or the state of things being such, that shame is lost, all virtue is lost." 192. Owing to not seeing the use and power of this it in their true light, many persons, after long puzzling, think they must make the pronouns, which [that] immediately follow, conform to the cases, which [that] the verbs and prepositions of the sentence demand. " It is them, and not the people whom [that] I address myself to." "It was him, and not the other man, that I sought after" The preposi- tions to and after demand an objective case ; and they have it in the words whom and that. The Pronouns which [that] follow the it, and the verb to be, must always be in the nominative case. And, therefore, in the above examples, it should be, " It is they, and not the other people " ; " It was he, and not the other man." 193. This it with its verb to be is sometimes employed with the preposition for, with singular force and effect. u It is for the guilty to live in fear, to skulk and to hang their heads ; but for the innocent it is to enjoy ease and tranquillity of mind, to scorn all disguise, and to carry them- selves erect." This is much more forcible than to say, " The guilty generally live in fear," and so on, throughout the sentence. The word for, in this case, denotes appro- priateness, or fitness ; and, the full expression would be this : " To the state of being, or state of things called guilti- ness, to live in fear is fitting, or is appropriated If you pay attention to the reason on which the use of these words is founded, you will never be at a loss to use them properly. 194. The word it is the greatest troubler that I know of in language. It is so small, and so convenient, that few are careful enough in using it. Writers seldom spare this word. Whenever they are at a loss for either a nominative or an objective to their sentence, they, without any kind of H2 SYNTAX, [letter ceremony, clap in an it. A very remarkable instance of this pressing of poor it into actual service, contrary to the laws of Grammar and of sense, occurs in a piece of compo- sition, where we might, with justice, insist on correctness. This piece is on the subject of Grammar ; it is a piece writ- ten by a Doctor of Divinity, and read by him to students in grammar and language in an academy ; and the very sen- tence that I am now about to quote is selected, by the author of a Grammar, as testimony of high authority in favor of the excellence of his work. Surely, if correctness be ever to be expected, it must be in a case like this. I allude [re- fer] to two sentences in the " Charge of the Reverend Doctor Abercrombie to the Senior Class of the Philadel- phia Academy," published in 1806 ; which sentences have been selected and published by Mr. Lindley Murray,* as a testimonial of the merits of his Grammar ; and which sentences are, by Mr. Murray, given to us in the follow- ing words : " The unwearied exertions of this gentleman have done more toward elucidating the obscurities, and embellishing the structure of our language, than any other wtiter on the subject. Such a work has long been wanted ; and, from the success with which it is executed, can not be too highly appreciated" [valued]. 195. As, in the learned Doctor's opinion, obscurities can be elucidated, and as, in the same opinion, Mr. Mur- ray is an able hand at this kind of work, it would not be amiss were the grammarian to try his skill upon this article * Lindley Murray, 1 745-1826. His English Grammar first appeared in 1795, and has since that time enjoyed an extensive popularity. It is not to be supposed, however, that Cobbett is the only author that has questioned its merits. On the contrary, the gravest exceptions have been taken to some of its characteristics by critics whose opinions cam not safely be disregarded. xvn.] AS RELATING TO PRONOUNS. II3 from the hand of his dignified eulogist ; for here is, if one may use the expression, a constellation of obscurities. Our poor oppressed it, which we find forced into the Doctor's service in the second sentence, relates to " such a work," though this work is nothing that has an existence, notwith- standing it is said to be " executed." In the first sentence, the '* exertions " become, all of a sudden, a " writer" : the exer- tions have done more than " any other writer " ; for, mind you, it is not the gentleman that has done anything : it is " the ex- ertions " that have done what is said to be done. The word gentleman is in the possessive [objective?] case, and has nothing to do with the action of the sentence. Let us give the sentence a turn, and the Doctor and the grammarian will hear how it will sound. " This gentleman's exertions have done more than any other writer" This is upon a level with " This gentleman's dog has killed more hares than any other sportsman ." No doubt Doctor Abercrombie meant to say, " The exertions of this gentleman have done more than those of any other writer. Such a work as this gentleman's has long been wanted : his work, seeing the successful manner of its execution, can not be too highly commended." Meant! No doubt at all of that ! And when we hear a Hampshire plowboy say, " Poll Cherrycheek have giv'd I thick handkecher," we know very well that he means to say, " Poll Cherrycheek has given me this handkerchief ; " and yet, we are but too apt to laugh at him, and to call him ignorant ; which is wrong ; because he has no pretensions co a knowledge of Grammar, and he may be very skillful as a plowboy. However, we will hot laugh at Doctor Aber- crombie, whom I knew, many years ago, for a very kind and worthy man, and who baptized your elder brother and elder sister. But if we may, in any case, be allowed to laugh at the ignorance of our fellow-creatures, that case cei xi4 SYNTAX, [letter tainly does arise when we see a professed grammarian, the author of voluminous precepts and examples on the sub- ject of Grammar, producing, in imitation of the possessors of invaluable medical secrets, testimonials vouching for the efficacy of his literary panacea, and when, in those very testimonials, we find most flagrant instances of bad Grammar. 196. However, my dear James, let this strong and strik- ing instance of the misuse of the word it serve you in the way of caution. Never put an it upon paper without think- ing well of what you are about. When I see many its in a page, I always tremble for the writer. 197. We now come to the second class of Pronouns; that is to say, the Relative Pronouns, of which you have had some account in Letter VI, paragraphs 62, 63, 64, 65,. and 66 ; which paragraphs you should now read over again with attention. 198. Who, which becomes whose in the possessive case, and whom in the objective case, is, in its use, confined to rational beings ; for though some writers do say, " the country whose fertility is great," and the like, it is not cor- rect. We must say, "the country the fertility of which." But if we personify ; if, for instance, we call a nation a she, or the sun a he, we must then, if we have need of rela- tive Pronouns, take these, or the word that, which is a rela- tive applicable to rational as well as irrational and even in- animate beings. [" Mr. George Washington Moon discountenances the use of whose as the possessive of which. He says, ' The best writers, when speaking of inanimate objects, use of which instead of whose.' The correctness of this statement is doubtful. The truth is, I think, that good writers use that form for the possessive case of which that in their xvii. j AS RELATING TO PRONOUNS. 115 judgment is, in each particular case, the more euphonious, giving the preference, perhaps, to of which. On this sub- ject Dr. Campbell says : ' The possessive of who is properly whose. The pronoun which, originally indeclinable, had no possessive. This was supplied, in the common peri- phrastic manner, by the help of the preposition and the article. But, as this could not fail to enfeeble the expres- sion, when so much time was given to mere conjunctives, all our best authors, both in prose and verse, have now come regularly to adopt, in such cases, the possessive of who, and thus have substituted one syllable in the room of three, as in the example following : " Philosophy, whose end is to instruct us in the knowledge of nature," for " Philoso- phy, the end of which is to instruct us." Some grammarians remonstrate ; but it ought to be remembered that use, well established, must give law to grammar, and not grammar to use.' " Professor Bain says : ' Whose, although the possessive of who, and practically of which, is yet frequently em- ployed for the purpose of restriction : " We are the more likely to guard watchfully against those faults whose de- formity we have seen fully displayed in others." This is better than " the deformity of which we have seen." " Prop- ositions of whose truth we have no certain knowledge." — Locke.' Dr. Fitzedward Hall says that the use of whose for of which, where the antecedent is not only irrational but inanimate, has had the support of high authority for several hundred years." — The Verbalist^ 199. The errors which [that] are most frequent in the use of these relative Pronouns arise from not taking care to use who and whom, when they are respectively demanded by the verbs or prepositions. "To who did you speak? Whom is come to-day?" These sentences are too glar 1 1 6 S YN TA X, [letter ingly wrong to pass from our pens to the paper ; but, as in the case of personal Pronouns, when the relatives are placed, in the sentence, at a distance from their antecedents, or verbs, or prepositions, the ear gives us no assistance. " Who, of all the men in the world, do you think I saw, the other day ? Who, for the sake of his numerous services, the office was given to." In both these cases it ought to be whom. Bring the verb in the first, and the preposition in the second case, closer to the relative : as, who I saw ; to who the office was given ; and you see the error at once. But take care ! " Whom, of all the men in the world, do you think was chosen to be sent as an embassador ? Whom, for the sake of his numerous services, had an office of honor bestowed upon him." These are nominative cases, and ought to [should] have who ; that is to say, " who was chosen ; who had an office!' I will not load you with nu- merous examples. Read again about the nominative and objective cases in Letter V. Apply your reason to the sub- ject. Who is the nominative, and whom the objective. Think well about the matter, and you will want no more examples. 200. There is, however, an erroneous way of employ- ing whom, which I must point out to your particular atten- tion, because it is so often seen in very good writers, and because it is very deceiving : " The Duke of Argyll, than whom no man was more hearty in the cause." " Cromwell, than whom no man was better skilled in artifice." A hun- dred such phrases might be collected from Hume, Black- stone, and even from Doctors Blair and Johnson. Yet they are bad Grammar. In all such cases, who should be made use of: for, it is nominative and not objective. "No man was more hearty in the cause than he was ; no man was better skilled in artifice than he was." It is a very xvii.] AS RELATING TO PRONOUNS. II) common Parliament-house phrase, and therefore presump- tively corrupt ; but it is a Doctor Johnson phrase too: " Pope, than whom few men had more vanity." The Doctor did not say, " Myself, than whom few men have been found more base, having, in my Dictionary, described a pensioner as a slave of state, and having afterward my- self become a pensioner." * 201. I differ, as to this matter, from Bishop Lowth, who says that " The relative who, having reference to no verb or preposition understood, but only to its antecedent, when it follows than, is always in the objective case : even though the Pronoun, if substituted in its place, would be in the nominative." And, then, he gives an instance from Milton : " Beelzebub, than whom, Satan except, none higher sat." It is curious enough that this sentence of the Bishop is, itself, ungrammatical ! Our poor unfortunate it is so placed as to make it a matter of doubt whether the Bishop meant it to relate to tuho, or to its antecedent. How- ever, we know his meaning ; but, though he says that who, when it follows than, is always in the objective case, he gives us no reason for this departure from a clear general principle : unless we are to regard as a reason the exam- ple of Milton, who has committed many hundreds, if not thousands, of grammatical errors, many of which the Bishop himself has pointed out. There is a sort of side-wind attempt at reason in the words, " having reference to no * The definition given by Dr. Johnson, in his Dictionary, of Pen- sioner, is as follows : " Pensioner — A slave of state hired by a stipend to obey his master. ' In Britain's senate he a seat obtains, And one more pensioner St. Stephen's gains.' — Pope." Under Pension Dr. Johnson says : kl In England it is generally under- stood to mean pay given to a state hireling for treason to his country." Ii8 SYNTAX, [letter verb or preposition understood." I do not see the reason, even if this could be : but, it appears to me impossible that a Noun or a Pronoun can exist in a grammatical state with- out having reference to some verb ox preposition, either ex- pressed or understood. What is meant by Milton ? " Than Beelzebub none sat higher, except Satan." And when, in order to avoid the repetition of the word Beelzebub, the relative becomes necessary, the full construction must be, " no devil sat higher than who sat, except Satan " ; and not, " no devil sat higher than whom sat." The supposition that there can be a Noun or Pronoun, which [that] has reference to no verb, and no preposition, is certainly a mis- take. [Of this, Dr. Fitzedward Hall remarks, in his " Recent Exemplifications of False Philology " : " That any one but Cobbett would abide this as English is highly improbable ; and how the expression — a quite classical one — which he discards can be justified grammatically, except by calling its than a preposition, others may resolve at their leisure and pleasure."] 202. That, as a relative, may, as we have seen, be ap- plied either to persons or [to] things ; but it has no posses- sive case, and no change to denote the other two cases. We say, " the man that gives, and the man that a thing is given to." But there are some instances when it can hardly be called proper [is not proper] to use that instead of who or whom. Thus, directly after a proper name, as in Hume : s< The Queen gave orders for taking into custody the Duke of Northumberland, who fell on his knees to the Earl of Arun- del, that [who] arrested him." Who would have been much better, though there was a who just before in the sentence. In the same author : " Douglas, zaho had prepared his peo- f and that [who] was bent upon taking his part openly." xvii.] AS RELATING TO PRONOUNS. 119 This never ought to [should] be, though we see it continu- ally. Either may do ; but both never ought to [should] be relatives of the same antecedent, in the same sentence. And, indeed, it is very awkward, to say the least of it, to use both in the same sentence, though relating to different antecedents, if all these be names of rational beings. " Th<- Lords, who [that] made the first false report, and the Com- mons, that seemed to vie with their Lordships in falsehood, became equally detested." That, as a relative, can not take the preposition or verb immediately before it : as» " The man to whom I gave the book " ; but I can not say, " the man to that I gave the book " nor ; " the knife to that I put a handle." " Having defeated whom, he re- mained quiet " ; but we can not, in speaking of persons, say, " Having defeated that, he remained quiet." [That is right, if there were several earls of Arundel, not otherwise. — " The Lords who," etc. As certain lords are clearly meant, the relative must be that. That " either may do," is not true.] 203. Which, as a relative Pronoun, is applied to irra- tional beings only, and, as to those beings, it may be em- ployed indifferently with that, except in the cases where the relative comes directly after a verb or a preposition, in the manner just spoken of. We say, " the town, the horse, the tree, which ; or to which " ; and so on. And we say, " the town, the tree, the horse, that" ; but not to or for that. 204. We may in speaking of nouns of multitude, when the multitude consists of rational creatures, and when we choose to consider it as a singular noun, make use of who or whom, or of zuhich, just as we please. We may say, " the crowd which was going up the street " ; or, " the crowd who was going up the street " ; but we can not make use of both in the same sentence and relating to 120 SYNTAX, [letter the same noun. Therefore, we can not say, " the crowd who was going up the street and which was making a great noise." We must take the who, or the which, in both places. If such noun of multitude be used in the plural number, we then go on with the idea of the rationality of the indi- viduals in our minds ; and therefore we make use of who and whom : " The assembly, ?vho rejected the petition, but to whom another was immediately presented." [It is certainly better to say, The crowd or the assembly which (or that, if the sense demands it), than to say, The crowd or the assembly who.~\ 205. Who, whose, whom, and which, are employed in asking questions ; to which, in this capacity, we must add what: " Who is in the house? Whose gun is that? Whom do you love best ? What has happened to-day ? " What means, generally, as a relative, " the thing which " : as, " Give me what [= the thing that] I want." It may be used in the nominative and in the objective case : " What hap- pens to-day may happen next week ; but I know not to what we shall come at last " ; or, " The thing which [that] hap- pens to-day may happen next week ; but I know not tJie thing which [that] we shall come to at last." 206. Which, though in other cases it can not be em- ployed as a relative with nouns which [that] are the names of rational beings, is, with such nouns, employed in asking questions : as, " The tyrants allege that the petition was disrespectful. Which of the tyrants ? " Again : " One of the petitioners had his head cleaved by the yeomanry. Which ? " That is to say, " Which of the petitioners was it?" 207. What, when used in asking for a repetition of what has been said: as, what? means, "Tell me that which [that] or the thing which [that] you have said." xvii.] AS RELATING TO PRONOUNS. 1 21 This word is used, and with great force, in the way of ex- clamation : " What, rob us of our right of suffrage, and then, when we pray to have our right restored to us, shut us up in dungeons ! " The full meaning is this : " What do tfiey do ? They rob us of our right." 203. It is not, in general, advisable to crowd these rela= tives together : but it sometimes happens that it is done. " Who, that has any sense, can believe such palpable false- hoods? What, that can be invented, can disguise these falsehoods ? By whom, that you ever [have] heard of, was a pardon obtained from the mercy of a tyrant ? Some men's rights have been taken from them by force and by genius, but whose, that the world ever [has] heard of be- fore, were taken away by ignorance and stupidity ? " 209. Whosoever, whosesoever, whomsoever, whatsoever, whichsoever, follow the rules applicable to the original words. The so is an adverb, which, in its general accepta- tion, means in like manner ; and ever, which is also an ad- verb, means, at any time, at all times, or always. These two words thus joined in whosoever, mean, who in any case that may be ; and so of the other three words. We some- times omit the so, and say, whoever, whomever, whatever^ and even whosever. It is a mere abbreviation. The so is understood ; and it is best not to omit to write it. Some- times the soever is separated from the Pronoun : " What man soever he might be." But the main thing is to under- stand the reason upon which the use of these words stands ; for, if you understand that, you will always use the words properly. 210. The Demonstrative Pronouns have been described in Letter VI, paragraph 67 ; and I have very little to add to what is there said upon the subject. They never change their endings, to denote gender or case ; and the propel 122 SYNTAX, [letter application of them is so obvious that it requires little to be said about it. However, we shall hear more of these Pro- nouns, when we come to the Syntax of Verbs. One ob- servation I will make here, however, because it will serve to caution you against the commission of a very common error. You will hardly say, " Them that write ' ; but you may say, as many do, " We ought always to have a great re- gard for them who [that] are wise and good." It ought to be, "for those who [that] are wise and good " ; because the word persons is understood: " those persons who [that] are wise and good " : and it is bad grammar to say, " them per- sons who [that] are wise and good." But observe, in another sense, this sentence would be correct. If I be [am] speak- ing of particular persons and if my object be [is] to make you understand that they are wise and good, and also that I love them ; then I say, very correctly, " I love them, who [ ; they] are wise and good." Thus : " The father has two children : he loves them who [ ; they] are wise and good ; and they love him, who [ ; he] is very indulgent." It is the mean- ing that must be your guide, and reason must tell you what is the meaning. " They, who can write, save a great deal of bodily labor," is very different from " Those who [that] can write save a great deal of bodily labor." The those stands for those persons ; that is to say, any persons, persons in general, who [that] can write ; whereas, the they, as here used, relates to some particular persons ; and the sentence means that these particular persons are able to write, and, by that means, they save a great deal of bodily labor. Doctor Blair, in his 21st Lecture, has fallen into an error of this sort : thus, " These two paragraphs are ex- tremely worthy of Mr. Addison, and exhibit a style, which [that] they, who [that] can successfully imitate, may esteem themselves happy." It ought to be those instead of they. xvii.] AS RELATING TO PRONOUNS. 123 But, this is not the only fault in this sentence. Why say " extremely worthy " ? Worthiness is a quality which [that] hardly admits of degrees, and surely it does not admit of extremes ! Then, again, at the close : to esteem is to prize \ to set value on, to value highly. How, then, can men " es- teem themselves happy"? How can they prize themselves happy? How can they highly value themselves happy? My dear James, let chamber-maids and members of the House of Commons, and learned Doctors, write thus : be you content with plain words which [that] convey your meaning ; say that a thing is quite worthy of a man ; and that men may deem themselves happy. It is truly curious that Lindley Murray should, even in the motto in the title-page of his English Grammar, have selected a sentence containing a grammatical error ; still more curious that he should have found this sentence in Doctor Blair's Lectures on Language ; and most curious of all that this sentence should be intended to inculcate the great utility of correct- ness in the composing of sentences. Here, however, are the proofs of this combination of curious circumstances: " They who [that] are learning to compose, and arrange their sentences with accuracy and order, are learning, at the same time, to think with accuracy and order."* Poh! Never think a man either learned or good merely on ac- count of his being called a Doctor. [The using of those instead of they, as Cobbett suggests, does not suffice to make the meaning unquestionable. If we would shun even the possibility of being misunderstood, we must use the relatives in this wise: "Those persons (certain persons being understood or designated) who have (all) learned to write, are able to do it." — " Those * This sentence is retained in the eighth edition of Lindley Murray's English Grammar. London, 1859. 124 S YN TA X, [letter persons (only) that have learned to write (i. e., such persons as have learned to write), are able to do it."] 211. The Indeterminate Pronouns have been enumer- ated in Letter VI, paragraph 71. They are sometimes Adjectives, as is stated in that paragraph. Whoever, what- ever, and whichever (that is, whosoever, whatsoever, which- soever), though relatives, are indeterminate too. But, in- deed, it signifies little how these words are classed. It is the use of them that we ought to [should] look to. Every, which I have now reckoned among these Pronouns, is never, nowadays, used without a noun, and is, therefore, in fact, an adjective. The error that is most frequently committed in using these Pronouns is the putting of the plural verb or plural Pronoun after nouns preceded by every, each, or either ; especially in the case of every : as, " every man ; every body ; every house." These are understood to mean, all the men, all the people, all the houses ; but, only one man, one body, one house, is spoken of, and therefore the verb ought to [should] be in the singular : as, " every body is disgusted " ; and not " every body are disgusted." 212. Before you use any of these words, you should think well on their true meaning ; for, if you do this, you will seldom commit errors in the use of them. Doctor Johnson in his Rambler, Number 177, has this passage : " Every one of these virtuosos looked on all his associates as wretches of depraved taste and narrow notions. Their conversation was, therefore, fretful and waspish, their be- havior brutal, their merriment bluntly sarcastic, and their seriousness gloomy and suspicious." Now these theirs certainly relate to every one, though the author meant, with- out doubt, that they should relate to the whole body of vir- tuosos, including the everyone. The word therefore adds to the confusion. The virtuosos were, therefore, fretful and xvil] AS RELATING TO PRONOUNb. 125 waspish. What for? Was it because every one saw his associates in a bad light ? How can my thinking meanly of others make their conversation fretful? If the Doctor had said, " These virtuosos looked on each other [one an- other] . . . ," the meaning would have been clear. 213. The Pronoun either, which means one of two, is very often improperly employed. It is sometimes used to denote one of three or more, which is always incorrect. We say, " either the dog, or the cat " : but not, " either the dog, the cat, or the pig" Suppose some one to ask me which I choose to have, mutton, veal, or woodcock ; I answer any one of them ; and not either of them. Doctor Blair has used any one where he ought to have used either: "The two words are not altogether synonymous •. yet, in the pres- ent case, any one of them would have been sufficient." [Either and neither should not — strictly — be used in re- lation to more than two objects. But, though both either and neither are strictly applicable to two only, they have been for a very long time used in relation to more than two by many good writers ; and, as it is often convenient so to use them, it seems probable that the custom will pre- vail. When more than two things are referred to, any and none should be used instead of either and neither : as, " any of the three," not, "either of the three"; "none of the four," not, " neither of the four." — The Verbalist. \ 214. In concluding this Letter on the Syntax of Pro- nouns, I must observe that I leave many of these indeter- minate Pronouns unnoticed in a particular manner. To notice every one individually could answer no purpose ex- cept that of swelling the size of a book ; a thing which [that] I most anxiously wish to avoid. 126 SYNTAX, [lette! LETTER XVIII SYNTAX, AS RELATING TO ADJECTIVES. 215. By this time, my dear James, you will hardly want [need?] to be reminded ot the nature of Adjectives. However, it may not be amiss for you to read again atten- tively the whole of Letter VI I. 216. Adjectives, having no relative effect, containing no representative quality, have not the dangerous power, possessed by pronouns, of throwing whole sentences into confusion, and of perverting or totally destroying the writ- er's meaning. For this reason, there is little to be said respecting the using of Adjectives. 217. When you make use of an Adjective in the way of comparison, take care that there be a congruity, or fit- ness, in the things or qualities compared. Do not say that a thing is deeper than it is broad or long ; or that a man is taller than he is wise or rich. Hume says, " The principles of the Reformation were deeper in the Prince's mind than to be easily eradicated." This is no comparison at all. It is nonsense. 218. When Adjectives are used as nouns, they must, in all respects, be treated as nouns. " The guilty, the inno- cent, the rich, the poor, are mixed together." But we can not say " a guilty," meaning to use the word guilty as a noun. 219. If two or more Adjectives be used as applicable to the same noun, there must be a comma, or commas, to sep- arate them : as, " a poor, unfortunate man " ; unless and or or be made use of, for then a comma or commas may be omitted : as, " a lofty and large and excellent house." 220. Be rather sparing than liberal in the use of Adjec« xviii.] AS RELATING TO ADJECTIVES. 127 tives. One which [that] expresses your meaning is better than two, which can, at best, do no more than express it, while the additional one may possibly do harm. But the error most common in the use of Adjectives is the endeav- oring [endeavor] to strengthen the Adjective by putting an adverb before it, and [omit] which adverb conveys the no- tion that the quality or property expressed by the Adjec- tive admits of degrees : as, " very honest, extremely just." A [one] man may be wiser than another wise man ; an [one] act may be more wicked than another wicked act ; but a [one] man can not be more honest than another ; every man who [that] is not honest must be dishonest ; and every act which [that] is not just must be unjust. " Very right," and " very wrong," are very common expressions, but they are both incorrect. Some expressions may be more com- mon than others : but that which [that, i. e., that thing that] is not right is wrong ; or that which [that] is not wrong is right. There are here no intermediate degrees. We should laugh to hear a man say, " You are a little right, I am a good deal wrong ; that person is honest in a trijling degree ; that act was too just." But our ears are accustomed to the adverbs of exaggeration. Some writers deal in these to a degree that tires the ear and offends the understanding. With them, everything is excessively or im- mensely or extremely or vastly or surprisingly or wonderfully or abundantly, or the like. The notion of such writers is that these words give strength to what they are saying. This is a great error. Strength must be found in the thought, or it will never be found in the words. Big-sound- ing words, without thoughts corresponding, are effort with- out effect. 221. Care must be taken, too, not to use such adjectives as are improper to be applied to the nouns along with which 128 SYNTAX, [letter they are used. " Good virtues ; bad vices ; painful tooth, aches ; pleasing pleasures." These are staringly absurd; but, among a select society of empty heads, " moderate Re- form " has long been a fashionable expression ; an expres- sion which [that] has been well criticised by asking the gentlemen who [that] use it how they would like to obtain moderate justice in a court of law, or to meet with moderate chastity in a wife. 222. To secure yourself against the risk of committing such errors, you have only to take care to ascertain the full meaning of every word you employ. LETTER XIX. SYNTAX, AS RELATING TO VERBS. 223. Let us, my dear James, get well through this Let- ter ; and then we may, I think, safely say that we know something of Grammar : a little more, I hope, than is known by the greater part of those who [that, i. e., those persons that] call themselves Latin and Greek scholars, and who [that] dignify their having studied these languages with the name of " Liberal Education' 1 224. There can be no sentence, there can be no sense in words, unless there be a Verb either expressed or under* stood. Each of the other Parts of Speech may alternately be dispensed with : but the Verb never can. The Verb being, then, of so much importance, you will do well to read again, before you proceed further, paragraphs 23, 24, 35, and 26, in Letter III, and the whole of Letter VIII. 225. Well, then, we have now to see how Verbs are used in sentences, and how a misuse of them affects the xix.] AS RELATING TO VERBS. 120 meaning of the writer. There must, you will bear in mind, always be a Verb expressed or understood. One would think that this was [is] not the case in the direction written on a post letter: "To John Goldsmith, Esq., Hambledon, Hampshire." But what do these words really mean ? Why, they mean, " This letter is to be delivered to John Gold- smith, who is an Esquire, who lives at Hambledon, which is in Hampshire." Thus, there are no less than five Verbs where we thought there was no Verb at all. " Sir, I beg you to give me a bit of bread." The sentence which [that] follows the Sir is complete ; but the Sir appears to stand wholly without connection. However, the full meaning is Vhis : " I beg you, who are a Sir, to give me a bit of bread." " What, John ? " That is to say, " What is said by you, whose name is John?" Again, in the date of a letter: "Long Island, March 25, 18 18." That is: "/ am now writing in Long Island ; this is the twenty-fifth day of March, and this month is in the one thousand eight hun- dred and eighteenth year of the Christian Era." 226. Now, if you take time to reflect a little on this matter, you will never be puzzled for a moment by those detached words, to suit which grammarians have invented vocative cases and cases absolute, and a great many other appellations, with which they puzzle themselves, and con- fuse and bewilder and torment those who [that] read their books. 227. We almost always, whether in speaking or in writ- ing, leave out some of the words which [that] are necessary to a full expression of our meaning. This leaving out is called the Ellipsis. Ellipsis is, in geometry, an oval figure • and the compasses, in the tracing of the line of this figi*~» do not take their full sweep all round, as in the tracing 01 a circle, but they make skips and leave out parts of the area, 9 130 S YN TA X, [letter Dr surface, which parts would be included in the circle, Hence it is, that the skipping over, or leaving out, in speak- ing or in writing, is called the Ellipsis ; without making use of which, we, as you will presently see, scarcely ever open our lips or move our pens. "He told me that he had given John the gun which [that] the gunsmith brought the other night." That is: "He told to me that he had given to John the gun, which [that] the gunsmith brought to this place, or hither, on the other night." This would, you see, be very cumbrous and disagreeable ; and, therefore, seeing that the meaning is quite clear without the words marked by italics, we leave these words out. But we may easily go too far in this elliptical way, and say, " He told me he had given John the gun the gunsmith brought the other night." This is leaving the sentence too bare, and making U to be, if not nonsense, hardly sense. 228. Reserving some further remarks, to be made by and-by, on the ellipsis, I have now to desire that, alrvays, when you are examining a sentence, you will take into, your view the words that are left out. If you have rnj doubt as to the correctness of the sentence, fill it up by ps*. ting in the left-out words, and if there be an error you wvV soon discover it. 229. Keeping in mind these remarks on the subject oi understood words, you will now listen attentively to me, while I endeavor to explain f o you the manner in which Verbs ought to be used in sentenceSc 230. The first thing is to come at a clear understand- ing with regard to the cases of nouns and pronouns as con- nected, in use, with Verbs and prepositions ; for, on this connection a great deal depends. Verbs govern, as it is called, nouns and pronouns ; that is to say, they sometimes cause, or make, nouns or pronouns to be in a certain case xix.] AS RELATING TO VERBS. 131 Nouns do not vary their endings to denote different cases , but pronouns do ; as you have seen in Letter VI. There, fore, to illustrate this matter, I will take the pronoun per- sonal of the third person singular, which in the nominative case is he, possessive case his, objective case him. [But nouns also vary their forms in the possessive case ; as, man, man's, men, men's, etc.] 231. When a man (it is the same with regard to any other person or thing) is the actor, or doer, the man is in the nominative case, and the corresponding pronoun is he. " He strikes." The same case exists when the man is the receiver or endurer of an action. " He is stricken." It is still the same case when the man is said to be in any state or condition. "He is unhappy." Indeed, there is no dif- ference in these two latter instances ; for, "he is stricken," is no other than to say that " he is in a state 01 condition, called stricken " [struck]. Observe, too, that in these two latter instances, the he is followed by the Verb to be ; he is stricken, he is unhappy ; and observe, moreover, that whenever the" Verb to be is used, the receiver, or be-er (if I may make a word) is, and must be, in the nominative case, But now let me stop a little to guard you against a puzzle, I say, " the Verb to be " ; but I do not mean those two words always. When I say the Verb to be, I may mean, as in the above examples, is. This is the Verb to be in the third person singular. " I write? I should say that here is the pronoun /and the Verb to write ; that is to say, it is the Verb to write in one of its forms. The to is the sign of the infinitive mode ; and the Verb in that state is the root, or the foundation, from which all the different parts or forms proceed. Having guarded ourselves against thi6 puzzler, let us come back to our nominative case. The actor, the doer, the receiver of an action, the be-er, must always be in !32 SYNTAX, [letter the nominative case ; and it is called nominative case be- cause it is that state, or situation, or case, in which the per- son or thing is named without being pointed out as the ob- ject, or end, of any foregoing action or purpose : as, " hi strikes ; he is stricken [struck] ; he is happy." This word nominative is not a good word ; acting and being case, would be much better. This word nominative, like most of the terms used in teaching grammar, has been [was] taken from the Latin. It is bad ; it is inadequate to its in- tended purpose ; but it is used ; and if we understand its meaning, or, rather, what it is designed to mean, its intrin- sic insufficiency is of no consequence. Thus, I hope, then, that we know what the nominative is : "He writes; he sings ; he is sick ; he is well ; he is smitten ; he is good " ; and so on, always with a he. 232. But (and now pay attention) if the action pass from the actor to a person or thing acted upon, and if there be no part of the Verb to be employed, then the person or thing acted upon is in the objective case ; as, " He smites him; he strikes him; he kills him." In these instances we wish to show, not only an action that is performed and the person who [that] performs it, but also the person upon whom it is performed. Here, therefore, we state the actor, \.he action, and the object; and the person or thing which [that] is the object, is in the objective case. The Verb is said, in such instances, to govern the noun or pronoun ; that is to say, to make it, or force it, to be in the objective case ; and to make us use him instead of he. 233. However, I remember that I was very much puz- zled on account of these cases. I saw that when " Peter was smitten" Peter was in the nominative case ; but that, when any person or thing "had smitten Peter," Peter was in the objective case. This puzzled me much ; and the loose xix.] AS RELATING TO VERBS. 133 and imperfect definitions of my grammar-book yielded me no clew to a disentanglement. Reflection on the reason for this apparent inconsistency soon taught me, however, that, in the first of these cases, Peter is merely named, or nomi- nated as the receiver of an action ; and that, in the latter instance, Peter is mentioned as the object of the action of some other person or thing, expressed or understood. I per- ceived that, in the first instance, "Peter is smitten" I had a complete sense. I was informed as to the person who [that] had received an action, and also as to what sort of action he had received. And I perceived that, in the second in- stance, "John has smitten Peter" there was an actor who took possession of the use of the Verb, and made Peter the object of it ; and that this actor, John, now took the nominative, and put Peter in the objective case. 234. This puzzle was, however, hardly got over when another presented itself; for I conceived the notion that Peter was in the nominative only because no actor was men- tioned at all in the sentence : but I soon discovered this to be an error : for I found that " Peter is smitten by John" still left Peter in the nominative ; and that, if I use the pronoun, I must say, " he is smitten by John " ; and not " him is smitten by John." 235. Upon this puzzle I dwelt a long time : a whole week, at least. For I was not content unless I could rec- oncile every thing to reason ; and I could see no reason for this. Peter, in this last instance, appeared to be the object? and there was the actor, John. My ear, indeed, assured me that it was right to say, " He is smitten by John " ; but my reason doubted the information and assurances of my ear. 236. At last, the little insignificant word by attracted my attention. This word, in this place, is a preposition. Ah f that is it ! prepositions govern nouns and prorrouns .' 134 SYNTAX, [letter that is to say, make them to be in the objective case ! So that John, who had plagued me so much, I found to be in the objective case ; and I found that, if I put him out, and put the pronoun in his place, I must say, " Peter is smitten by him" 237. Now, then, my dear James, do you clearly under- stand this ? If you do not, have patience. Read and think, and weigh well every part of what I have here written : for, as you will immediately see, a clear understanding with re- . gard to the cases is one of the main inlets to a perfect knowl- edge of grammar. 238= Verbs, of which there must be one at least, ex- pressed or understood, in every sentence, must agree in per- son and in number -with the nouns or pronouns which [that] are the nominatives of the sentence ; that is to say, the Verbs must be of the same person and same number as the nomi- natives are. Verbs frequently change their forms and end- ings to make themselves agree with the nominatives. How necessary is it, then, to know what is, and what is not, a nominative in a sentence ! Let us take an example, " John smite Peter." What are these words? John is a noun, third person, singular number, nominative case. Smite is a verb, first person, singular number. Peter is a noun, third person, singular number, objective case. Therefore, the sentence is incorrect ; for the nominative, John, is in the third person, and the Verb is in the first : while both ought to be in the same person. The sentence ought to be, " John smites Peter " ; and not " John smite Peter." [Here are more ought-tds where shonlds should be used.] 239. This is, to be sure, a very glaring error : but still it is no more than an error, and is, in fact, as excusable as any other grammatical error. " The men lives in the coun« Xix. j AS DELATING TO VERBS. 135 try." Here the Verb lives is in the singular number, and the noun men, which is the nominative, is in the plural number. "The men live in the country," it ought to be. These errors stare us in the face. But when the sentences become longer, and embrace several nominatives and Verbs, we do not so readily perceive *he errors that are committed. '• The intention of the Act ot Parliament, and not its sev- eral penalties, decide the character of the corrupt assembly by whom it was passed." Here the noun penalties comes so near to the Verb decide that the ear deceives the judg- ment. But the noun intention is the nominative to the Verb, which therefore ought to be decides. Let us take a sentence still more deceiving : " Without the aid of a fraud- ulent paper-money, the tyrants could never have performed any of those deeds, by which their safety have been endan- gered, and which [that] have, at the same time, made them detested." Deeds is the nominative to the last have and its principal Verb ; but safety is the nominative to the first have ; and therefore this first have ought to have been has. You see that the error arises from our having the plural noun deeds in our eye and ear. Take all the rest of the sentence away, and leave " safety have been " standing by itself, and then the error is as flagrant as " John smite Pe- ter." Watch me now, in the next sentence : " It must be observed that land fell greatly in price as soon as the cheats began to draw in their paper-money. In such cases the quantity and quality of the land is the same as it was be- fore ; but the price is reduced all of a sudden, by a change in the value and power of the money, which becomes very different from what it was." Here are two complete sen- tences, which [that] go very glibly off the tongue. There is nothing in them that offends the ear. The first is, in- deed, correct ; but the last is a mass of error- Quantity I 136 SYNTAX, [LETTER and quality, which are the nominatives in the fhst mem- ber of the sentence, make, together, a plural, and should have been followed, after the word land, by are and not by is j and the it Teas, which followed, should, of course, have been they were. In the second member of the sen- tence, value and power are the nominatives of becomes, which, therefore, should have been become ; and then, again, there follows an it was instead of they were. We are mis- led, in such cases, by the nearness of the singular noun, which comes in between the nominatives and the Verbs. We should not be likely to say, " Quantity and quality is j value and power becomes. 1 ' But when a singular noun comes in between such nominatives and the Verbs, we are very apt to be thinking of that noun, and to commit error. When we once begin, we keep on : and, if the sen- tence be long, we get together, at last, a fine collection of Verbs and pronouns, making as complete nonsense as heart can wish. Judge Blackstoxe, in the 4th Book, Chapter 33, says : " The very scheme and model of the administration of common justice, between party and party, was entirely settled by this king; and has continued nearly the same to this day." Administration of common justice was full upon the judge's ear ; down he clapped was ; and has naturally followed : and thus, my dear son, in grammar as in moral conduct, one fault almost necessarily produces others. 240. Look, therefore, at your nominative, before you put a Verb upon paper ; for, you see, it may be one word, or two or more words. But observe, if there be two or nore singular nouns or pronouns, separated by or, which, you know, is a disjoining conjunction ; then, the Verb must be in the singular ; as, " A soldier or a sailor who [that] has served his country faithfully, is fairly entitled to a pension ; but who will say that a prostituted peer, a - xix.] AS RELATING TO VERBS. 137 pimp, or a buffoon, merits a similar provision from the public ? " 241. It sometimes happens that there are, in the nomi- native, two or more nouns, or pronouns, and that they are in different numbers, or in different persons : as, " The min- ister or the borough-tyrants ." These nouns can not have the Verb to agree with them both. Therefore, if it be the conspiring of these wretches against the liberties of the peo- ple, of which we have to speak, we can not say, " The min- ister or the borough-tyrants conspire " ; because the Verb would not then agree in number with the noun minister : nor can we say conspires ; because the Verb would not agree with the noun borough-tyrants. Therefore, we must not write such sentences ; we must say, " The minister con- spires, or the borough-tyrants conspire, against the liberties of the people." Repetition is sometimes disagreeable to the ear ; but it is better to repeat, be it ever so often, than to write bad grammar, which is only another term for nonsense. 242. When nominatives are separated by nor, the rule of or must be followed. " Neither man nor beast is safe in such weather" ; and not are safe. And if nominates of different numbers present themselves, we must no«. give them a Verb which [that] disagrees with either the one or the other. We must not say, " Neither the halter nor the bayonets are sufficient to prevent us from obtaining our rights." We must avoid this bad grammar by using a dif- ferent form of words : as, " We are to be prevented from obtaining our rights by neither the halter nor the bayonets." And why should we wish to write bad grammar, if we can express our meaning in good grammar ? 243. If or or nor disjoin nouns and pronouns of differ- ent persons, these nouns and pronouns, though they be all of the same number, can not be the nominative of one and 138 SYNTAX, [letter the same Verb. We can not say, " They or I am in fault ; I, or they, or he, is the author of it ; George or I am the person." Mr. Lindley Murray says that we may use these phrases ; and that we have only to take care that the Verb agrees with that person which [that] is placed nearest to it : but he says, also, that it would be better to avoid such phrases by giving a different turn to our words. I do not like to leave anything to chance or to discretion when we have a clear principle for our guide. Fill up the sentences, and you will see what pretty work here is. " They am in fault, or I am in fault ; I is the author, or they is the author, or he is the author ; George am the person, or I am the person." Mr. Murray gives a similar latitude as to the Verbs used with a mixture of plurals and singulars, as men- tioned in the foregoing paragraph. The truth, I suspect, is, that Mr. Murray, observing that great writers frequently committed these errors, thought it prudent to give up the cause of grammar, rather than seem to set himself against such formidable authority. But if we follow this course, it is pretty clear that we shall very soon be left with no prin- ciple and no rule of grammar. 244. The nominative is frequently a noun of multitude : as, mod, parliament, gang. Now where this is the case, the Verb is used in the singular or in the plural, upon precisely the same principles that the pronouns are so used ; and as these principles, together with ample illustrations by the way of example, have been given you in Letter XVII, para- graph 181, I need say nothing more of the matter. I will just observe, however, that consistency, in the use of the Verb, in such cases, is the main thing to keep in view. We may say, " The gang of borough-tyrants is cruel " ; or, that " the gang of borough-tyrants are cruel " ; but if we go on to speak of their notoriously brutal ignorance, we must xix.] AS RELATING TO VERBS. 139 not say, " The gang of borough-tyrants is cruel and are also notoriously as ignorant as brutes." We must use is in both places, or are in both places. 245. In looking for the nominative of a sentence, take care that the relative pronoun be not a stumbling-block, for relatives have no changes to denote number or person ; and, though they may sometimes appear to be of themselves nominatives, they never can be such. "The men who [that] are here, the man who [that] is here ; the cocks that crow, the cock that crows." Now, if the relative be the nominative, why do the Verbs change, seeing that here is no change in the relative ? No : the Verb, in pursuit of its nominative, runs through the relatives to come at their antecedents, men, man, cocks, cock. Bishop Lowth says, however, that " the relative is the nominative when no other nominative comes between it and the Verb"; and Mr. Murray has very faithfully copied this erroneous ob- servation. " Who is in the house ? Who are in the house ? Who strikes the iron ? Who strike the iron ? Who was in the street ? Who were in the street ? " Now, here is, in all these instances, no other nominative between the rela- tive and the Verb ; and yet the Verb is continually varying. Why does it vary ? Because it disregards the relative and goes and finds the antecedent, and accommodates its num- ber to that antecedent. The antecedents are, in these in- stances, understood: "What person is in the house? What persons are in the house ? What person strikes the iron ? What persons strike the iron ? What person was in the street ? What persons were in the street ? " The Bishop seems to have had a misgiving in his mind, when he gave this account of the nominative functions of the relative ; for he adds, " The relative is of the same person as the antecedent : and the Verb agrees with it accordingly." 140 SYNTAX, [letter Oh ! oh ! but the relative is always the same, and is of any and of every number and person. How then can the Verb, when it makes its changes in number and person, be said to agree with the relative ? Disagree, indeed, with the relative the Verb can not any more than it can with a preposition ; for the relative has, like the preposition, no changes to de- note cases ; but the danger is that in certain instances the relative may be taken for a nominative, without your look- ing after the antecedent, which is the real nominative, and that thus, not having the number and person of the ante- cedent clearly in your mind, you may give to the Verb a wrong number or person. It is very seldom that those who [that] lay down erroneous rules furnish us with exam- ples by means of which we are enabled to detect the error of these rules ; yet, Mr. Murray has, in the present case, done this most amply. For in another part of his book he has these two examples: "I am the general who give the orders to-day. I am the general who [that] gives the orders to-day." Here the antecedents as well as the relatives are precisely the same ! the order of the words is the same ; and yet the Verbs are different. Why? Because in the first example, the pronoun / is the nominative, and in the second, the noun general. The first means, " I, who am the general here, give the orders to-day." The second means, " The general who [that] gives the orders to-day is I." Nothing can more clearly show that the relative can not be the nominative, and that to consider it as a nomi- native must lead to error and confusion. You will ob- serve, therefore, that when I, in the Etymology and Syntax as relating to relative pronouns, speak of relatives as being in the nominative case, I mean that they relate to nouns or to personal pronouns, which [that] are in that case. The same observation applies to the other cases. xix.] AS RELATING TO VERBS. 141 [There are few, if any, grammarians nowadays that take Cobbett's view of the subject treated of in this para- graph. " Clever as Cobbett's argument is, James," says my learned friend Prof. Davidson, " probably was not misled by it."] 246. We are sometimes embarrassed to fix precisely on the nominative, when a sort of addition is made to it by words expressing persons or things that accompany it : as, " The Tyrant, with the Spy, have brought Peter to the block." We hesitate to determine whether the Tyrant alone is in the nominative, or whether the nominative in- cludes the Spy ; and of course we hesitate which to employ, the singular or the plural Verb ; that is to say, has or have. The meaning must be our guide. If we mean that the act has been done by the Tyrant himself, and that the Spy has been a mere involuntary agent, then we ought to use the singular ; but if we believe that the Spy has been a co- operator ; an associate ; an accomplice ; then we must use the plural of the Verb. " The Tyrant with his Proclama- tion, has produced great oppression and flagrant violations of law." Has, by all means, in this case ; because the proclamation is a mere instrument. Give the sentence a turn : " The Tyrant has produced great oppression and flagrant violations of the law with his proclamation." This is good ; but " the Tyrant has brought Peter to the block with the Spy," is bad ; it sounds badly [bad] ; and it is bad sense. It does not say what we mean it should say. "A leg of mutton, with turnips and carrots, is very good." If we mean to say that a leg of mutton when cooked with these vegetables, is good, we must use is; but if we be speaking of the goodness of a leg of mutton, and these vege- tables taken altogether, we must use are. When with means along with, together with, in company with, and the 142 SYNTAX, [LETTEfc like, it is nearly the same as and ; and then the plural Verb must be used. "He, with his bare hand, takes up hot iron." Not, " he, with his bare hand, take up." " He, with his brothers, are able to do much." Not, " is able to do much." If the pronoun be used instead of brothers, it will be in the objective case : " He, with them, are able to do much." But this is no impediment to the including of the noun (represented by them) in the nominative. With, which is a preposition, takes the objective case after it : but if the persons or things represented by the words coming after the preposition, form part of the actors in a sentence, the understood nouns make part of the nominatives. " The bag, with the guineas and dollars in it, were stolen," For if we say was stolen, it is possible for us to mean that the bag only was stolen. " Sobriety, with great industry and talent, enable a man to perform great deeds." And not en- ables : for, sobriety alone would not enable a man to do great things. " The borough-tyranny, with the paper- money makers, have produced misery and starvation." And not has ; for we mean that the two have co-operated. " Zeal, with discretion, do much " ; and not, does much ; for we mean, on the contrary, that it does nothing. It is the meaning that must determine which of the numbers we ought, in all such cases, to employ. [All wrong. An adjunct does not change the number oj the nominative. " The tyrant, with (i. e., aided by) the spy, has brought Peter to the block." " Sobriety s with (i. e,, coupled with) great industry and talent, enables a man to perform great deeds." " Zeal, with (i. e., directed by) dis- ci etion, does much." If the second substantive is consid- ered as forming part of the subject, it should be connected by and.~\ 247o The Verb to be sometimes comes between two xix.] AS RELATING TO VERBS. 143 nouns of different numbers. " The great evil is the bor- ough-debt." In this sentence there is nothing to embar- rass us ; because evil and borough-debt are both in the sin- gular. But, " the great evil is the taxes," is not so clear of embarrassment. The embarrassment is the same, when there is a singular noun on one side, and two or more sin- gulars or plurals on the other side : as, " The curse of the country is the profligacy, the rapacity, the corruption of the law-makers, the base subserviency of the administrators of the law, and the frauds of the makers of paper-money." Now, we mean here, that these things constitute, or form, or make up, a curse. We mean that the curse consists of these things ; and if we said this, there would be no puz- zling. " The evil is the taxes." That is, the taxes consti- tute the evil ; but we can not say, " the evil are the taxes " ; nor can we say, that the " curse are these things." Avoid, then, the use of the Verb to be in all such cases. Say, the curse of the country consists of, or arises from, or is pro- duced by. Dr. Blair, in his 19th Lecture, says, "A feeble, a harsh, or an obscure style, are always faults? The 07 required the singular Verb is ; but faults required are. If he had put is and faulty, there would have been no doubt of his being correct. But as the sentence now stands, there is great room for doubt, and, that, too, as to more than one point : for fault means defect, and a style, which is a whole v can not well be called a defect, which means a want of good- ness in a part. Feebleness, harshness, obscurity, are faults. But to call the style itself, to call the whole thing a faulty is more than the Doctor meant. The style may be faulty i and yet it may not be a fault. The Doctor's work is faulty ; but surely, the work is not a fault ! 248. Lest you should be, in certain instances, puzzled to find your nominative case, which, as you now see, consti* 144 SYNTAX* [letter tutes the main-spring and regulator of every sentence, 1 will here point out to you some instances wherein there is used, apparently, neither Verb nor nominative. " In gen- eral I dislike to drink wine." This in general is no more, in fact, than one 7vord. It means generally. But some- times there is a Verb comes in : " generally speaking." Thus : " The borough-tyrants, generally speaking, are great fools as well as rogues." That is to say, "when we speak generally " ; or, " if we are speaking generally " ; or " when men or people speak generally." For observe that there never can be a sentence without a Verb expressed or under- stood, and that there never can be a Verb without a nomi- native case expressed or understood. 249. Sometimes not only two or more nouns, or pro- nouns, may be the nominative of a sentence, but many other words along with them may assist in making a nominative : as, " Pitt, Rose, Steele, and their associates, giving to Wal- ter a sum of the public money, as a reward for libeling the sons of the king, was extremely profligate and base." That is to say. this act of Pitt and his associates was extremely profligate and base. It is, when you come to inquire, the act which [that] is the nominative, and all the other words only go to describe the origin and end of the act. 250. You must take care that there be a nominative, and that it be clearly expressed or understood. " The Attorney- General Gibbs, whose malignity induced him to be ex- tremely violent, and was listened to by the Judges." The first Verb induced has a nominative, namely, the malignity of the Attorney-General Gibbs : but the was has no nomi- native, either expressed or clearly understood ; and, we can not, therefore, tell what or who it was that was listened to : Whether the malignity of Gibbs, or Gibbs himself. It should fcix.] AS DELATING TO VERBS. l\% have been, and who, or, and he, was listened to ; and then we should have known that it was Gibbs himself that was listened to. The omitting of the nominative, five hundred instances of which I could draw from Judge Blackstone and Doctor Johnson, arises very often from a desire to avoid a repetition of the noun or pronouns ; but repetition is always to be preferred before [to] obscurity. 251. Now, my dear James, I hope that I have explained to you, sufficiently, not only what the nominative is, but what are its powers in every sentence, and that I have im- printed deeply on your mind the necessity of keeping th<> nominative constantly in your eye. For want of doing this, Judge Blackstone has, in Book IV, Chap. 17, committed some most ludicrous errors, " Our ancient Saxon laws nominally punished theft with death, if above the value of twelve-pence ; but the criminal was permitted to redeem his life by a pecuniary ransom ; as among their German ances- tors." What confusion is here ! Whose ancestors ? Theirs. Who are they? Why the criminal. Theirs, if it relate to anything, must relate to laws ; and then the laws have an- cestors. Then, what is it that was to be of above the value of twelve-pence ? The death, or the theft ? By " if above the value of twelve-pence," the Judge, without doubt, meant, " if the thing stolen were above the value of twelve-pence " ; but he says no such thing ; and the meaning of the words is, if tlie death were above the value of twelve-pence. The sentence should have stood thus : " Our ancient Saxon laws nominally punished theft with death, if the thing stolen were above the value of twelve-pence ; but the criminals were permitted to redeem their lives by a pecuniary ransom ; as among their German ancestors." I could quote, from the same author, hundreds of examples of similar errors ; but were there only this one to be found in a work which [that] 146 SYNTAX, [letter is composed of matter which [that] was read, in the way of Lectures, by a professor of law to students in the Univer- sity of Oxford, even this one ought to be sufficient to convince you of the importance of attending to the precepts which [that] I have given you relative to this part of our subject. 252. As to the objective case, it has nothing to do with Verbs ; because a noun which [that] is not in the nomina- tive must be in the objective ; and because Verbs do never vary their endings to make themselves agree with the ob- jective, This case has been sufficiently explained under the head of personal pronouns, which have endings to de» note ito 253. The possessive case, likewise, has nothing to do with Verbs, only you must take care that you do not, in any instance, look upon it as a nominative. " The quality ot the apples were good." No: it must be was; lor quality is the nominative ; and apples the possessive. " The want of learning, talent, and sense, are more visible in the two houses of parliament than in any other part of the nation." Take care upon all such occasions. Such sentences are, as to grammatical construction, very deceiving. It should be " is more visible " ; for want is the nominative ; and learn- ing, talent, and sense, are in the possessive. The want of learning, and so on. 254. You now know all about the person and number of Verbs. You know the reasons upon which are founded their variations with regard to these two circumstances. Look, now, at the conjugation in Letter VIII, paragraph 98 ; and you will see that there remain the Times and Modes to be considered. 255. Of Times there is very little to be said here. All the fanciful distinctions of perfect present, more past, and more perfect past, and numerous others, only tend to be- /;ix.] AS RELATING TO VERBS. 147 wilder, confuse, and disgust the learner. There can be but three times, the presejit, the past, the future ; and, for the expressing of these, our language provides us with words and terminations the most suitable that can possibly be con- ceived. In some languages which [that] contain no little words such as our signs, -will, shall, may, and so on, the Verbs themselves change their form in order to express what we express by the help of these signs. There are two past times in French, for instance : J will give you an ex- ample in order to explain the matter. " The working-men, every day, gave money to the tyrants, who, in return, gave the working-men dungeons and axes." Now here is our word gave, which is the past time of the Verb to give. It is the same word, you see, in both instances : but you will see it different in the French : " Tous les jours les ouvriers donnaient de l'argent aux tyrants, qui, en retour, donnerent aux ouvriers des cachots et des haches." You see that, in one place, our give is translated by donnaient, and the other place, by donnerent. One of these is called, in French, the past imperfect, and the other the past perfect. This dis- tinction is necessary in the French ; but similar distinctions are wholly unnecessary in English, 256. In the Latin language, the Verbs change their end- ings so as to include in the Verbs themselves what we express by our auxiliary Verb to have. And they have as many changes ; or different endings, as are required to express all those various circumstances of time which [that] we express by work, worked, shall work, may work, might work, have worked, had worked, shall have worked, may have worked, might have worked, and so on. It is, therefore, necessary for the Latins to have distinct appellations to suit these va- rious circumstances of time, or states of an action ; but such distinction of appellations can be of no use to us, whose 148 SYNTAX, [letter Verbs never vary their endings to express tinu except the single variation from the present to the past ; foi even as to the future, the signs answer our purpose. In our compound times, that is to say, such as / have worked, there is the Verb to have, which becomes had, or shall have, and so on. 257. Why, then, should we perplex ourselves with a multitude of artificial distinctions, which [that] can not, by any possibility, be of any use in practice? These distinc- tions have been introduced from this cause : those who [that] have written English Grammars have been taught Latin ; and either unable to divest themselves of their Latin rules, or unwilling to treat with simplicity that which [that] if made somewhat of a mystery, would make them appear more learned than the mass of people, they have endeav- ored to make our simple language turn and twist itself so as to become as complex in its principles as the Latin lan- guage is. 258. There are, however, some few remarks to be made with regard to the times of Verbs : but before I make them, I must speak of the participles. Just cast your eye again on Letter VIII, paragraphs 97 and 102. Look at the con- jugations of the Verbs to work, to have, and to be, in that same Letter. These participles, you see, with the help of to have and to be, form our compotind times. I need not tell you that I was working means the same as / worked, only that the former supposes that something else was going on at the same time, or that something happened at the time I was working, or that, at least, there is some circum- stance of action or of existence collateral with my work- ing : as, " I was working when he came ; I was sick while I was working ; it rained while I was working ; she scolded while I was working." I need not tell you the use of do and did j I need not say that I do work is the same as I work* xix.] AS RELATING TO VERBS. 149 only the former expresses the action more positively, and adds some degree of force to the assertion ; and that did work is the same as worked, only the former is, in the past time, of the same use as do is in the present. I need not dwell here on the uses of will, shall, may, might, should, would, can, could, and must ; which uses, various as they are, are as well known to us all as the uses of our teeth and our noses ; and to misapply which words argues not only a de- ficiency in the reasoning faculties, but also a deficiency in instinctive discrimination. I will not, my dear James, in imitation of the learned doctors, pester you with a philo- logical examination into the origin and properties of words, with regard to the use of which, if you were to commit an error in conversation, your brother Richard, who is four years old, would instantly put you right. Of all these little words I have said quite enough before ; but when the Verbs to have and to be are used as auxiliaries to ptincipal Verbs, and, especially, when the sentences are long, errors of great consequence may be committed ; and, therefore, against these it will be proper to guard you. 259. Time is so plain a matter ; it must be so well Known to us, whether it be the present, the past, or the future, that we mean to express, that we shall hardly say, " We work" when we are speaking of our having worked last year. But you have seen in Letter XVI, paragraph 171 (look at it again), that Dr. Blair could make a mis- take in describing the time of an action. Doctor Blair makes use of " it had been better omitted." Meaning that it would have been better to omit it. This is a sheer vul- garism, like, " I had as lief be killed as enslaved." Which ought to be, " I would as lief." But the most common error is the using of the Verb to have with the passive participle, when the past ti??ie, simply, or the infinitive of the Verb, 15° SYNTAX, [letter ought to be used. "Mr. Speaker, I expected from the former language, and positive promises, of the Noble Lord and the Right Honorable the Chancellor of the Exchequer to have seen the Bank paying in gold and silver." This is House-of-Commons language. Avoid it as you would avoid all the rest of their doings. I expected to see, to be sure, and not have seen, because the have seen carries your act of seeing back beyond the period within which it is supposed to have been expected to take place. " I expected to have plowed my land last Monday." That is to say, " I last Monday was in the act of expecting to have plowed my land before that day" But this is not what the writer means. He means to say that, last Monday, or before that day, he was in the act of expecting to plow his land on that day. " I called on him and wished to have submitted my manu- script to him." Five hundred such errors are to be found in Dr. Goldsmith's works. " I wished, then and there, to submit my manuscript to him." I wished to ao something there, and did not then wish that I had done something before. [The locution, "It had been better," instead of, "It would have been better," is not a " sheer vulgarism." It is sanctioned by high grammatical authority and the usage of many careful writers. We may also say, " I had as lief," or " I would as lief," though the latter expression is gen- erally accounted preferable.] 260. When you use the active participle, take care that the times be attended to, and that you do not, by misapply cations, make confusion and nonsense. " I had not the pleasure of hearing his sentiments when I wrote that letter." It should be of having heard ; because the hearing must be supposed to have been wanted previous [previously] to the act of writing. This word wanted, and the word wanting, Six.] AS RELATING TO VERBS. 15 1 are frequently misused. " All that was wanting was hon- esty." It should be wanted. " The Bank is weighed in the balance, and found wanting," and not wanted. Found to be wanting, or in want ; in want of money to pay its notes. 261. I will not fatigue your memory with more exam- ples relating to the times of Verbs. Consider well what you mean ; what you wish to say. Examine well into the true meaning of your words, and you will never make a mistake as to the times. " / thought to have heard the noble Lord produce something like proof." No ! my dear James will never fall into the use of such senseless gabble ! You would think of hearing something ; you would think of to hear, not to have heard. You would be waiting to hear, and not, like these men, be waiting to have heard. " I should have liked to have been informed of the amount of the Ex- chequer Bills." A phraseology like this can be becoming only in those Houses where it was proposed to relieve the distress of the nation by setting the laborers to dig holes one day and [to] fill them up the next. 262. It is erroneous to confound the past time with the passive participle of the Verb. But now, before I speak of this very common error, let us see a little more about the participles. You have seen, in Letter VIII, what the parti- ciples are : you have seen that working is the active parti- ciple, and xvorked the passive participle. We shall speak fully of the active by-and-by. The passive participle and the Verb to be, or some part of that Verb, make what is called the passive Verb. This is not a Verb which [that], in its origin, differs from an active Verb, in like manner as a neuter Verb differs from an active Verb. To sleep is neu- ter in its origin, and must, in all its parts, be neuter ; but every active Verb may become a passive Verb. The passive Verb is, in fact, that state of an active Verb which [that] t ^ 2 SYNTAX, [letter expresses, as we have seen above, the action as being re* ceived or endured ; and it is called passive because the re~ ceiver or endureroi the action is passive ; that is to say, does nothing. "John smites; John is smitten.'" Thus, then, the passive Verb is no other than the passive participle, used along with some part of the Verb to be. 263. Now, then, let us see a specimen of the errors of which I spoke at the beginning of the last paragraph. When the Verb is regular, there can be no error of this sort ; be- cause the past time and the passive participle are written in the sam«i manner : as, " John worked ; John is worked." But, whtn the Verb is irregular, and when the past time and the passive participle are written in a manner different from each other, there is room for error, and error is often committed: " John smote ; John is smote." This is gross. It offends the ear ; but when a company, consisting of men who [that] have been enabled, by the favor of the late Will- iam Pitt, to plunder and insult the people, meet under the name of a Pitt Club, to celebrate the birthday of that cor- rupt and cruel minister, those who [that] publish accounts of their festivities, always tell us that such and such toasts were drank ; instead of drunk. I drank at my dinner to- day ; but the milk and water which [that] I drank were drunk by me. In the lists of Irregular Verbs, in Letter VIII, the differences between the past times and the pas- sive participles are all clearly shown. You often hear peo- ple say, and see them write, " We have spoke ; it was spoke in my hearing " ; but "we have came ; it was did" are just as correct. 264. Done is the passive participle of to do, and it is very often misused. This done is frequently a very great offender against Grammar. To do is the act of doing. We often see people write, " I did not speak, yesterday, so well Xix.] AS RELATING TO VERBS. 153 as I wished to have done." Now, what is meant by the writer ? He means to say that he did not speak so well as he then wished, or was wishing, to speak. Therefore, the sentence should be, "I did not speak yesterday so well as I wished to do." That is to say, " so well as I wished to do it " ; that is to say, to do, or to perform, the act of speaking. 265. Take great care not to be too free in your use of the Verb to do in any of its times or modes. It is a nice lit- tle handy word, and, like our oppressed it, it is made use of very often when the writer is at a loss for what to put down. To do is to act, and, therefore, it never can, in any of its parts, supply the place of a neuter Verb. Yet, to employ it for this purpose is very common. Dr. Blair, in his 23d Lecture, says : " It is somewhat unfortunate that this Num- ber of the Spectator did not end, as it might very well have done, with the former beautiful period." That is to say, " done zV." And then we ask : done what? Not the act of ending : because, in this case, there is no action at all. The Verb means to come to an end ; to cease ; not to go any further. This same Verb to end is sometimes an active Verb : " I end my sentence " ; and then the Verb to do may supply its place : as, " I have not ended my sentence so well as I might have done " ; that is, done it : that is, done, or performed, the act of ending. But the Number of the Spectator was no actor ; it was expected to perform nothing : it was, by the Doctor, wished to have ceased to proceed. " Did not end as it might very well have ended. . . . ." This would have been correct ; but the Doctor wished to avoid the repetition, and thus he fell into bad Grammar. " Mr. Speaker, I do not feel so well satisfied as I should have done, if the Right Honorable Gentleman had explained the matter more fully." You constantly hear talk like this among those whom [that] the Boroughs make law- 154 SYNTAX, [letter givers. To feel satisfied is, when the satisfaction is to arise from conviction produced by fact or reasoning, a senseless expression ; and to supply its place when it is, as in this case, a neuter Verb, by to do, is as senseless. Done what? Done the act of feeling ! I do not feel so well satisfied as I should have done, or executed, ox performed the act of feel- ing ! What incomprehensible words ! Very becoming in the creatures of corruption, but ridiculous in any other per- sons in the world. 266. But do not misunderstand me. Do not confound do and did, as parts of a principal Verb, with the same words, as parts of an auxiliary. Read again Letter VIII, paragraph in. Do and did, as helpers, are used with neu- ter as well as with active Verbs ; for here it is not their business to supply the place of other Verbs, but merely to add strength to affirmations and negations, or to mark time : as, " The sentence does end, I do feel easy." But done, which is the passive participle of the active Verb to do, can never be used as an auxiliary. The want of making this distinc- tion has led to the very common error of which I spoke in the last paragraph, and against which I am very desirous to guard you. 267. In sentences which [that] are negative, or inter- rogative, do and did express time : as, ' ' You do not sleep ; did you not feel? " But they do not here supply the place of other Verbs : they merely help ; and their assistance is useful only as to the circumstance of time ; for we may say, "You sleep not ; felt you not ? " And if in answer to this question I say, " I did," the word feel is understood : " I did feel." 268. Well, then, I think, that as far as relates to the active Verb, the passive Verb, and the passive participle, enough has now been said. You have seen, too, something of the difference between the functions of the active Verb, xix.] AS RELATING TO VERBS. 155 and those of the neifter ; but there are a few remarks to be made with regard to the latter. A neuter Verb can not have a noun or a pronoun in the objective case immediately after it ; for though we say, " I dream a dream" it is understood that my mind has been engaged in a dream. "I live a good life" means that I am living in a good manner. " I walk my horse abc ut," means that I lead or conduct my horse in the pace called a walk. Nor can a neuter Verb become passive ; because a passive Verb is no other than a Verb describing an action received ox endured. " The noble Earl, on returning to town, found that the noble Countess was eloped with his Grace." I read this very sentence in an English newspaper not long ago. It should be had eloped ; for was eloped means that somebody had eloped the Countess : it means that she had received or endured, from some actor, the act of eloping, whereas, she is the actress, and the act is confined to herself. The Verb is called neuter because the action does not pass over to anything. There are Verbs which [that] are inactive : such as, to sit, to sleep, to exist. These are also neuter Verbs, of course. But inactivity is not necessary to the making of a Verb neuter. It is suffi- cient for this purpose that the action do not pass from the actor to any object. 269. In the instance just mentioned the error is flagrant : " Was eloped" is what few persons would put down in writ- ing : yet anybody might do it upon the authority of Dr. fohnson : for he says, in his Dictionary, that to elope is an active Verb, though he says that it is synonymous with to ran away, which, in the same Dictionary, he says, is a neu- ter Verb. However, let those who [that] prefer Doctor Johnson's authority to the dictates of reason and common sense say that "his Grace eloped the Countess ; and that, ac- cordingly, the Countess was eloped." 156 SYNTAX, [letter 270. The danger of error, in cases of this kind, arises from the circumstance of there being many Verbs which [that] are active in one sense and neuter in another. The Verb to endure, for instance, when it means to support, to sustain, is active : as, " I endure pain" But when it means to last, to continue, it is neuter : as, " The earth endures from age to age." In the first sense we can say, the pain is endured : but, in the last, we can not say the earth is en- dured from age to age." We say, indeed, I am fallen ; the colt is grown, the trees are rotten, the stone is crumbled, the post is moldered, the pitcher is cracked ; though to grow, to rot, to crumble, to molder, to crack, are all of them neuter Verbs. But it is clearly understood here that we mean that the colt is in a grown, or augmented state ; that the trees are in a rotten state ; and so on : and it is equally clear that we could not mean that the Countess was in an eloped state. " The noble Earl found that the Countess was gone." This is correct, though to go is a neuter Verb. But gone, in this sense, is not the participle of the Verb to go ; it is merely an adjective, meaning absent. If we put any word after it, which [that] gives it a verbal signification, it becomes er- roneous. " He found that the Countess was gone out of the house." That is to say, was absent out of the house ; and this is nonsense. It must in this case be, " He found that the Countess had gone out of the house." 271. Much more might be said upon this part of my subject ; many niceties might be stated and discussed ; but I have said quite enough on it to answer every useful pur- pose. Here, as everywhere else, take time to thi7ik. There is a reason for the right use of every word. Have your meaning clear in your mind ; know the meaning of all the words you employ ; and then you will seldom commit errors. xix.] AS RELATING TO VERBS. 157 272= There remains to be noticed the use of the active participle, and then we shall have a few, and only a few, words to say upon the subject of the modes of Verbs. As to the active participle, paragraph 97, in Letter VIII, will have told you nearly all that is necessary. We know well that / am working, means that / work, and so on. There is great nicety in distinguishing the circumstances which [that] call for the use of the one from those which [that] call for the other : but, like many other things, though very diffi- cult to explain by words, these circumstances are perfectly well understood, and scrupulously attended to, by even the most illiterate persons. The active participle is, you know, sometimes a no un in its functions : as, " Working is good for our health." Here it is the nominative case to the Verb is. Sometimes it is an adjective : as, " the working peo- ple." As a noun it may be in any of the three cases : as, " Working is good ; the advantage of working ; I like work- ing." It may be in the singular or in the plural : " The working of the mines ; the workings of corruption." Of course it requires articles and prepositions as nouns require them. More need not be said about it ; and, indeed, my chief purpose in mentioning the active participle in this place is to remind you that it may be a nominative case in a sentence. 273. The modes have been explained in Letter VIII, paragraphs 92, 93, 94, 95, and 96. Read those paragraphs again. The infinitive mode has, in almost all respects, the power of a noun. " To work is good for our health." Here it is the nominative of the sentence. " To eat, to drink, and to sleep, are necessary." It can not become a plural ; but it may be, and frequently is, in the objective case : as, " / want to eat." The to is, in some few cases, omitted when the infinitive is in the objective case : as, " / dan 158 SYNTAX, [letter wiite." But, "I dare to write," is just as neat, and more proper. The to is omitted by the use of the ellipsis : as, " I like to shoot, hunt, and course." But care must be taken not to leave out the to, if you thereby make the meaning doubtful. Repetition is 'sometimes disagreeable, and tends to enfeeble language ; but it is always preferable to ob- scurity. 274. If you cast your eye once more on the conjugation of the Verb to work, in Letter VIII, you will see that 1 have there set down the three other modes, with all theii persons, numbers, and times. The imperative mode I dis- patched very quietly by a single short paragraph ; and, in- deed, in treating of the other two modes, the indicative and the subjunctive, there is nothing to do but to point out the trifling variations that our Verbs undergo in order to make them suit their forms to the differences of ?node. The in- dicative mode is that manner of using the Verb which [that] is applied when we are speaking of an action without any other action being at all connected with it, so as to make the one a condition or consequence of the other. " He works every day ; he rides out " ; and so on. But, there may be a condition or a consequence dependent on this working and riding: and in that case these Verbs must be in the sub- junctive mode ; because the action they express depends on something else, going before or coming after. " If he work every day, he shall be paid every day : if he ride out, he will not be at home by supper-time." The s is dropped at the end of the Verb here ; and the true cause is this, that there is a sign understood. If filled up, the sentence would stand thus : " If he should work ; if he should ride out." So that, after all, the Verb has, in reality, no change of termination to denote ?vhat is called mode. And all the fuss which [that] Grammarians have made about the potential modes, and xix.J AS RELATING TO VERBS. 1 59 other fanciful distinctions of the kind, only serve [serve only] to puzzle and perplex the learner. 275. Verbs in general, and, indeed, all the Verbs, ex- cept the Verb to be, have always the same form in the pres- ent time of the indicative and in that of tJie subjunctive, in all the persons, save the second and third person singular. Thus, we say, in the present of the indicative, / work, we work, you work, they work ; and in the subjunctive the same. But we say, in the former, thou workest, he works ; while, in the subjunctive, we say, thou work, he work ; that is to say, thou mayst work, or mightest, or shouldest (and so on), work ; and he may work, or might or should, as the sense may require. Therefore, as to all Verbs, except the Verb to be, it is only in these two persons that anything can hap- pen to render any distinction of mode necessary. But the Verb to be has more variation than any other Verb. All other Verbs have the same form in their indicative present time as in their infinitive mode, with the trifling exception of the st and s added to the second and third person singu- lar : as, to have, to write, to work, to run ; I have, I write, I work, I run. But the Verb to be becomes, in the present time of its indicative, I am, thou art, he is, we are, you are, they are ; which are great changes. Therefore, as the sub- junctive, in all its persons, takes the infinitive of the Verb without any change at all, the Verb to be exhibits the use of this mode most clearly ; for, instead of I am, thou art, he is, we are, the subjunctive requires, I be, thou be, he be, we be ; that is to say, I may be, or might be : and so on. Look now at the conjugation of the Verb to be, in Letter VIII, paragraph 117 ; and then come back to me. 276. You see, then, that this important Verb, to be, has a form in some of its persons appropriated to the subjunctive mode. This is a matter of consequence. Distinctions, with- 160 SYNTAX, [LETTER out differences in the things distinguished, are fanciful, and, at best, useless. Here is a real difference ; a practical differ- ence ; a difference in the form of the word. Here is a. past time of the subjunctive ; a past time distinguished, in some of its persons, by a different manner of spelling or writing the word. If I be ; if I were ; if he were ; and not if I was, if he was. In the case of other Verbs, the past of the in- dicative is the same as the past of the subjunctive ; that is to say, the Verb is written in the same letters : but in the case of the Verb to be it is otherwise. If I worked, if I smote, if I had. Here the Verbs are the same as in I worked, I smote, I had ; but in the case of the Verb to be, we must say, in the past of the indicative, I was, and in that of the subjunctive, if I were. 277. The question, then, is this : What are the cases in which we ought to use the subjunctive form? Bishop Lowth, and, on his authority, Mr. Lindley Murray, have said, that some conjunctions have a government of verbs ; that is to say, make them or force them to be in the subjunctive mode. And then these gentlemen mention particularly the conjunctions if, though, unless, and some others. But (and these gentlemen allow it), the Verbs which [that] follow these conjunctions are not always in the subjunctive mode ; and the using of that mode must depend, not upon the con- junction, but upon the sense of the whole sentence. How, then, can the conjunction govern the Verb? It is the sense, the meaning of the whole sentence, which [that] must gov- ern ; and of this you will presently see clear proof. " If it be dark : do not come home. If eating is necessary to man, he ought not to be a glutton." In the first of these sen- tences, the matter expressed by the Verb may be or may not be. There exists an uncertainty on the subject. And if the sentence were filled up, it would stand thus : M If it xix.] AS RELATING TO VERBS. 161 should be dark, do not come home." But in the second sentence there exists no such uncertainty. We know, and all the world knows, that eating is necessary to man. We could not fill up the sentence with should ; and, therefore, we make use of is. Thus, then, the conjunction if, which you see is employed in both cases, has nothing at all to do with the government of the verb. It is the sense which [that] governs. 278. There is a great necessity for care as to this matter ; for the meaning of what we write is very much affected when we make use of the modes indiscriminately. Let us take an instance. " Though her chastity be right and becoming, it gives her no claim to praise ; because she would be criminal if she were not chaste." Now, by em- ploying the subjunctive, in the first member of the sentence, we leave it uncertain whether it be right or not for her to be chaste ; and, by employing it in the second, we express a doubt as to the fact of her chastity. We mean neither of these ; and, therefore, notwithstanding here are a though and [an] if, both the Verbs ought to be in the indicative. " Though her chastity is right and becoming, it gives her no claim to praise : because, she would be criminal if she •was [were] not chaste." Fill up with the signs. " Though her chastity may be right ; if she should not be chaste " ; and then you see, at once, what a difference there is in the meaning. 279. The subjunctive is necessarily always used where a sign is left out : as, ' ' Take care that he come to-morrow, that you be ready to receive him, that he be well received, and that all things be duly prepared for his entertainment." Fill up with the signs, and you will see the reason for what you write. 280. The Verb to be is sometimes used thus : " Were hi n 1 62 SYNTAX, [letter rich, I should not like him the better. Were it not dark, I would go." That is to say, if he were : if it were. "It were a jest, indeed, to consider a set of seat-sellers and seat- buyers as a lawful legislative body. // were to violate every principle of morality to consider honesty as a virtue, when not to be honest is a crime which [that] the law punishes." The it stands for a great deaf here. " Ridicu- lous, indeed, would the state of our minds be, if it were such as to exhibit a set of seat-sellers and seat-buyers as a lawful legislative body." I mention these instances be- cause they appear unaccountable ; and I never like to slur things over. Those expressions for the using of which we can not give a reason ought not to be used at all. 281. As to instances in which authors have violated the principles of Grammar, with respect to the use of the modes, I could easily fill a book much larger than this with instances of this kind from Judge Blackstone and Doctor Johnson. One only shall suffice. I take it from the Judge's first Book : " Therefore, if the king purchases lands of the nature of gavelkind, where all the sons inherit equally ; yet, upon the king's demise, his eldest son shall succeed to these lands alone.'" Here is fine confusion, not to say something inclining toward high-treason ; for, if the king's son be to inherit these lands alone, he, of course, is not to inherit the crown. But, it is the Verb purchases with which we have to do at present. Now, it is notorious that the king does not purchase land in gavelkind, or any other lands ; whereas, from the form of the Verb, it is taken for granted that he does it. It should have been, " If the king purchase lands " ; that is to say, if he were to purchase, or if he should purchase. 282. Thus, my dear James, have I gone through all that appeared to me of importance, relating to Verbs. xx.] AS RELATING TO ADVERBS, ETC. 163 Every part of the Letter ought to [should] be carefully read, and its meaning ought to [should] be well weighed in your mind ; but always recollect that, in the using of Verbs, that which [that] requires your first and most earnest care is the ascertaining of the nominative of the sentence ; for, out of every hundred grammatical errors, full fifty, I be- lieve, are committed for want of due attention as to this matter. LETTER XX. SYNTAX, AS RELATING TO ADVERBS, PREPOSITIONS, AND CONJUNCTIONS. 283. After what has been said, my dear James, on the subject of the Verb, there remains little to be added. The Adverbs, Prepositions, and Conjunctions, are all words which [that] never vary their endings. Their uses have been sufficiently illustrated in the Letters on the Syntax, of Nouns, Pronouns, and Verbs. In a Letter which [that] is yet to come, and which [that] will contain specimens of false Grammar, the misuse of many words, belonging to these inferior Parts of Speech, will be noticed ; but it would be a waste of your time to detain you by [with] an elabo- rate account of that which [that] it is, by this time, hardly possible for you not to understand. 284. Some grammarians have given lists of Adverbs, Prepositions, and Conjunctions. For what reason I know- not, seeing that they have not attempted to give lists of the words of other Parts of Speech. These lists must be de- fective, and, therefore, worse than no lists. To find out the meaning of single words, the Dictionary is the place. The business of Grammar is to show the connection be- 1 64 SYNTAX, ETC. [letter tween words, and the manner of using words properly. The sole cause of this dwelling upon these Parts of Speech appears to me to have been a notion that they would seem to be neglected, unless a certain number of pages of the book were allotted to each. To be sure, each of them is a part of Speech, as completely as the little finger is a part of the body : but few persons will think that, because we des- cant very frequently, and at great length, upon the qualities of the head and heart, we ought to do the same with regard to the qualities of the little finger. 285. I omitted, in the Letter on Verbs, to notice the use of the word thing ; and I am not sorry that I did, be- cause by my noticing it in this concluding paragraph, tne matter may make a deeper impression on your mind. Thing is, of course, a noun. A pen is a thing, and every animal, or creature, animate or inanimate, is a thing. We apply it to the representing of every creature in the universe, ex- cept to men, women, and children ; and a creature is that which [that] has been created, be it living, like a horse, or dead, like dirt or stones. The use of the word thing, as far as this goes, is plainly reconcilable to reason ; but " to get drunk is a beastly thing." Here is neither human being, irrational animal, nor inanimate creature. Here is merely an action. Well, then, this action is the thing ; for, as you have seen in Letter XIX, paragraph 273, a verb in the in- finitive mode has, in almost all respects, the function and powers of a noun. " It is a most atrocious thing to uphold the Bank of England in refusing to give gold for its promis- sory notes, and to compel the nation to submit to the wrong that it sustained from that refusal." The meaning is, that the whole of these measures or transactions constituted a most atrocious deed or thing. XXI.] SPECIMENS OF FALSE GRAMMAR. 165 LETTER XXI. specimens of false grammar, taken from the writ- ings of doctor johnson and from those of doc- tor watts. My dear James : The chief object of this letter is to prove to you the ne- cessity of using great care and caution in the construction of your sentences. When you see writers like Dr. Johnson and Dr. Watts committing grammatical errors, and, in some instances, making their words amount to nonsense, or at least make their meaning doubtful ; when you see this in the author of a Grammar and of a Dictionary of the Eng- lish Language, and in the author of a work on the subject of Logic ; and when you are informed that these were two of the most learned men that England [has] ever produced, you can not fail to be convinced that constant care and caution are necessary to prevent you from committing not only similar, but much greater, errors. Another object in the producing of these specimens, is to convince you that a knowledge of the Latin and Greek languages does not prevent men from writing bad English. Those languages are, by impostors and their dupes, called 11 the learned languages " ; and those who [that] have paid for having studied them are said to have received " a liberal education." These appellations are false, and, of course, they lead to false conclusions. Learning, as a noun, means knowledge, and learned means knowing ox possessed of knowl- edge. Learning is, then, to be acquired by conception ; and \t is shown in judgment, in reasoning, and in the various modes of employing it. What, then, can learning have to do with any particular tongue ! Good Grammar, for in- 1 66 SPECIMENS OF FALSE GRAMMAR, [letter stance, written in Welsh, or in the language of the Chip- pewa savages, is more learned than bad Grammar written in Greek. The learning is in the mind and not in the tongue : learning consists of ideas and not of the noise that is made by the mouth. If, for instance, the Reports drawn up by the House of Commons, and [omit] which are composi- tions discovering in every sentence ignorance the most pro- found, were written in Latin, should we then call them learned? Should we say that the mere change of the words from one tongue into another made that learned which [that] was before unlearned ? As well may we say that a falsehood written in English would have been truth if written in Latin ; and as well may we say that a certain handwriting is a learned handwriting, or, that cer- tain sorts of ink and paper are learned ink and paper, as that a language, or tongue, is a learned language, or tongue. The cause of the use of this false appellation, " learned languages," is this, that those who [that] teach them in England have, in consequence of their teaching, very large estates in house and land, which are public property, but which are now used for the sole benefit of those teachers, who are, in general, the relations [relatives] or dependents of the Aristocracy. In order to give a color of reasonable- ness to this species of appropriation, the languages taught by the possessors are called " the learned languages " ; and [omit] which appellation is, at the same time, intended to cause the mass of the people to believe that the professors and learners of these languages are, in point of wisdom, far superior to other men ; and to establish the opinion that all but themselves are unlearned persons. In short, the appel- lation, like many others, is a trick which [that] fraud has furnished for the purpose of guarding the snug possessors of xxi.] OF DRS. JOHNSON AND WATTS. 167 the property against the consequences of the people's under- standing the matter. It is curious enough that this appellation of " learned languages " is confined to the English nation and the Ameri- can, which inherits it from the English. Neither in France, in Spain, in Italy, nor in Germany is this false and absurd appellation in use. The same motives have not existed in those countries. There the monks and other priests have inherited from the founders. They had not any occasion to resort to this species of imposition. But in England the thing required to be glossed over. There was something or other required in that country as an apology for taking many millions a year from the public to keep men to do no apparently useful thing. Seeing themselves unable to maintain the position that the Latin and Greek are more " learned languages " than others, the impostors and their dupes tell us that this is not what they mean. They mean, they say, not that those lan- guages are, in themselves, more learned than others ; but that, to possess a knowledge of them is a proof that the pos- sessor is a learned man. To be sure, they do not offer us any argument in support of this assertion ; while it would be easy to show that the assertion must, in every case, be false. But let it suffice, for this time, that we show that the possession of the knowledge of those languages does not prevent men from committing numerous grammatical errors when they write in their native language. I have, for this purpose, fixed upon the writings of Doc- tor Johnson and of Doctor Watts ; because, besides its be- ing well known that they were deeply skilled in Latin and Greek, it would be difficult to find two men with more real learning. I take also the two works for which they are re- spectively the most celebrated ; the Rambler of Doctor 1 68 SPECIMENS OF FALSE GRAMMAR, [letter Johnson,* and the Logic of Doctor Watts.f These are •works of very great learning. The Rambler, though its general tendency is to spread a gloom over life, and to damp all enterprise, private as well as public, displays a vast fund of knowledge in the science of morals ; and the Logic, though the religious zeal of its pious, sincere, and benevo- lent author has led him into the very great error of taking his examples of self-evident propositions from among those, many of which great numbers of men think not to be self-evident, is a work wherein profound learning is con- veyed in a style the most simple, and in a manner the most pleasing. It is impossible to believe that the Logic was not revised with great care ; and, as to the Rambleu, the biographer of its author tells us that the Doctor made six thousand corrections and alterations before the work was printed in volumes. The Rambler is in Numbers : therefore, at the end of each extract from it, I shall put the Letter R, and the A T um- ber. The Logic is divided into Parts and Chapters. At the end of each extract from it, I shall put L ; and then add the Part and Chapter. I shall range the extracts under the names of the Parts of Speech to which the erroneous words respectively belong. Articles. " I invited her to spend the day in viewing a seat and gardens." — R. No. 34. " For all our speculative acquaintance with things should * The first number of the Rambler was published on Tuesday, March 20, i749-'5o, and the last on Saturday the 17th (14th, in fact) March, 1752. t " Logick : or The Right Use of Reason in the Enquiry aftel Truth." By Dr. Isaac Watts, first published in 1725. xxi.] OF DRS. JOHNSON AND WATTS. 169 be made subservient to our better conduct in the civil and religious life." — L. Introduction. The indefinite article a can not, you know, be put be- fore a plural noun. We can not say a gardens ; but this is, in fact, said in the above extract. It should have been " a seat and its gardens." " Civil and religious life" are gen- eral and indefinite in the second extract. The article, there- fore, was unnecessary, and is improperly used. Look back at the use of Articles, Letter IV. Nouns. ,{ Among the innumerable historical authors, who fill every nation with accounts of their ancestors or undertake to transmit to futurity the events of their own time, the greater part, when fashion and novelty have ceased to rec- ommend them, are of no other use than chro?iological me- mo) ials, which necessity may sometimes require to be con- sulted." — R. No. 122. This is all confusion, vt/ hose ancestors? The nation's ancestors are meant : but the author s are expressed. The two theirs and the them clearly apply to the same Noun. How easily all this confusion would have been avoided by considering the nation as a singular, and saying its ancestors ! In the latter part of the sentence, the authors are called chronological memorials ; and though we may, in some cases, use the word author for author's work ; yet, in a case like this, where we are speaking of the authors as actors, we can not take such a liberty. " Each of these classes of the human race has desires, fears, and conversation, peculiar to itself ; cares which [that] another can not feel, and pleasures of which he can not partake." — R. No. 160. The noun of multitude, classes, being preceded by each t 170 SPECIMENS OF FALSE GRAMMAR, [letter has the pronoun itself, properly put after it ; but the he. does not correspond with these. It should have been it. With regard to these two extracts, see paragraph 181. " His great ambition was to shoot flying, and he, there- fore, spent whole days in the woods, pursuing game, which, before he was near enough to see them, his approach frighted away." — R. No. 66. Game is not a noun of multitude, like mob, or House of Commons. There are different games or pastimes ; but this word, as applied to the describing of wild animals, has no plural ; and, therefore, can not have a plural pronoun to stand for it. " The obvious duties of piety toward God and love toward man, with the governments of all our inclinations and passions." — L. Part 4. This plural is so clearly wrong that I need not show why it is wrong. " And by this mean they will better judge what to choose." — L. Part 4. Mean, as a noun, is never used in the singular. It, like some other words, has broken loose from all principle and rule. By universal acquiescence it is become always a plural, whether used with singular or plural pronouns and articles or not. Doctor Watts, in other instances, says this means. 11 Having delayed to buy a coach myself, till I should have the lady's opinion, for whose use it was intended." — R. No. 34. We know that whose relates to lady, according to the Doctor's meaning ; but, grammatically, it does not. It re- lates to opinion. It should have been, " the opinion of the lady for whose use." See Syntax of Nouns, Letter XVI, paragraphs 170 and 171. *xi] OF DRS JOHNSON AND WATTS. 17 1 Pronouns. "Had the opinion of my censurers been unanimous, it might have overset my resolutions ; but, since I find them at variance with each other, I can, without scruple, neglect them, and follow my own imagination." — R. No. 23. You see the Doctor has, in the last member of his sen- tence, the censurers in his eye, and he forgets his nomina- tive, opinion. It is the opinion that was not unanimous, and not the censurers who were not unanimous ; for, they were unanimous in censuring. " They that frequent the chambers of the sick will gen- erally find the sharpest pains, and most stubborn maladies, among them whom [that] confidence in the force of nature formerly betrayed to negligence or irregularity ; and that superfluity of strength, which was at once their boast and their snare, has often, in the end, no other effect than that it continues them long in impotence and anguish." — R. No. 38. The they and the first them ought to [should] be those / the to ought to be into. The two theirs and the last them are not absolutely faulty, but they do not clearly enough relate to their antecedent. " Metissa brought with her an old maid, recommended by her mother, who taught her all the arts of domestic man- agement, and was, on every occasion, her chief agent and directress. They soon invented one reason or other to quar- rel with all my servants, and either prevailed on me to turn them away, or treated them so ill that they left me of them- selves, and always supplied their places with some brought from my wife's family." — R. No. 35. Here is perfect confusion and pell-mell ! Which of the two, the old maid or the ?nother, was it that taught the arts of 172 SPECIMENS OF FALSE GRAMMAR, [letter domestic management ? And which of the two was taught, Metissa or the old maid? " They soon invented." Who are they? Are there two, or all the three? And who sup- plied the places of the servants ? The meaning of the words clearly is that the servants themselves supplied the places. It is very rarely [rare] that we meet with so bad a sentence as this. " I shall not trouble you with a history of the stratagems practiced upon my judgment, or the allurements tried upon my heart, which, if you have, in any part of your life, been acquainted with rural politics, you will easily conceive. Their arts have no great variety, they think nothing worth their care but money." — R. No. 35. " Their arts" : but whose arts? There is no antecedent, except " rural politics" ; and thus, all this last sentence is perfect nonsense. " But the fear of not being approved as just copiers of human manners is not the most important concern that an author of this sort ought to have before him." — R. No. 4. An author can not be said to fear not to be approved as just copiers. The word author ought to [should] have been in the plural, and him ought to have been them. " The wit, whose vivacity condemns slower tongues to silence ; the scholar, whose knowledge allows no man to think he instructs him" — R. No. 188. Which of the two is allowed ? The scholar or the no man ? Which of the two does he relate to ? Which of the two does the him relate to ? By a little reflection we may come at the Doctor's meaning ; but, if we may stop to dis- cover the grammatical meaning of an author's words, how are we to imbibe the science which [that] he would teach us ? *' The state of the possessor of humbls virtues, to the xxi.] OF DRS. JOHNSON AND WATTS. 173 affector of great excellences, is that of a small cottage of stone, to the palace raised with ice by the Empress of Rus- sia ; it was, for a time, splendid and luminous, but the first sunshine melted it to nothing." — R. No. 22. Which, instead of it, would have made clear that which [that] is now dubious, for it may relate to cottage as well as to palace ; or it may relate to state. " The love of retirement has, in all ages, adhered closely to those minds which [that] have been most enlarged by knowledge, or elevated by genius. Those who [that] en- joyed everything generally supposed to confer happiness, have been forced to seek it in the shades of privacy." — R. No. 7. To seek what ? The love of retirement, or everything ? The Doctor means happiness, but his words do not mean it. " Yet there is a certain race of men that make it their duty to hinder the reception of every work of learning or genius, who [ ; that] stand as sentinels in the avenues of fame, and value themselves upon giving ignorance and envy the first notice of a prey!' — R. No. 3. That, or who, may, as we have seen, be the relative of a noun, which [that] is the name of a rational being or beings ; but both can not be used, applicable to the same noun in the same sentence. Nor is " a prey " proper. Prey has no plural. It is like fat, meat, grease, garbage, and many other words of that description. " For, among all the animals upon which nature has im- pressed deformity and horror, there was none whom [that] he durst not encounter rather than a beetle." — R. No. 126. Here are whom and which used as the relatives to the same noun ; and, besides, we know that whom can, in no case, be a relative to irrational creatures, and, in this case, 174 SPECIMENS OF FALSE GRAMMAR, [letter the author is speaking of such creatures only. " Horror" is not a thing that can be impressed upon another thing so as to be seen. Horror is a feeling of the mind ; for, though we say " horror was visible on his countenance," we clearly mean that the outward signs of horror were visible. We can not see horror as we can deformity. It should have been "de- formity and hideousness." " To cull from the mass of mankind those individuals upon which the attention ought to be most employed." — R. No. 4. The antecedent belongs to rational beings, and, there- fore, the which should have been whom. " This determination led me to Metissa, the daughter of Chrisophilus, whose person was at least without deformity." — R. No. 35. The person of which of the two? Not of the old Papa, to be sure ; and yet this is what the words mean. [Not so. The antecedent is clearly Metissa.~\ " To persuade them who [that] are entering the world, that all are equally vicious, is not to awaken judgment." — R. No. 119. Those persons, who [that] are entering the world, and not any particular persons of whom we have already been speaking. We can not say them persons ; and, therefore, this sentence is incorrect. " Of these pretenders it is fit to distinguish those who [that] endeavor to deceive from them who [that] are de- ceived." — R. No. 189. " I have, therefore, given a place to what may not be use- less to them whose chief ambition is to please." — R. No. 34. The thems in these two sentences should be those. But, tfem who are deceived has another sort of error attached to xxi.] OF DRS. JOHNSON AND WATTS. 175 it, for the who, remember, is not, of itself a nominative. The antecedent, as you have seen, must be taken into view. This antecedent, must be, the persons, understood ; and then we have them persons are deceived. " Reason, as to the power and principles of it, is the common gift of God to man." — L. Introduction. The it may relate to power as well as to reason. There- fore, it would have been better to say, " Reason, as to its power and principles " : for if clearness is always necessary, how necessary must it be in the teaching of logic ! " All the prudence that any man exerts in his common concerns of life." — L. Introduction. Any man means, here, the same as men in general, and the concerns mean the concerns common to men in gen- eral ; and therefore the article the should have been used instead of the pronoun his. " It gives pain to the mind and memory, and exposes the unskillful hearer to mingle the superior and inferior particu- lars together ; it leads them into a thick wood instead of open daylight, and places them in a labyrinth instead of a plain path." — L. Part 4, Chap. 2. The Grammar is clearly bad ; and the rhetoric is nov. quite free from fault. Labyrinth is the opposite of plain path, but open daylight is not the opposite of a thick wood. Open plain would have been better than open daylight ; for open daylight may exist along with a thick wood. Verbs. " There are many things which [that] we every day see others unable to perform, and, perhaps, have even miscar- ried ourselves in attempting ; and yet can hardly allow to be difficult." — R. No. 122. 176 SPECIMENS OF FALSE GRAMMAR, [letteb This sentence has in it one of the greatest of faults. The nominative case of can allow is not clear to us. This is a manner too elliptical. " We can hardly allow them" is what was meant. " A man's eagerness to do that good, to -which he is not called, will betray him into crimes." — R. Xo. 8. The man is not called to the good, but to do the good. It is not my business, at this time, to criticise the opinions of Doctor Johnson ; but, I can not refrain from just remark- ing upon this sentence, that it contains the sum total of pas- sive obedience and non-resistance. It condemns all disinter- ested zeal and everything worthy of the name of patriotism. " We are not compelled to toil through half a folio to be convinced that the author has broke his promise." — R. No. i. " The Muses, when they sung before the throne of Ju- piter." — R. Xo. 3. In the first of these, the passed time is used where the passive participle ought to have been used ; and in the sec- ond, the passive participle is used in the place of the passed time. Broken and sang were the proper words. " My purpose was, after ten months more spent in com- merce, to have withdrawn my wealth to a safer country." — - R. Xo. 120. The purpose was present, and therefore it was his pur- pose to withdraw his wealth. " A man may, by great attention, persuade others that he really has the qualities that he presumes to boast ; but the hour will come when he should exert them, and then whatever he enjoyed in praise, he must suffer in reproach!' — R. Xo. 20. Here is a complete confounding of times. Instead ef xxi.] OF DRS. JOHNSON AND WATTS. 1 77 should^ it should be ought to : and instead of enjoyed, it should be may have enjoyed. The sense is bad, too ; for how can a man suffer in i-eproach what he has enjoyed in praise ? " He had taught himself to think riches more valuable than nature designed them, and to expect from them. . . ." — R. No. 20. " I could prudently adventure an inseparable union." '— R. No. 119. " I propose to endeavor the entertainment of my country- men." — R. No. 1. " He may, by attending the remarks, which [that] every paper will produce." — R. No. 1. In each of these four sentences, a neuter verb has the powers of an active verb given to it. " Designed them to be ; adventure on; endeavor to entertain; attending to" To design a thing is to draw it ; to attend a thing is to wait on it. No case occurs to me, at present, wherein adventure and endeavor can be active verbs ; but, at any rate, they ought not to have assumed the active office here. "/ was not condemned in my youth to solitude, either by indigence or deformity, nor passed the earlier part of life without the flattery of courtship." — R. No. 119. The verb can not change from a. neuter to an active with- out a repetition of the nominative. It should have been, nor did I pass ; or, nor passed I. " Anthea was content to call a coach, and crossed the brook." — R. No. 34. It should be " she crossed the brook." "He will be welcomed with ardor, unless he destroys those recommendations by his faults." — R. No. 160. "If he thinks his own judgment not sufficiently en« lightened, he may rectify his opinions." — R. No. I. 1 78 SPECIMENS OF FALSE GRAMMAR, [letter " If 'he finds, with all his industry, and all his artifices, that he can not deserve regard, or can not obtain it, he may let the design fall." — R. No. I. The subjunctive mode ought to be used in all these three sentences. In the first, the meaning is, " unless he should destroy." In the two last, the Doctor is speaking of his own undertaking : and, he means, " the author, if he should think, if he should find ; may then rectify his opinions ; may then let fall his design." He therefore should have written, " if he think ; if he find." " Follow solid argument wherever it leads you." — L. Part 3. Wherever it may lead you, shall lead you, is meant; and, therefore, the subjunctive mode was necessary. It should have been, " wherever it lead you." " See, therefore, that your general definitions, or de- scriptions, are as accurate as the nature of the thing will bear ; see that your general divisions and distributions be just and exact ; see that your axioms be sufficiently evi- dent ; see that your principles be well drawn." — L. Part 4. All these members are correct, except the first, where the verb is put in the indicative mode instead of the sub- junctive. All the four have the same turn ; they are all in the same mode, or manner ; they should, therefore, all have had the verb in the same form. They all required the sub- junctive form. Participles. " Or, it is the drawing a conclusion, which [that] was before either unknown, or dark." — L. Introduction. It should be "the drawing of a conclusion " ; for, in this case, the active participle becomes a noun. " The act of drawing " is meant, and clearly understood ; and we xxi.] OF DRS. JOHNSON AND WATTS. 179 can not say, " the act drawing a conclusion." When the article comes before, there must be the preposition after the participle. To omit the preposition in such cases is an error very common, and therefore I have noticed the error in this instance, in order to put you on your guard. Adverbs. " For thoughts are only criminal when they are first chosen, and then voluntarily continued." — R. No. 8. The station, or place, of the adverb is a great matter. The Doctor does not mean here that which [that, better : what] his words mean. He means that " thoughts are criminal, only when they are first chosen and then volun- tarily continued." As the words stand, they mean that "thoughts are nothing else, or nothing more, than criminal," in the case supposed. But here are other words not very properly used. I should like to be informed how a thought can be chosen ; how that is possible : and also how we can continue a thought, or how we can discontinue a thought at our will. The science here is so very profound that we can not see the bottom of it. Swift says : " Whatever is dark is deep. Stir a puddle, and it is. deeper than a well." Doctor Johnson deals too much in this kind of profundity. " I have heard how some critics have been pacified with claret and a supper, and others laid asleep with the soft notes of flattery." — R. No. 1. How means the manner in which : as, " How do you do ? " That is, ' ' In what manner do you carry yourself on?" But the Doctor tells us here, in other words, the precise manner in which the critics were pacified. The how, therefore, should have been that. " I hope not much to tire those whom [that] I shall not happen to please." — R. No. 1. 180 SPECIMENS OF FALSE GRAMMAR, [letteb He did not mean that he did not much hope, but that he hoped not to tire much. " I hope I shall not much tire those whom [that] I may not happen to please." This was what he meant ; but he does not say it. " And it is a good judgment alone [only ?] can dictate how far to proceed in it and when to stop." — L. Part 4. Doctor Watts is speaking here of writing. In such a case an adverb, like how far, expressive of longitudinal space, introduces a rhetorical figure ; for the plain mean- ing is, that judgment will dictate how much to write on it, and not how far to proceed in it. The figure, however, is very proper, and much better than the literal words. But when a figure is begun it should be carried on throughout, which is not the case here ; for the Doctor begins with a figure of longitudinal space, and ends with a figure of time. It should have been " where to stop." Or, " how long to proceed in it and when to stop." To tell a man how far he is to go into the Western countries of America, and when he is to stop, is a very different thing from telling him how far he is to go and where he is to stop. I have dwelt thus on this distinction, for the purpose of putting you on the watch, and guarding you against confounding figures. The less you use them the better, till you understand more about them. " In searching out matters of fact in times past or in distant places, in which case moral evidence is sufficient, and moral certainty is the utmost that can be attained, here we derive a greater assurance of the truth of it by a num- cer of persons, or multitude of circumstances concurring to bear witness to it." — L. Part 3. The adverb here is wholly unnecessary, and it does harm. But what shall we say of the of it, and the to it? xxi.] OF DRS. JOHNSON AND WATTS. 181 What is the antecedent of the it? Is matters of fact the antecedent ? Then them, and not zV, should have been the pronoun. Is evidence the antecedent ? Then we have cir- cumstances bearing witness to evidence ! Is certainty the antecedent? Then we have the truth of certainty / Mind, my dear James, this sentence is taken from a treatise on logic ! How necessary is it, then, for you to be careful in the use of this powerful little word it! Prepositions. " And, as this practice is a commodious subject of rail- lery to the gay, and of declamation to the serious, it has been ridiculed. . . ." — R. No. 123. With the gay ; for to the gay means that the raillery is addressed to the gay, which was not the author's meaning. 14 When I was deliberating to what new qualifications I should aspire." — R. No. 123. With regard to it, it ought to have been ; for we can not deliberate a thing nor to a thing. " If I am not commended for the beauty cf my works, I may hope to be pardoned for their brevity." — R. No. I. We may commend him for the beauty of his works ; and we may pardon him for their brevity, if we deem the brevity a fault ; but this is not what he means. He means that, at any rate, he shall have the merit of brevity. " If I am not commended for the beauty of my works, I may hope to be pardoned on account of their brevity." This is what the Doctor meant ; but this would have marred a little the antithesis : it would have unsettled a little of the balance of that see-saw in which Dr. Johnson so much delighted, and which [that], falling into the hands of novel-writers and of Members of Parliament, has, by moving unencum* 1 82 SPECIMENS OF FALSE GRAMMAR, [letter bered with any of the Doctor's reason or sense, lulled so many thousands asleep ! Dr. Johnson created a race of writers and speakers. " Mr. Speaker, that the state of the nation is very critical, all men must allow ; but, that it is wholly desperate, few men will believe." When you hear or see a sentence like this, be sure that the person who [that] speaks or writes it has been reading Dr. Johnson, or some of his imitators. But, observe, these imitators go no fur- ther than the frame of the sentences. They, in general, take special care not to imitate the Doctor in knowledge and reasoning. I have now lying on the table before me forty-eight errors in the use or omission of Prepositions by Doctor Watts. I will notice but two of them ; the first is an error of commission, the second of omission : " When we would prove the importance of any scrip- tural doctrine or duty, the multitude of texts wherein it is repeated and inculcated upon the reader, seems naturally to instruct us that it is a matter of greater importance than other things which [that] are but slightly or singly men- tioned in the Bible." — L. Part 3. The words 7-epeated and inculcated both apply to upon ; but we can not repeat a thing upon a reader, and the words here used mean this. When several verbs or participles are joined together by a copulative conjunction, care must be taken that the act described by each verb, or participle, be such as can be performed by the agent, and per- formed, too, in the manner, or for the purpose, or on the object, designated by the other words of the sentence. The other instance of error in the use of the Prepo- sition occurs in the very first sentence in the Treatise on Logic : xxi.] OF DRS. JOHNSON AND WATTS. i8j ** Logic is the art of using reason well in our inquiries after truth, and the communication of it to others." — L. Introduction. The meaning of the words is this: that "Logic is the art of using reason well in our inquiries after truth, and ii also the communication of it to others." To be sure we do understand that it means that " Logic is the art of using reason well in our inquiries after truth, and in the com- munication of it to others " ; but, surely, in a case like this, no room for doubt, or for hesitation, ought to [should] have been left. Nor is "using reason well" a well-chosen phrase. It way mean treating it well: not ill-treating it. " Using reason properly, or employing reason well," would have been better. For, observe, Doctor Watts is here giv- ing a definition of the thing of which he was about to treat : and he is speaking to persons unacquainted with that thing : for as to those acquainted with it, no definition was wanted. Clearness, everywhere desirable, was here absolutely neces- sary. Conjunctions. " As, notwithstanding all that wit, or malice, or pride, or prudence, will be able to suggest, men and women must, at last, pass their lives together, I have never, there- fore, thought those writers friends to human happiness who [that] endeavor to excite in either sex a general contempt or suspicion of the other." — R. No. 149. The as is unnecessary ; or the therefore is unnecessary. " But the happy historian has no other labor than of gath- ering what tradition pours down before him." — R. No. 122. " Some have advanced, without due attention to the consequences of this notion, that certain virtues have their correspondent faults, and therefore to exhibit either apart is to deviate from probability." — R. No. 4. 1 84 SPECIMENS OF FALSE GRAMMAR, [letter " But if the power of example is so great as take pos- session of the memory by a kind of violence, care ought to be taken that, when the choice is unrestrained, the best examples only should be exhibited ; and that which [that] is likely to operate so strongly should not be mischievous or uncertain in its effects." — R. No. 4. It should have been, in the first of these extracts, " than that of gathering " ; in the second, " and that therefore " ; in the third, " and that that which [that] is likely." If the Doctor wished to avoid putting two thats close together, he should have chosen another form for his sentence. The that which is a relative, and the conjunction that was re- quired to go before it. [The that is a demonstrative, and the which is a relative. The clause, with the ellipsis supplied, is: "And that that thing which (properly, that) is likely."] 11 It is, therefore, an [a] useful thing when we have a fundamental truth, we use the synthetic method to explain it."— L. Part 4. It should have been that we use. Wrong Placing of Words. Of all the faults to be found in writing, this is one of the most common, and perhaps it leads to the greatest num- ber of misconceptions. All the words may be the proper words to be used upon the occasion ; and yet, by a misplac- ing of a part of them, the meaning may be wholly destroyed ; and even made to be the contrary of what it ought to be. " I asked the question with no other intention than to set the gentleman free from the necessity of silence, and give him an opportunity of mingling [to mingle ?] on equal terms with a polite assembly, from which, however uneasy, he xxi.] OF DRS. JOHNSON AND WA TTS. 185 could not then escape by a kind introduction of the only sub- ject on which I believed him to be able to speak with pro- priety." — R. No. 126. This is a very bad sentence altogether. " However un- easy" applies to assembly, and not to gentleman. Only ob- serve how easily this might have been avoided. " From which he, however uneasy, could not then escape." After this we have " he could not then escape, by a kind introduc- tion." We know what is meant ; but the Doctor, with all his commas, leaves the sentence confused. Let us see whether we can not make it clear. " I asked the question with no other intention than, by a kind introduction of the only subject on which I believed him to be able to speak with propriety, to set the gentleman free from the necessity of silence, and to give him an opportunity of mingling on equal terms with a polite assembly, from which he, however uneasy, could not then escape." " Reason is the glory of human nature, and one of the chief eminences whereby we are raised above our fellow- creatures, the brutes, in this lower world." — L. Introduc- tion. I have before showed an error in the first sentence of Doctor Watts's work. This is the second sentence. The words, " in this lower world" are not words misplaced only ; they are wholly unnecessary, and they do great harm ; for they do these two things : first, they imply that there are brutes in the higher world ; and, second, they excite a doubt, whether we are raised above those brutes. I might, my dear James, greatly extend the number of my extracts from both these authors ; but here, I trust, are enough. I had noted down about two hundred errors in Doctor Johnson's Lives of the Poets ; but afterward per- ceiving that he had revised and corrected the Rambler with l86 SPECIMENS OF FALSE GRAMMAR, [letter extraordinary care, I chose to make my extracts from that work rather than from the Lives of the Poets. Double-negative and Ellipsis. Before I dismiss the specimens of bad Grammar, I will just take, from Tull, a sentence which [that] contains strik- ing instances of the misapplication of Negatives, and of the Ellipsis. In our language two negatives applied to the same verb, or to the same words of any sort, amount to an affirm- ative : as, " Do not give him none of your money." That is to say, " Give him some of your money," though the con- trary is meant. It should be, " Do not give him any of your money." Errors, as to this matter, occur most frequently when the sentence is formed in such a manner as to lead the writer out of sight and out of sound of the first negative before he comes to the point where he thinks a second is re- quired : as, " Neither Richard nor Peter, as I have been in- formed, and indeed as it has been proved to me, never gave James authority to write to me." You see it ought to be ever. But in this case, as in most others, there requires nothing more than a little thought. You see clearly that two negatives, applied to the same verb, destroy the nega- tive effect of each other. " I will not never write." This is the contrary of " I will never write." The Ellipsis, of which I spoke in Letter XIX, paragraph 227, ought to be used with great care. Read that paragraph again ; and then attend to the following sentence of Mr. Tull, which I select in order to show you that very fine thoughts may be greatly marred by a too free use of the El- lipsis. " It is strange that no author should never have written fully of the fabric of plows ! Men of greatest learning have spent their time in contriving instruments to measure XXII.] ERRORS IN A KING'S SPEECH. 187 the immense distance of the stars, and in. finding out the dimensions and even weight of the planets. They think it more eligible to study the art of plowing the sea with ships than of tilling the land with plows. They bestow the utmost of their skill, learnedly to pervert the natural use of all the elements for destruction of their own species by the bloody art of war : and some waste their whole lives in studying how to arm death with new engines of horror, and inventing an infinite variety of slaughter ; but think it be- neath men of learning (who only are capable of doing it) to employ their learned labors in the invention of new, or even improving the. old, instruments for increasing of bread.'' You see the never ought to be ever. You see that the the is left out before the word greatest, and again before weight, and, in this last-mentioned instance, the leaving of it out makes the words mean the ' even weight " ; that is to say, not the odd weight ; instead of " even the weight," as the author meant. The conjunction that is left out before " of tilling " ; before destruction, the article the is again omitted ; in is left out before inventing, and also before im- proving ; and, at the close, the is left out before increasing. To see so fine a sentence marred in this way is, I hope, quite enough to guard you against the frequent commission of similar errors. LETTER XXII. errors and .nonsense in a king's speech. My dear James: In my first Letter I observed to you that to the func- tions of Statesmen and Legislators was [is] due the highest respect which [that] could [can] be shown by man to any 1 88 ERRORS AND NONSENSE [letter thing human ; but I, at the same time, observed that, as the degree and quality of our respect rose [rise] in propor- tion to the influence which [that] the different branches of knowledge naturally had [have] in the affairs and on the conditions of men, so, in cases of imperfection in knowledge, or of negligence in the application of it, or of its perversion to bad purposes, all the feelings op- posite to that of respect, rose [rise] in the same propor- tion ; and to one of these cases I have now to direct your attention. [What is true at all times should always be expressed in the present tense.] The Speeches of the King are read by him to the Par- liament. They are composed by his Ministers, or select Councilors. They are documents of great importance, treating of none but weighty matters ; they are always styled Most Gracious, and are heard and answered with the most profound respect. The persons who [that] settle upon what shall be the topics of these Speeches, and who [that] draw the Speeches up, are, a Lord High Chancellor, a First Lord of the Treasury, a Lord President of the Council, three Secre- taries of State, a First Lord of the Admiralty, a Master General of the Ordnance, a Chancellor of the Exchequer, and perhaps one or two besides. These persons are called, when spoken of in a body, the Ministry. They are alj Members of the King's constitutional Council, called the Privy Council, without whose assent the King can issue no proclamation nor any order affecting the people. This Council, Judge Blackstone, taking the words of Coke, calls w a noble, honorable, and reverend assembly." So that, in the Ministry, who are selected from the persons who [that] compose this assembly, the nation has a right to expect xxii.] IN A KINGS SPEECH. 1 89 something very near to perfection in point of judgment and of practical talent. How destitute of judgment and of practical talent these persons have been, in the capacity of Statesmen and of Legislators, the present miserable and perilous state of England amply demonstrates ; and I am now about to show you that they are equally destitute in the capacity of writ- ers. There is some poet who [that] says : 11 Of all the arts in which the learned excel, The first in rank is that of writing well." * And though a man may possess great knowledge, as a Statesman and as a Legislator, without being able to per- form what this poet would call writing well ; yet, surely, we have a right to expect in a Minister the capacity of being able to write grammatically ; the capacity of putting his own meaning clearly down upon paper. But, in the composing of a King's Speech it is not one man, but nine men, whose judgment and practical talent are employed. A King's Speech is, too, a very short piece of writing. The topics are all distinct. Very little is said upon each. There is no reasoning. It is all plain matter of fact, or of simple observation. The thing is done with all the advan- tages of abundant time for examination and re-examina- tion. Each of the Ministers has a copy of the Speech to read, to examine, and to observe upon ; and when no one has anything left to suggest in the way of alteration or im- provement, the Speech is agreed to, and put into the mouth of the King. Surely, therefore, if in any human effort perfection can * This quotation should run : 11 Of all those arts in which the wise excel, Nature's chief masterpiece is writing well." Sheffield. Essay of Poetry- 190 ERRORS AND NONSENSE [letter be expected, we have a right to expect it in a King's Speech. You shall now see, then, what pretty stuff is put together, and delivered to the Parliament, under the name of King's Speeches. The Speech which [that] I am about to examine is, in- deed, a Speech of the Regent ; * but I might take any other of these Speeches. I chose this particular speech because the subjects of it are familiar in America as well as in England. It was spoken on the 8th of November, 1814. I shall take a sentence at a time, in order to avoid con- fusion : " My Lords and Gentlemen, It is with deep regret that I am again obliged to announce the continuance of his Ma- jesty's lamented indisposition." Even in this short sentence there is something equiv- ocal; for it may be that the Prince's regret arises from his being obliged to announce, and not from the thing an- nounced. If he had said, "With deep regret I announce," or, " I announce with deep regret," there would have been nothing equivocal. And, in a composition like this, all ought to be as clear as the pebbled brook. " It would have given me great satisfaction to have been enabled to communicate to you the termination of the war between this country and the United States of America." The double compound times of the verbs, in the first part of the sentence, make the words mean that it would, before the Pi ince came to the House, have given him great satisfaction to be enabled to communicate ; whereas he meant, " It would now have given me great satisfaction to be enabled to communicate." In the latter part of the sen- * George Frederick, afterward George IV, eldest son of George III and Queen Charlotte. He was appointed regent, in consequence of his father's mental incapacity, in t8ii. XXii.] IN A KING'S SPEECH. 191 tence we have a little nonsense. What does termination mean? It means, in this case, end or conclusion; and thus the Prince wished to communicate an end to the wise men by whom he was surrounded ? To communicate is to impart to another anything we have in our possession or within our power. And so, the Prince wished to impart the end to the Noble Lords and Honorable Gentlemen. He might wish to impart, or communicate the news, or the intelligence of the end ; but he could not communicate the end itself . What should we say, if some one were to tell us, that an officer had arrived, and brought home the ter- mination of a battle and carried it to Carlton House and communicated it to the Prince ? We should laugh at our informant's ignorance cf Grammar, though we should un- derstand what he meant. And shall we, then, be so par- tial and so unjust as to reverence in Kings' Councilors that which [that] we should laugh at in one of our neigh- bors ? To act thus would be, my dear Son, a base aban- donment of our reason, which is, to use the words of Dr. Watts, the common gift of God to man. "Although this war originated in the most unprovoked aggression on the part of the Government of the United States, and was calculated to promote the designs of the common enemy of Europe against the rights and inde- pendence of all other nations, I never have ceased to enter- tain a sincere desire to bring it to a conclusion on just and honorable terms." The the most would lead us to suppose that there had been more than one aggression, and that the war originated in the most unprovoked of them; whereas the Prince's meaning was that the aggression was an unprovoked one, unprovoked in the superlative degree ; and that, therefore, it was a most unprovoked aggression. The words all other 192 ERRORS AND NONSENSE [letter nations may mean all nations except England ; or, all nations out of Europe ; or, all nations other than the United States ; or, all nations except the enemy 's own nation. Guess you which of these is the meaning : I confess that I am wholly unable to determine the question. But, what does the close of the sentence mean when taken into view with the although at the beginning ? Does the Prince mean that he would be justified in wanting to make peace on unjust and dishonorable terms because the enemy had been the aggressor? He might, indeed, wish to make it on terms dishonorable, and even disgraceful, to the enemy : but could he possibly wish to make it on unjust terms? Does he mean that an aggression, however wicked and un- provoked, would give him a right to do injustice? Yet, if he do not mean this, what does he mean ? Perhaps (for there is no certainty) he may mean that he wishes to bring the war to a conclusion as soon as he can get just and honorable terms from the enemy : but, then, what is he to do with the although? Let us try this. " I am ready," say you, " to make peace, if you 7vill give me just terms, al- though you are the aggressor." To be sure you are, whether I be the aggressor or not ! All that you can possibly have the face to ask of me is justice ; and, therefore, why do you connect your wish for peace with this although ? Either you mean that my aggression gives you a right to demand of me more than justice, or you talk nonsense. Nor must we overlook the word "government" which [that] is introduced here. In the sentence before, the D rince wished to communicate the end of the war between * this country and the United States " ; but in this sentence we are at war with " the Government of the United States." This was a poor trick of sophistry, and as such we will let it pass, with only observing that such low trickery is not xxii.] IN A KING'S SPEECH. 193 very becoming in men selected from " a noble, honorable, and reverend assembly." " I am still engaged in negotiations for this purpose." That is, the purpose of bringing the war to a conclu- sion. A very good purpose ; but why still? He had not told his nobles and his boroughmen that he had been en- gaged in negotiations. Even this short, simple sentence could not be made without fault. *' The success of them must, however, depend on my disposition being met ivith corresponding sentiments on the part of the enemy." Now suppose I were to say, " My wagon was met with Mr. Tredwell's coach." Would you not think that some- body had met the wagon and coach both going together the same way ? To be sure you would. But if I were to say, " My wagon was met by Mr. Tredwell's coach," you would think that they had approached each other from different spots. And, therefore, the Prince should have said, " met by." This sentence, however, short as it happily is, is too long to be content with one error. Disposition, in this sense of the word, means state, or bent, or temper, of mind : and the word sentiments means thoughts^ or opinions. So, here we have a temper of mind met by thoughts. Thoughts may correspond or agree with a temper of mind ; but how are they to meet it? If the Prince had said, " My dispo- sition being met by a corresponding disposition on the part of the enemy," he would have uttered plain and dignified language. 11 The operations of his Majesty's forces by sea and land in the Chesapeake, in the course of the present year, have been attended with most brilliant and successful results." Were there only the bad placing of the different mem- 13 194 ERRORS AND NONSENSE [letter bers of this sentence, the fault would be sufficient. But we do not know whether the Prince means operations by sea and land, or forces by sea and land. " The flotilla of the enemy in the Patuxent has been de- stroyed. The signal defeat of their land forces enabled a detachment of his Majesty's army to take possession of the city of Washington ; and the spirit of enterprise which [that] has characterized all the movements in that quarter, has produced on the inhabitants a deep and sensible impres- sion of the calamities of a war in which they have been so wantonly involved." Enemy is not a noun of multitude, like gang, or House of Commons, or den of thieves ; and, therefore, when used in the singular, must have singular pronouns and verbs to agree with it. Their, in the second of these sentences, should have been his. A sensible impression is an impres- sion felt ; a deep impression is one more felt. Therefore it was " a sensible and deep impression." But, indeed, sensi- ble had no business there ; for, an impression that is deep must be sensible. What would you think of a man who [that] should say, " I have not only been stabbed, but my skin has been cut ! " Why, you would think, to be sure, that he must be a man selected from the noble, honorable, and reverend assembly at Whitehall. " The expedition directed from Halifax to the Northern coast of the United States has terminated in a manner not less satisfactory" Than what? The Prince has told us, before this, of nothing that has terminated satisfactorily. He has talked of a brilliant result, and of an impression made on the in- habitants ; but of no termination has he talked ; nor has he said a word about satisfaction. We must always take care xxii.] IN A KINGS SPEECH. 195 how we use, in one sentence, words which [that] refer to anything said in former sentences. "The successful course of this operation has been foU lowed by the immediate submission of the extensive and im- portant district east of the Penobscot river to his Majesty's arms. " This sentence is a disgrace even to a Ministry with a JENKINSON at its head.* What do they mean by a course being followed by a submission ? And then, " has been fol- lowed by the immediate submission " ? One would think that some French emigrant priest was employed to write this Speech. He, indeed, would say, " a ete suivie par la soumission immediate." But when we make use of any word, like immediate, which carries us back to the time and scene of action, we must use the past time of the verb, and say, " was followed by the immediate submission." That is to say, was then followed by the then immediate ; and not has now been followed by the then immediate submission. The close of this sentence exhibits a fine instance of want of skill in the placing of the parts of a sentence. Could these noble and reverend persons find no place but the end for " to his Alajesty's arms " ? There was, but they could not see it, a place made on purpose, after the word sub- mission. It is unnecessary, my dear James, for me to proceed fur- ther with an exposure of the bad Grammar and the non- sense of this Speech. There is not, in the whole Speech, one single sentence that is free from error. Nor will you be at all surprised at this, if ever you should hear those per- sons uttering their own speeches in those places which [that], when you were a naughty little boy, you used to call the * Charles Jenkinson, Earl of Liverpool, born 1790, died 1828. This vas the famous statesman that held the premiership from 1812 till 1827. 196 SENTENCES AND FIGURES, [letter 3< Thieves' Houses!' If you should ever hear them there, stammering and repeating and putting forth their nonsense, your wonder will be, not that they wrote a King's Speech so badly, but that they contrived to put upon paper sen- tences sufficiently grammatical to enable us to guess at the meaning. LETTER XXIII. on putting sentences together, and on figurative language. My dear James : I have now done with the subject of Grammar, which, as you know, teaches us to use words in a proper manner. But though you now, I hope, understand how to avoid error in the forming of sentences, I think it right not to conclude my instructions without saying a few words upon the sub- ject of adding sentence to sentence, and on the subject of figurative language. Language is made use of for one of three purposes: namely, to inform, to convince, or to persuade. The first, requiring merely the talent of telling what we know, is a matter of little difficulty The second demands reasoning. The third, besides reasoning, demands all the aid that we can obtain from the use of figures of speech, or, as they are sometimes called, figures of rhetoric, which last word means the power of persuasion. "Whatever may be the purpose for which we use lan- guage, it seldom can happen that we do not stand in need of more than one sentence ; and, therefore, others must be added. There is no precise rule, there can be no precise rule, with regard to the manner of doing this. When we *XIII.] SENTENCES AND FIGURES. 197 have said one thing, we must add another ; and so on, until we have said all that we have to say. But we ought to take care, and great care, that if any words in a sentence relate, in any way, to words that have gone before, we make these words correspond grammatically with those foregoing words ; an instance of the want of which care you have seen in Paragraph 178. The order of the matter will be, in almost all cases, that of your thoughts. Sit down to write what you have thought, and not to think what you shall write. Use the first words that occur to you, and never attempt to alter a thought ; for that which [that] has come of itself into your mind is likely to pass into that of another more readily and with more effect than anything which [that] you can, by reflec- tion, invent. • Never stop to make choice of words. Put down your thought in words just as they come. Follow the order which [that] your thought will point out : and it will push you on to get it upon the paper as quickly and as clearly as possible. [Herein Cobbett judges others too much by himself. Those whose diction is best are, for the most part, laborious writers. Lord Brougham, it is said, not unfrequently re- wrote his paragraphs several times. Those that are com- pelled to write rapidly seldom write really well.] Thoughts come much faster than we can put them upon paper. They produce one another : and this order of their coming is, in almost every case, the best possible order that they can have on paper ; yet, if you have several in your mind, rising above each other [one another] in point of force, the most forcible will naturally come the last upon ^aper. Mr. Lindley Murray gives rules about Ion? sent'**— 198 SENTENCES AND FIGURES. [letter and short sentences, and about a due mixture of long and short ; and, he also gives rules about the letters that sen- tences should begin with, and the syllables that they should end with. Such rules might be very well if we were to sing our writing ; but when the use of writing is to inform, to convince, or to persuade, what can it have to do with such rules ? There are certain connecting words which [that] it is of importance to use properly : such as therefore, which means for that cause, for that reason. We must take care, when we use such words, that there is occasion for using them. We must take care that when we use but, or for, or any other connecting word, the sense of our sentences requires such word to be used ; for, if such words be improperly used, they throw all into confusion. You have seen the shameful effect of an although in the King's Speech which [that] I noticed in my last Letter. The adverbs when, then, while, now, there, and some others, are connecting words, and not used in their strictly literal sense. For example : " Well, then, I will not do it." Then, in its literal sense, means, at that time, or in that time : as, " I was in America then." But " Well, then," means, " Well, if that be so," or " let that be so," or " in that case." You have only to accustom your- self a little to reflect on the meaning of these words : for that will soon teach you never to employ them improperly. A writing, or written discourse, is generally broken into • paragraphs. When a new paragraph should begin, the na- / ture of your thoughts must tell you. The propriety of it ' will be pointed out to you by the difference between the thoughts that are coming and those which [that] have gone ;; before. It is impossible to frame rules for regulating such divisions. When a man divides his work into Parts, Books, V^Chapters, and Sections, he makes the division according to KXiii.] SENTENCES AND FIGURES. 199 that which [that] the matter has taken in his mind ; and, \ when he comes to write, he has no other guide for the dis- J tribution of his matter into sentences and paragraphs. .' Never write about any matter that you do not well un- derstand. If you clearly understand all about your matter, you will never want thoughts, and thoughts instantly be- come words. One of the greatest of all faults in writing and in speak- ing is this : the using of many words to say little. In order to guard yourself against this fault, inquire what is the sub- stance or amount of what you have said. Take a long speech of some talking Lord, and put down upon paper what the amount of it is. You will most likely find that the amount is very small ; but, at any rate, when you get it, you will then be able to examine it, and to tell what it is worth. A very few examinations of this sort will so frighten you that you will be forever after upon your guard against talking a great deal and saying little. Figurative language is very fine when properly employed ; but, figures of rhetoric are edge-tools, and two-edged tools, too. Take care how you touch them ! They are called figures, because they represent other things than the words in their literal meaning stand for. For instance : " The tyrants oppress and starve the people. The people would live amid abundance, if those cormorants did not devour the fruit of their labor." I shall only observe to you, upon this subject, that, if you use figures of rhetoric, you ought to take care that they do not make nonsense of what you say ; nor excite the ridicule of those to whom you write. Mr. Murray, in an address to his students, tells them " that he is about to offer them some advice with regard to their future walks in the paths of literature." Now, though a man may take a walk along a path, a walk means also the 200 SENTENCES AND FIGURES. [letter ground laid out in a certain shape, and such a walk is wider than a path. He, in another part of this address, tells them that they are in the morning of life, and that that is the season for exertion. The morning, my dear James, is not a season. The year, indeed, has seasons, but the day has none. If he had said the spring of life, then he might have added the season of exertion. I told you they were edge-tools. Be- ware of them. I am now, my dear Son, arrived at the last paragraph of my treatise, and I hope that, when you arrive at it, you will understand Grammar sufficiently to enable you to write without committing frequent and glaring errors. I shall now leave you, for about four months, to read and write English ; to practice what you have now been taught. At the end of those four months I shall have prepared a Gram- mar to teach you the French Language* which language I hope to hear you speak, and to see you write well, at the end of one year from this time. With English and French on your tongue and in your pen, you have a resource not only greatly valuable in itself, but a resource that you can be deprived of by none of those changes and chances which [that] deprive men of pecuniary possessions, and which [that], in some cases, make the purse-proud man of yester- day a crawling sycophant to-day. Health, without which life is not worth having, you will hardly fail to secure by early rising, exercise, sobriety, and abstemiousness as to food. Happiness, or misery, is in the mind. It is the mind that lives ; and the length of life ought to be measured by the number and importance of our ideas, and not by the num- ber of our days. Never, therefore, esteem men merely on account of their riches or their station. Respect goodness, * The publication of Cobbett's " French Grammar, or Plain Direc tions for the Learning of French," took place in 1823. xxiv.] SIX LESSONS. 201 find it where you may. Honor talent wherever you behold it unassociated with vice ; but, honor it most when accom- panied with exertion, and especially when exerted in the cause of truth and justice ; and, above all things, hold it in honor when it steps forward to protect defenseless inno- cence against the attacks of powerful guilt. LETTER XXIV. SIX LESSONS, INTENDED TO PREVENT STATESMEN FROM USING FALSE GRAMMAR, AND FROM WRITING IN AN AWKWARD MANNER. Harpenden, Hertfordshire, June 23, 1822, My dear James: In my first Letter, I observed that it was of the greatest importance that Statesmen, above all others, should be able to imite well. It happens, however, but too frequently, that that which [that] should be, in this case as well as in others, is not ; sufficient proof of which you will find in the remarks which [that] I am now about to make. The let- ter to Tierney /* a thing which [that] I foresaw would be- come of great and lasting importance ; a thing to which I knew I should frequently have to recur with satisfaction ; I wrote on the anniversary of the day on which, in the year 1 8 10, I was sentenced to be imprisoned for two years, to pay a fine of a thousand pounds, and to be held in bonds of five thousand pounds for seven years, for having publicly, and in print, expressed my indignation at the flogging of * George Tierney, a famous parliamentary debater and political writer, secretary for Ireland, and president of the Board of Control during the administration of Fox and Grenville. 202 SIX LESSONS. [letter English Local-Militia men in the town of Ely, under a guard of German soldiers. I thought of this at a time when I saw those events approaching which [that] I was certain would, by fulfilling my predictions, bring me a compensa- tion for the unmerited sufferings and insults heaped upon me with so unsparing a hand. For writing the present little work, I select the anniversary of a day which [that] your excellent conduct makes me regard as among the most blessed in the calendar. Who, but myself, can imagine what I felt when I left you behind me at [in] New York ! Let this tell my persecutors that you have made me more than amends for all the losses, all the fatigue, all the dan- gers, and all the anxieties attending that exile of which their baseness and injustice were the cause. The bad writing, on which I am about to remark, I do not pretend to look on as the cause of the present public calamities, or of any part of them ; but it is a proof of a deficiency in that sort of talent which [that] appears to me to be necessary in men intrusted with great affairs. He who [that] writes badly thinks badly. Confusedness in words can proceed from nothing but confusedness in the thoughts which [that] give rise to them. These things may be of trifling importance when the actors move in private life ; but, when the happiness of millions of men is at stake, they are of importance not easily to be de- scribed. . The pieces of writing that I am about to comment on I deem bad writing, and, as you will see, the writing may be bad, though there may be no grammatical error in it. The best writing is that which [that] is best calculated to secure the object of the writer ; and the worst, that which [that] is the least likely to effect that purpose. But it is not in this extended sense of the words that I am now going to xxiv.] INTRODUCTION. 203 consider any writing. I am merely about to give specimens of badly-written papers, as a warning to the Statesmen of the present day ; and as proofs, in addition to those which [that] you have already seen, that we ought not to conclude that a man has great abilities merely because he receives great sums of the public money. The specimens, that I shall give, consist of papers that relate to measures and events of the very first importance. The first is the Speech of the Speaker of the House of Com- mons to the Regent, at the close of the first Session of 18 19, during which Mr. Peel's, or the Cash-Payment, Bill had been passed ; * the second is the Answer of the Regent to that Speech : the first is the work of the House ; the sec- ond that of the Ministry. In Letter XXII, I gave the reasons why we had a right to expect perfection in writings of this description. I there described the persons to whom the business of writing King's speeches belongs. The Speaker of the House of Commons is to be taken as the man of the greatest talent in that House. He is called the " First Commoner of Eng- land." Figure to yourself, then, the King on his throne, in the House of Lords ; the Lords standing in their robes ; the Commons coming to the bar, with the Speaker at their head, gorgeously attired, with the mace held beside him ; figure this scene to yourself, and you will almost think it se- dition and blasphemy to suppose it possible that the Speech made to the King, or that his Majesty's Answer, both pre- pared and written down long beforehand, should be anything short of perfection. Follow me, then, my dear Son, through this Letter ; and you will see that we are not to judge of * This was an act for the gradual assumption of cash payments by the Bank of England. The notes of the Bank had been, in 1797, de- clared by law a legal tender, although no longer convertible into coin. 204 SIX LESSONS. [letter men's talents by the dresses they wear, by the offices they fill, or [nor] by the power they possess. After these two Papers I shall take some Papers written by Lord Castlereagh, by the Duke of Wellington, and by the Marquis Wellesley. These are three of those persons who [that] have, of late years, made the greatest figure in our affairs with foreign nations. The transactions which [that] have been committed to their management have been such as were hardly ever exceeded in point of magnitude, whether we look at the transactions themselves or at their natural consequences. How much more fit than other men they were to be thus confided in ; how much more fit to have the interest and honor of a great nation committed to their hands, you will be able to judge when you shall have read my remarks on those of their Papers to which I have here alluded. In the making of my comments, I shall insert the sev- eral papers, a paragraph or two, or more, at a time ; and I shall number the paragraphs for the purpose of more easy reference. LESSON I. Remarks on the Speech of the Speaker of the House of Com- mons * to the Prince Regent, which Speech teas made at the close of the first Session of 1 8 19, duiing -which Ses- sion Peel's Bill\ was passed. " May it please your Royal Highness : 1. " We, his Majesty's faithful Commons of the United King- dom of Great Britain and Ireland in Parliament assembled, at- tend your Royal Highness with our concluding Bill of Supply. * The Speaker of the House of Commons at this time was Charles Manners Sutton, afterward Viscount Canterbury. + Peel's Bill. See note on p. 203. xxiv.] SPEAKER'S SPEECH. 205 2. "The subjects which [that] have occupied our attention have been more numerous, more various and more important, than are usually submitted to the consideration of Parliament in the same Session." It is difficult to say what is meaned [meant],* in Para- graph No. 2, by the word various. The Speaker had already said that the subjects were more numerous, which was quite enough ; for they necessarily differed from each other [one another], or they were one and the same ; and, therefore, the word various can in this place have no meaning at all, unless it mean that the subjects were vai legated in them- selves, which would be only one degree above sheer non- sense. Next comes the " than are" without a nominative case. Chambermaids, indeed, write in this way, and, in such a case, " the dear unintelligible scrawl " is, as the young rake says in the play, " ten thousand times more charming" than correct writing ; but from a Speaker in his robes we might have expected " than those which [that] are usually sub- mitted." And what does the Speaker mean by " in the same Ses- sion " ? He may mean " in one and the same Session " : but what business had the word same there at all ? Could he not have said, " during one Session," or " during a single Session " ? 3. " Upon many of these subjects we have been engaged in long and unwearied examinations ; but such has been the press- ure of other business, and particularly of that which ordinarily belongs to a first Session of Parliament — and such the magni- tude and intricacy of many of those inquiries, that the limits of the present Session have not allowed of bringing them to a close." There is bad taste, at least, in using the word examina- tions in one part of the sentence, and the word inquiries in * See note to par. 35. 206 SIX LESSONS. [letter the other part, especially as the pronoun those was used in the latter case. The verb "has" agrees in number with the noun "pressure" ; but the Speaker, notwithstanding the aid of his wig, was not able to perceive that the same verb did not agree in number with the nouns " magnitude and intricacy." Such has been the pressure, and such havebeen the " magnitude and intricacy." 4. " But, Sir, of those measures which [that] we have com- pleted, the most prominent, the most important, and, as we trust, in their consequences, the most beneficial to the public, ara the measures which [that] have grown out of the consideration of the present state of the country — both in its currency and its finances." There is not here any positive error in Grammar ; but there is something a great deal worse ; namely, unintelligi- ble words. The epithet "prominent " was [is] wholly unne- cessary, and only served [serves] to inflate the sentence. It would have been prudent not to anticipate [predict?], in so marked a manner, beneficial consequences from Peel's Bill : but what are we to understand from the latter part of the sentence ? Here are measures growing out of the consid- eration of the state of the country in its currency and finances. What ! The state of the country in its currency ? Or is it the consideration in its currency ? And what had the word both to do there at all ? The Speaker meaned [meant] that the measures had grown out of, or, which would have been much more dignified, had been the result of a consider- ation of the present state of the country, with regard to its currency as well as with regard to its finances. 5. " Early, Sir, in the present Session, we instituted an in- quiry into the effects produced on the exchanges with foreign countries, and the state of the circulating medium, by the restric- tion on payments in cash by the Bank. This inquiry was most atixiously and most deliberately conducted, and in its result led to the conclusion that it was most desirable, quickly, but with xxiv.] SPEAKER'S SPEECH. 207 due precautions, to return to our ancient and healthful state of currency: — That whatever might have been the expediency of the Acts for the suspension of payments of cash at the different periods at which they were enacted (and doubtless they were ex- pedient), whilst the country was involved in the most expensive contest that ever weighed down the finances of any country- still that, the necessity for the continuance of these Acts having ceased, it became us with as little delay as possible (avoiding carefully the convulsion of too rapid a transition) to return to our ancient system ; and that, if at any period, and under any circumstances, this return could be effected without national in- convenience, it was at the present, when this mighty nation, with a proud retrospect of the past, after having made the greatest efforts, and achieved the noblest objects, was now reposing in a confident, and, as we fondly hope, a well-founded expectation of a sound and lasting peace." Here, at the beginning of this long and most confused paragraph, are two sentences, perfect rivals in all respects ; each has 37 words in it ; each has three blunders ; and the one is just as obscure as the other. To " institute " is to settle, to fix, to erect, to establish ; and not to set about or undertake, which was what was done here. If I were to tell you that I have instituted an inquiry into the qualities of the Speaker's Speech, you would, though I am your fa- ther, be almost warranted in calling me an egregious cox- comb. But, what are we to make of the " and the " further on ? Does the Speaker mean that they instituted (since he will have it so) an inquiry into the state of the circulating medium, or into the effects produced on the circulating me- dium by the cash suspension ? I defy any man living to say which of the two is meaned [meant] by his words. And, then we come to "by the Bank " ; and here the only possi- ble meaning of the words is, that the restriction was im- posed by the Bank ; whereas the Speaker means the restric- tion on payments made at the Bank. If at, instead of by t had happened to drop out of the wig, this part of the sen- tence would have been free from error. 208 SIX LESSONS. [letter As to the second sentence in this Paragraph, No. 5, I may first observe on the incongruity of the Speaker's two superlative adverbs. Anxiously means with inquietude; and deliberately means coolly, slowly, warily, and the like. The first implies a disturbed, the latter a tranquil, state of the mind ; and a mixture of these it was, it appears, that produced Peel's Bill ; this mixture it was which [that] " in its result," LED to the conclusion ; that is to say, the result led to the result ; result being conclusion, and conclusion being result. But tautology is, you see, a favorite with this son of the Archbishop of Canterbury, more proofs of which you have yet to witness. And why must the king be com- pelled to hear the phrase " healthful state of the currency," threadbare as it had long before been worn by Horner and all his tribe of coxcombs of the Edinburgh Review ! * Would not " our ancient currency " have answered every purpose ? And would it not have better become the lips of a person in the high station of Speaker of the House of Commons ? The remaining part of this paragraph is such a mass of confusion that one hardly knows where or how to begin upon it. The " that" after the colon and the dash seems to connect it with what has gone before ; and yet what con- nection is there ? Immediately after this " that " begins a parenthetical phrase, which is interrupted by a parenthe- sis, and then the parenthetical phrase goes on again till it comes to a dash, after which you come to the words that join themselves to the first " that." These words are " still that" Then, on goes the parenthetical phrase again till you come to " it became us." Then comes more parentheti- * The Edinburgh Review was started in October, 1802, by a knot of young men living in the northern metropolis, the chief of whom were Francis Jeffrey, Sydney Smith, Francis Horner, and Henry Brougham. The political views advocated in its pages from the first were Whig. xxiv.] SPEAKER'S SPEECH. 209 cal matter and another parenthesis : and then comes " to re- turn to our ancient system." Take out all the parenthetical matter, and the paragraph will stand thus : " That it was desirable to return to our ancient and healthful state of cur- rency : — that — still that, it became us to return to our an= cient system." But only think of saying " whatever might have been the expediency of the acts " ; and then to make a paren- thesis directly afterward for the express purpose of posi- tively asserting that they " were expedient " / Only think of the necessity for the continuance of the acts having ceased, and of its being becoming in the parliament to re- turn to cash payments as soon as possible, and yet that a convulsion was to be apprehended from a too rapid tran- sition : that is to say, from returning to cash payments sooner than possible ! After this comes a doubt whether the thing can be done at all ; for we are told that the parliament, in its wisdom, concluded that, if " at any period this return could be effected without national inconvenience, it was at the pres- ent." And then follows that piece of sublime nonsense about the nation's reposing in the fond (that is, foolish) hope of, not only a lasting, but also a sound, peace. A lasting peace would have been enough for a common man : but the son of an Archbishop must have it sound as well as lasting, or else he would not give a farthing for it. 6. "In considering, Sir, the state of our finances, and in minutely comparing our income with our expenditure, it ap- peared to us that the excess of our income was not fairly ade~ quatefor the purposes to which it was applicable— the gradual reduction of the national debt. 7. "It appeared to us that a clear available surplus of "at least five millions ought to be set apart for that object. 8. "This, Sir, has been effected by the additional impo- sition of three millions of taxes." 2io SIX LESSONS. [letter The word "fairly," in Paragraph No. 6, is a redun- dancy: it is mere j/aw^. " Adequate /- " ought to be "adequate to"; and ''applicable" is inapplicable to the case ; for the money was applicable to awy purpose. It should have been, " the purpose (and not the purposes) for which it was intended" ; or, "the purpose to which it was intended to be applied." The 7th Paragraph is a heap of redundant Treasury- slang. Here we have surplus ; that is to say, an ^zw-quan- tity ; but this is not enough for the Speaker, who must have it clear also ; and not only clear, but available : and then he must have it set apart into the bargain ! Leave out all the words in italics, and put purpose instead of object at the end ; and then you have something like common sense as to the words, but still foolish enough as to the political view of the matter. Even the 8th Paragraph, a simple sentence of fourteen words, could not be free from fault. What does the Speaker mean by an " additional imposition " ? Did he imagine that the king would be fool enough to believe that the parliament had imposed three millions of taxes without making an addition to former impositions? How was the imposition to be other than " additional " ? Why, therefore, cram in this word? 9. "Sir, in adopting this course, his Majesty's faithful Com- mons did not conceal from themselves that they were calling upon the nation for a great exertion ; but well knowing that honor, and character, and independence have at all times been the first and dearest objects of the hearts of Englishmen, we felt assured that there was no difficulty that the country would not encounter, and no pressure to which she would not willingly and cheerfully submit, to enable her to maintain, pure and un- impaired, that which [that] has never yet been shaken or sul- lied— htr public credit and her national good faith." This is a sentence which [that] might challenge the xxiv.] SPEAKER'S SPEECH. 21 1 world ! Here is, in a small compass, almost every fault that writing can have. The phrase " conceal from them- selves " is an importation from France, and from one of the worst manufactories too. What is national " honor " but national "character" ? In what do they differ? And what had " independence " to do in a case where the sub- ject was the means of paying a debt? Here are three things named as the "first " object of Englishmen's hearts. Which was the "first" of the three? Or were they the first three? To "feel assured " is another French phrase. In the former part of the sentence, the Parliament are a they; in the latter part they are a we. But it is the figures of rhetoric which [that] are the great beauties here. First it is Englishmen who [that] have such a high sense of honor and character and independence. Next it is the country. And next the country becomes a she ; and in her character of female will submit to any "pressure " to enable her to "maintain" her purity : though scarcely anybody but the sons of Archbishops ever talks about maintaining purity, most people thinking that, in such a case, preserving is bet- ter. Here, however, we have pure and tinimpaired. Now- pure applies to things liable to receive stains and adul* terations ; tinimpaired, to things liable to be undermined dilapidated, demolished, or worn out. So th^ Speaker, in order to make sure of his mark, takes them both, and says that the thing which [that] he is about to name, "has never yet been shaken or sullied" ! But what is this fine thing after all ? Gad ! there are two things ; namely, " public credit and national good faith." So that, leaving the word good to go to the long account of redundancy, here is another instance of vulgarly-false Grammar ; for the two nouns, joined by the conjunction, require the verb have instead of has. 212 SIX LESSONS. [letter io. " Thus, Sir, I have endeavored shortly, and I am aware how imperfectly, to notice the various duties which [that] have devolved upon us, in one of the longest and most arduous ses- sions i?i the Records of Parliament. n. "The Bill, Sir, which [that] it is my duty to present to your Royal Highness, is entitled ' An Act for applying certain moneys therein mentioned for the Service of the year 1819, and for further appropriating the supplies granted in this Session of Parliament.' To which, with all humility, we pray his Majesty's Royal Assent." Even here, in these commonplace sentences, there must be something stupidly illiterate. The Speaker does not mean that his " endeavor" was "shortly" made, or made in a short manner ; but that his notice was made in a short manner; and, therefore, it ought to have been, " to notice shortly" if shortly it must be; yet surely phraseology less groveling might have been used on such an occasion. " In the longest session," and " in the records of Parliament," are colloquial, low, and incorrect into the bargain ; and as for " moneys " in the last paragraph, the very sound of the word sends the mind to 'Change Alley, and conjures up before it all the noisy herd of Bulls and Bears. There is, indeed, one phrase in this whole Speech (that in which the Speaker acknowledges the imperfectness of the manner in which he has performed his task) which [that] would receive our approbation ; but the tenor of the Speech, the at once flippant and pompous tone of it, the self-conceit that is manifest from the beginning to the end, forbid us to give him credit for sincerity when he confesses his deficiencies, and tell us that the confession is one of those clumsy traps so often used with [in] the hope of catch* ing unmerited applause. xxiv.] KING'S SPEECH. 213 LESSON II. Remarks on the Speech which \that\ the Prince Regent made to the Parliament on the occasion when the above Speech of the Speaker was made. "My Lords and Gentlemen : 12. "It is with great regret that I am again obliged to an- nounce to you the continuance of his Majesty's lamented indis- position. 13. "I can not close this Session of Parliament without ex- pressing the satisfaction that I have derived from the zeal and assiduity with which you have applied yourselves to the several important objects which [that] have come under your considera- tion. 14. "Your patient and laborious investigation of the state of the circulation and currency of the kingdom demands my warm- est acknowledgment ; and I entertain a confident expectation that the measures adopted, as the result of this inquiry, will be productive of the most beneficial consequences." The phrase pointed out by italics in the 12th Paragraph is ambiguous ; and, as it is wholly superfluous, it has no business there. The 13th Paragraph (for a wonder !) is free from fault ; but, in the 14th, why does the king make two of the " circulation and currency " ? He means, doubtless, to speak of the thing, or things, in use as money. This was the currency ; and what, then, was the " circulation " ? It is not only useless to employ words in this way ; it is a great deal worse : for it creates a confusion of ideas in the mind of the reader. Investigation and inquiry come nearly [near] to each other in meaning ; but when the word " this," which had a direct application to what had gone before, was used, the word investigation ought to [should] have followed it, and not the word inquiry ; it being always a mark of great affecta- tion and of false taste, when pains are taken to seek for synonymous words in order to avoid a repetition of sound. 214 SIX LESSON'S. [letter The device is seen through, and the littleness of mind ex- posed. The fine word " adopted " is not nearly so good as the plain word taken would have been. The Parliament did not adopt the measures in question ; they were their own ; of their own invention : and, if I were here writing remarks on the measures, instead of remarks on the language in which they were spoken of, we might have a hearty laugh at the " confident expectation " which [that] the king enter- tained of the " most beneficial consequences " of those meas- ures, which were certainly the most foolish and mischievous ever taken by any parliament, or by any legislative assem- bly in the world. "Gentlemen of the House of Commons: 15. "I thank you for the supplies which [that] you have granted for the service of the present year. 16. "I sincerely regret that the necessity should have existed of making any additions to the burdens of the people ; but I anticipate [expect] the most important permanent advantages from the effort which [that] you have thus made for meeting at once all the financial difficulties of the country ; and I derive much satisfactio?i from the belief that the means which [that] you have devised for this purpose are calculated to press as lightly on all classes of the community as could be expected when so great an effort was to be made." Nobody, I presume, but kings, says, an " effort for meet- ing." Others say that they make an effort to meet. And nobody, that I ever heard of before, except bill-brokers, talks about meeting money demands. One can not help admiring the satisfaction, nay, the " much satisfaction " that the King derived from the belief that the new taxes would press as lightly as possible on all classes of the community. I do not like to call this vulgar nonsense, because, though written by the Ministers, it is spoken by the King. But, what is it? The additional load must fall upon somebody j xxiv.] KING'S SPEECH. 215 upon some class or classes ; and where, then, was the sense of expressing " muck satisfaction " that they would fall lightly on all classes ? The words " as possible" which come after lightly, do nothing more than make an addition to the confusion of ideas. " My Lords and Gentlemen : 17. " I continue to receive from Foreign Powers the strong* est assurances of their friendly disposition toward this country. 18. "I have observed with great concern the attempts which [that] have recently been made in some of the manufacturing districts to take advantage of circumstances [that are the result of or that are the outcome of, or that are due to] of local dis- tress, to excite a spirit of disaffection to [toward] the institutions and Government of the Country. No object can be nearer my heart than to promote the welfare and prosperity of all classes of his Majesty's subjects ; but this can not be effected without the maintenance of public order and tranquillity. 19. "You may rely, therefore, upon my firm determination to employ, for this purpose, the powers intrusted to me by law ; and I have no doubt that, on your return to your several coun- ties, you will use your utmost endeavors, in co-operating with the Magistracy, to defeat the machinations of those whose pro- jects, if successful, could only aggravate the evils which [that] it professed to remedy ; and who [that], under the pretense of Reform, have really no other object but the subversion of our happy Constitution." Weak minds, feeble writers and speakers, delight in su- perlatives. They have big sound in them, and give the appearance of force ; but they very often betray those who [that] use them into absurdities. The King, as in Para- graph No. 17, might continue to receive strong assurances ; but how could he receive " the strongest " more than once? In the 18th Paragraph we have " welfare and prosperity." I, for my part, shall be content with either (the two being the same thing), and, if I find, from the acts of the govern- ment, reason to believe that one is really sought for, I shall care little about the other. I am, however, I must confess, not greatly encouraged 216 SIX LESSONS. [letter to hope for this, when I immediately afterward hear of a " firm determination" to employ "powers" the nature of which is but too well understood. " Determination " can, in Grammar, receive no additional force from having firm placed before it ; but, in political interpretation, the use of this word can not fail to be looked upon as evincing a little more of eagerness than one could wish to see apparent in such a case. In these speeches, nouns, verbs, adjectives, and adverbs, generally go, like crows and ravens, in pairs. Hence we have, in the 18th Paragraph, " the institutions and govern- ment " of the country. Now, though there may be institu- tions of the country which [that] do not form a part of its government ; the government is, at any rate, among the coun- try's institutions. If every institution do not form a part of the government, the government certainly forms a part of the institutions. But, as the old woman said by her goose and gander, these words have been a couple for so many, many years, that it would be a sin to part them just at the last. The gross grammatical errors in the latter part of the last paragraph, where the singular pronoun it represents the plural noun projects, and the verb profess is in the past in- stead of the present time, one can account for only on the supposition that the idea of Reform had scared all the pow- ers of thought from the minds of the writers. This unhappy absence of intellect seems to have continued to the end of the piece ; for here we have " no other object but" instead of no other object than: and the word "really" put into the mouth of a king, and on such an occasion, is something so very low that we can hardly credit our eyes when we be- hold it. [Cobbett sometimes appears to me to be hypercritical, xxiv.] INTR OD UC TION. 2 1 7 and sometimes to pass unnoticed what should receive his attention. " The strongest assurances " does not seem to me to be, by a good deal, as objectionable as " circumstances of local distress," or as " spirit of disaffection to the govern- ment." Cobbett, as we have seen, blunders occasionally as well as the rest of us. The study of his verbal criticisms tends to make us think, which is the chief advantage to be derived from them.] INTRODUCTION To the Four Lessons on the Productions of Lord Castlereagh, the Duke of Wellington, the Marquis Wellesley, and the Bishop of Winchester. From the literary productions of Speakers and Ministers I come to those of Ambassadors, Secretaries of State, Vice- roys, and Bishops. In these persons, even more fully per- haps than in the former, we are entitled [have a right] to expect proofs of great capacity as writers. I shall give you specimens from the writings of four persons of this descrip- tion, and these four, men who [that] have been intrusted with the management of affairs as important as any that the king of this country ever [has] had to commit [intrust ?] to the hands of his servants ; I mean Lord Castlereagh, the Duke of Wellington, the Marquis Wellesley, and the Bishop of Winchester ; the first of whom has been called the great- est Statesman, the second, the greatest Captain, the third, the greatest Viceroy, the fourth, the greatest Tutor, of the age. The passages which [that] I shall first select from the writings of these persons, are contained in State Papers, re« lating to the Museums at Paris. 2l8 SIX LESSONS. [letter And here, in order that you may be better able to judge of the writings themselves, I ought to explain to you the nature of the matters to which they relate, and the circum- stances under which they were written. The Mtiseums at Paris contained, in the year 1815, when the King of France was escorted back to that city by the armies of the Allies, a great many Statues and Pictures, which [that] Napoleon had, in his divers conquests and invasions, taken from the collections of other countries, and carried to France. When, therefore, the Allies had, by their armies, possession of Paris, at the time just mentioned, they rifled these Museums, and took from them what had, or what they asserted had, be- longed to the Allies respectively. The French contended that this was unjust, and that it was an act of pillage. They said, that, in 18 14, when the Allies were also in possession of the capital of France, they put forward no claim to the things in question, which were, to all intents and purposes, military booty, or prize ; and that for the Allies to make this claim now, was not only contrary to their own prece- dent of 1814, but that it was to assume the character of ene~ mies of France, directly in the teeth of their own repeated declarations, in which they had called themselves friends and even Allies of France ; and in direct violation of their solemn promises to commit against the French nation no act of hostility, and to treat it, in all respects, as a friend. The Allies had now, however, the power in their hands ; and the result was the stripping of the Museums. To characterize this act committed by those who [that] entered France under the name of Allies of the King and of the great body of his people, and who [that] took possession of Paris in virtue of a convention which [that] stipulated for the security of all public property : to charac- terize such an act is unnecessary ; but we can not help la- xxiv.] LORD CASTLEREAGH % S NOTE. 219 menting that the Ministers of England were open abettors, if not original instigators, in this memorable transaction, which, of all the transactions of that time, seems to have created the greatest portion [?] of rancor in the minds of the people of France. That the English Ministers were the instigators appears pretty clearly [clear] from the seizure (which was by force of arms) having been immediately preceded by a paper (called a note) delivered by Lord Castlereagh in the name of the Prince Regent, to the Ambassadors of the Allies, which paper was dated nth September, 181 5, and from which paper I am now about to give you a specimen of the witt- ing of this Secretary of State. LESSON III. Remarks on Lord Castlereagh 's Note of the lit A September, 181 5, on the Subject of the Museums at Paris. This note set out by saying, that representations, on the subject of the Statues and Pictures, have been laid before the Ambassadors of the Allies, and that the writer has received the commands of the Prince Regent to submit, for the consideration of the Allies, that which [that] fol- lows. After some further matter, among which we find this "greatest Statesman" talking of "the indulgen- ces " (instead of indulgences) to which the French had a right "to aspire" (instead of to hope for); after saying that the purity of the friendship of the Allies had been " proved beyond a question " by their last year's conduct, and "still more" that is to say, farther than beyond, by their this year's conduct ; after talking about the "sub- stantial integrity " of France, and thereby meaning that 220 SIX LESSONS. [letteu she was to be despoiled of only a part of her dominions; after talking about "combining" this " integrity with such an adequate system of temporary precaution as may sat- isfy what the Allies owe to the security of their own sub- jects " ; after all this, and a great deal more of the same description, we come to the paragraphs that I am now going to remark on. Observe, I continue the numboing of the paragraphs, as if the whole of the Papers on which I am commenting, formed but one piece of writing. 20. " Upon what principle can France, at the close of such a war, expect to sit down with the same extent of possessions which [that] she held before the Revolution, and desire, at the same time, to retain the ornamental spoils of all other countries ? Is it that there can exist a doubt of the issue of the contest, or of the power of the Allies to effectuate what justice and policy require ? If not, upon what principle deprive France of her late territorial acquisitions, and preserve to her the spoliations apper- taining to those territories, which all modern conquerors have invariably respected, as inseparable from the country to which they belonged ? 21. " The Allied Sovereigns have perhaps something to atone for to Europe, in consequence of the course pursued by them, when at Paris, during the last year. It is true, they never did so far make themselves parties in the criminality of this mass 0/ plunder as to sanction it by any stipulation in their Treaties ; such a recognition has been on their part uniformly refused ; but they certainly did use their influence to repress at that moment any agitation of their claims, in the hope that France, not less subdued by their generosity than by their arms, might be disposed to preserve inviolate a peace which [that] had been studiously framed to serve as a bond of reconciliation between the Nation and the King. They had also reason to expect that his Majesty would be advised voluntarily to restore a considerable p?-opor- tion, at least, of these spoils, to their lawful owners. 22. ' ' But the question is a very different one now, and to pursue the same course, under circumstances so essentially altered, would be, in the judgment of the Prince Regent, equally unwise toward France, and unjust toward our Al- lies, who have a direct interest in this question. 23. "His Royal Highness, in stating this opinion, feels it necessary to guard against the possibility of misrepresentation. 24. " While he deems it to be the dutv of the Allied Sover* xxiv.] LORD CASTLEREAGH'S NOTE. 221 eigns not only not to obstruct, but [to] facilitate, upon the pres- ent occasion, the return of these objects to the places from whence they were torn, it seems not less consistent with their delicacy not to suffer the position of their armies in France, or the removal of these works from the Louvre, to become the means, either directly or indirectly, of bringing within their own dominions a single article which [that] did not of right, at the period of their conquest, belong either to their respective family collections, or to the countries over which they now actu- ally reign. 25. "Whatever value the Prince Regent might attach to such exquisite specimens of the fine arts, if otherwise acquired, he has no wish to become possessed of them at the expense of France, or rather of the countries to which they of a right [right- fully] belong, more especially by following up a principle in war which [that] he considers a reproach to the nation by which it has been adopted, and so far from wishing to take advantage of the occasion to purchase from the rightful own- ers any articles they might, from pecuniary considerations, be disposed to part with, His Royal Highness would, on the con- trary, be disposed rather to afford the means of replacing them in those very temples and galleries of which they were so long the ornaments. 26. " Were it possible that His Royal Highness's sentiments toward the person and cause of Louis XVIII could be brought into doubt, or that the position of His Most Christian Majesty was likely to be injured in the eyes of his own people, the Prince Regent would not come to this conclusion without the most painful reluctance ; but, on ihe contrary, His Royal High- ness believes that His Majesty will rise in the love and respect of his own subjects, in proportion as he separates himself from these remembrances of revolutionary warfare. These spoils, which impede a moral reconciliation between France and the countries she has invaded, are not necessary to record the exploits of her armies, which, notwithstanding the cause in which they were achieved, must ever make the arms of the nation re- spected abroad. But while these objects remain at Paris, constituting as it were the title-deeds of the countries which [that] have been given up, the sentiments of reuniting these countries again to France will never be altogether extinct ; nor will the genius of the French people ever completely associate itself with the more limited existence assigned to the nation under the Bourbons." I shall say nothing of the logic of this passage ; and t would fain pass over the real and poorly-disguised mo- 222 SIX LESSONS. [letter five of the proceeding ; but this must strike every ob- server. It is the mere writing, which [that], at present, is to be the principal object of our attention. To be sure, the sen- timents, the very thoughts, in Paragraphs 24 and 25, which speak the soul, as they are conveyed in the language, of the sedentary and circumspect keeper of a huckster's stand, or the more sturdy perambulating bearer of a miscellaneous pack, do, with voice almost imperious, demand a portion of our notice ; while, with equal force, a similar claim is urged by the suspicions in the former of these paragraphs, and the protestations in the latter, which present to the nations of Europe, and especially to the French nation, such a capti- vating picture of English frankness and sincerity ! But let us come to the writing : and here, in Paragraph 20, we have spoliations appertaining to territories, though spoliation means the act of despoiling, and never does or can mean the thing of which one has been despoiled ; and next, we have the word which, relating to spoliation, and then the subsequent part of the sentence tells us that spolia- tions have invariably been respected. In the 2 1st Paragraph, does the it relate to criminality or to mass of plunder ? and what is meaned [meant] by a sanction given to either ? Could the writer suppose it pos- sible that it was necessary to tell the Allies, themselves, that they had not sanctioned such things? And here, if we may, for a moment, speak of the logic of our " greatest Statesman," the Allies did sanction, not criminality, not a mass of plunder, but the quiet possession of the specimens of art, by leaving, in 18 14, that possession as they found it. At the close of this paragraph, we have a proportion, instead of a part, an error common enough with country fellows when they begin to talk fine, but one that surely ought to xxiv.] LORD CASTLEREAGH'S NOTE. 223 be absent from the most stately of the productions of a Sec- retary of State. " Unwise toward France, and unjust toward the Allies," and " equally " too, is as pretty a specimen of what is called twattle as you will find ; while " the return " of these " ob- jects" the not purloining of a." single article," the not wish- ing to " take advantage " and to "purchase any of the arti- cles that the owners might wish to part with" form as fine an instance of the powers of the plume de crasse, or pen of mud, as you will be able to hunt out of the history of a whole year's proceedings at the Police Offices. But, in Paragraph 24, we have " their conquest." The conquest of whom or what? That of the Allies, that of their dominions, or that of the "objects"! It is impossible to answer, except by guess ; but it comes out, at any rate, that there was a conquest ; and this " greatest Statesman " might have perceived that this one word was a complete answer to all his assertions about plunder and spoliation ; for that which [that] is co7iquered is held of right ; and the only want of right in the Allies, forcibly to take these " articles," arose from their having entered France as Allies of the King of France, and not as enemies and conquerors. And what, in Paragraph 25, is meaned [meant] by "fol- lowing up a principle in war" ? The phrase, " follow up a principle," is low as the dirt ; it is chit-chat, and very unfit to be used in a writing of this sort. But, as to the sense : how could the Regent, even if he had purchased the pic- tures, be said to follow up a principle " in war " ? The meaning, doubtless, was that the Regent had no wish to become possessed of these things at the expense of France, or, rather, at the expense of the countries to which they be- longed, especially as he could not thus gratify his taste for the arts without acting upon a principle which [that] the 224 SIX LESSOXS. [letter French had acted on in war. This meaning might, indeed, be supposed to be contained in the above phrase of Lord Castlereagh ; but in a writing of this kind ought [should] anything to be left to szipposition ? The 26th Paragraph is an assemblage of all that is in- correct, low, and ludicrous. The " was " after Christian Majesty ought to [should] be could be, that is, " were it pos- sible that his position could be likely to be injured " ; and not " were it possible that his position was likely to be in- jured," which is downright nonsense. And then only think of an injured position ; and of the King's position being in- jured " in the eyes " of his people ! " But, on the contrary** On the contrary of what? Look back, and see if it be pos- sible to answer this question. Next comes the intolera- ble fustian of the King " separating himself from remem- brances" '; and from this flight, down the " greatest States- man " pitches, robs the attorney's office, and calls the Statues and Pictures " title-deeds, as it were " ; and this "as it were " is, perhaps, the choicest phrase of the whole passage. But, in conclusion (for it is time to have done with it), what do you say to "the sentiments of reuniting the countries to France"? And, what do you say, then, to the "genius" (that is, the disposition) " of the French people associating itself with the limited existence assigned to the nation under the Bourbons " ? What do you say of the man who [that] could make use of these words, when his meaning was, " that, as long as these Statues and Pictures remained to remind the French people of the late extent of the domin- ions of France, their minds would not be completely recon- ciled to those more narrow limits, which [that] had now been prescribed to her " ? What do you say of the man who, having this plain proposition to state, could talk of the genius of the people associating itself with the more limited xxiv.] WELLINGTON'S DISPATCH. 225 existence of the nation, the nation being the people ; and therefore his meaning, if there be any sense in the words, being, that the people as a nation had, under the Bourbons, had their existence, or length of life, abridged ? What do you say, what can you say of such a man, but that nature might have made him for a valet, for a strolling player, and possibly, for an auctioneer ; but never for a Secretary of State ! * Yet this man was educated at the University of Cambridge. \ LESSON IV. Remarks on a Dispatch of the Duke of Wellington {called the greatest Captain of the Age) relative to the Museums at Paris. Having, as far as relates to the Museums, taken a suffi- cient view of the writing of the greatest Statesman of the age, I now come to that of the "greatest Captain." The writing that I am now about to notice relates to the same subject. The Captain was one of the Commanders at Paris, at the time above spoken of, and it is in that capacity that he writes. Bu> we ought to observe, here, that he is not * This Statesman, looked upon by one party as a paragon of perfec- tion, has been characterized by the other party as " the most intoler- able mischief that ever was cast by an angry Providence on a helpless people." + This Lesson was written in June, 1822 On the 12th August, 1822, this same Lord Castlereagh (being still Secretary of State) killed himself at North Cray, in Kent, by cutting his throat. A Coroner's Jury pro- nounced him to have been insane ; and, which is very curious, a letter from the Duke of Wellington was produced to prove that the deceased had been insane for some time. Though, mind, he had been for some time, and was when he cut his throat, actually intrusted with the care and powers of the other two Secretaries 1 offices (they being absent), v> well as those of the office of Foreign Affairs! —Note by Cobbett- 226 SIX LESSONS. [letter only a great Captain, but a great Ambassador also ; and that he was Ambassador at the Congress of Vienna * just before the time we are speaking of ; and that he was formerly Sec- retary of State for Ireland. The paper, from which I am about to make a quotation, is a "dispatch " from the " greatest Captain " to Lord Castle* reagh, dated at Paris, 23d September, 1815, soon after the Museums had been rifled. I shall not take up much of your time with the perform- ance of this gentleman ; a short specimen will suffice ; and that shall consist of the first three paragraphs of his " dis* patch." " My dear Lord : 27. " There has been a good deal of discussion here lately re- specting the measures which [that] I have been under the neces- sity of adopting, in order to get for the King of the Netherlands his pictures, etc., from the Museums; and lest these reports should reach the Prince Regent, I wish to trouble you, for His Royal Highness's information, with the following statement of what has passed. 28. " Shortly after the arrival of the Sovereigns at Paris, the Minister of the King of the Netherlands claimed the pictures, etc., belonging to his Sovereign, equally with those of other powers ; and, as far as I could learn, never could get any satis- factory reply from the French Government. After several con- versations with me, he addressed your Lordship an official Note, which was laid before the Ministers of the Allied Sovereigns, as- sembled in conference ; and the subject was taken into consider- ation repeatedly, with a view to discover a mode of doing justice to the Claimants of the specimens of the arts in the Museums, without injuring the feelings of the King of France. In the mean time the Prussians had obtained from His Majesty not only all the really Prussian Pictures, but those belonging to the Prus- sian territories on the left of the Rhine, and the Pictures, etc., * The Congress of Vienna was held in that capital after the first treaty of Paris, for the general settlement of the affairs of Europe. The Congress first met on the 30th September, 1814, Lord Castlereagh, and afterward the Duke of Wellington, acting as representatives of Great Britain. xxiv.] WE LLING TON ' S DISPA TCH. 227 belonging to all the Allies of His Prussian Majesty; and the sub- 1 ject pressed for an early decision ; and your Lordship wrote yout note of the nth inst., in which it was fully discussed. 29. " The Ministers of the King of the Netherlands still hav» ing no satisfactory answer from the French Government, ap' pealed to me, as the General in Chief of the army of the King of the Netherlands, to know whether I had any objection to em- ploy His Majesty's Troops to obtain possession of what was his undoubted property. I referred this application again to the Ministers of the Allied Courts, and no objection having been stated, I considered it tny duty to take the necessary measures to obtain what was his right." The great characteristic of this writing (if writing it ought to be called) is the thorough-paced vulgarity of it. There is a meanness of manner as well as of expression, and, indeed, a suitableness to the subject much too natural, in all its appearances, to have been the effect of art. The writer, though addressing a Minister of State, and writing matter to be laid before a Sovereign, begins exactly in the manner of a quidnunc talking to another that he has just met in the street. " There has been a good deal of dis- cussion " (that is to say, talk) " here " ; that is to say, at Paris, Castlereagh being, at the time, in London. The phrase " to get for" is so very dignified that it could have come only from a great man, and could have been inspired by nothing short of the consciousness of being " the Ally oj all the nations of Europe" as the writer calls himself in an- other part of this famous " dispatch!' But what are " these reports," of which the great Cap- tain speaks in the latter part of this paragraph ? He had spoken of no reports before. He had mentioned " discus- sion" and a "-good deal" of it; but had said not a word about reports ; and these reports pop out upon us like " these six men in buckram," * in Falstaff s narrative to the Prince. * See Shakespeare's Henry IV (ist Part), Act ii, sc. iv. Cobbett is Wrong in regard to the number. Falstaff 's 4< rogues in buckram" *28 SIX LESSONS. Lletter The Captain's " wishing to trouble " Lord Castlereagh, "for the Regent's information" closes this paragraph in a very suitable manner, and prepares the mind for the next, where the Regent would find trouble enough, if he were compelled to find out the English of it. The Dutch Minister " claimed the. Pictures belonging to his Sovereign, equally with those of other powers ." What ! did this Dutch- man claim the whole : those belonging to the Dutch Sov- ereign and those belonging to all the other powers besides ? This, to be sure, would have been in the true Dutch style ; but this could hardly be the fact. If it were, no wonder that the Duke had learned that the Minister " never could get any satisfactoyy reply " ; for it must have been a deal indeed that would have satisfied him. The phrase " he addressed your Lordship an official Note " is in the counting-house style ; and then to say to Lord Castlereagh, " your Lordship wrote your Note of the nth of September," was so necessary, lest the latter should imagine that somebody else had written the note ! Nor are the four ands in this paragraph to be overlooked : for never was this poor conjunction so worked before, except, per- haps, in some narrative of a little girl to her mother. The narrative is, in the last-quoted paragraph, con- tinued with unrelaxed spirit. The Dutch Minister can still obtain no satisfactory answer ; he asks the Duke whether he has any objection to use force, and asserts, at the same time, that the goods in question are his master's " undoubted property" Upon this the Duke applies to the other Min- isters, and " no objection having been stated" he considers it his duty to obtain " what was his right" ; that is to say, the Dutch King's right. mounted from two to four, then to seven, then to nine, and at last there »*ere eleven buckram men grown out of two. xxiv.] CASTLEREAGH' S SECOND NOTE. 229 Never was there surely a parcel of words before put to- gether by anybody in so clumsy a manner. In a subse- quent part of the "dispatch " we have this : "I added, that I had no instructions regarding the Museum, nor no grounds on which to form a judgment." In another place we ha-\ e " the King of the Netherlands Pictures." In another place we have M that the property" should be returned to their rightful owners. But, to bestow criticism on such a shocking abuse of letters is to disgrace it : and nothing can apologize for what I have done but the existence of a general knowledge of the fact that the miserable stuff that I have quoted, and on which I have been remarking, proceeded from the pen of a man who [that] has, on many occasions, had some of the most important of the nation's affairs committed to his man- agement. There is in the nonsense of Castlereagh a fri- volity and a foppery that give it a sort of liveliness, and that now and then elicit a smile ; but in the productions of his correspondent there is nothing to relieve , all is vulgar, all clumsy, all dull, all torpid inanity. LESSON V e Remarks on a Note presented by Lord Castlereagh to the Ambassadors of the Allies at Paris, in July, 1815, rela* tive to the Slave Trade. 30. "Viscount Castlereagh, his Britannic Majesty's Principal Secretary of State, etc. , in reference to the communica- tion he has made to the Conference of the orders addressed to the Admiralty to suspend all hostilities against the coast of France, observes, that there is reason to foresee that French ship-owners might be induced to renew the Slave Trade, under the supposition of the peremptory and total abolition decreed by Napoleon Bonaparte having ceased with his power ; that, never- theless, great and powerful considerations, arising from motives 23° SIX LESSONS. [letter of humanity and even regard for the King's authority, require that no time should be lost to maintain in France the entire and immediate abolition of the Traffic in Slaves ; that if, at the time of the Treaty of Paris, the King's administration could wish a final but gradual stop should be put to this Trade, in the space of five years, for the purpose of affording the King the gratification of having consulted, as much as possible, the in- terests of the French Proprietors in the Colonies, now, that the absolute prohibition has been ordained, the question assumes entirely a different shape, for if the King were to revoke the said prohibition, he would give himself the disadvantage of au- thorizing, in the interior of France, the reproach which [that] more than once has been thrown out against his former Govern- ment, of countenancing reactions, and, at the same time, justi- fying, out of France, and particularly in England, the belief of a systematic opposition to liberal ideas ; that accordingly the time seems to have arrived when the Allies can not hesitate formally to give weight in France to the immediate and entire prohibition of the Slave Trade, a prohibition, the necessity of which has been acknowledged, in principle, in the transactions of the Congress at Vienna." Now, I put this question to you : Do you understand what this great Statesman means ? Read the Note three times over, and then say whether you understand what he ivants? You may guess ; but you can go little further. Here is a whole mass of grammatical errors ; but, it is the obscurity, the unintelligibleness of the Note, that I think constitutes its greatest fault. One way of proving the bad- ness of this writing is to express the meaning of the writer in a clear manner ; thus : " Lord Castlereagh observes that there is reason to ap- prehend that the French ship-owners may be induced to renew the Slave Trade, from a supposition that the total abolition, recently decreed by Napoleon, has been nullified by the cessation of his authority ; that motives of humanity as well as a desire to promote the establishment of the King's authority, suggest that no time should be lost in taking efficient measures to maintain the decree of aboli- tion ; that at the time of the treaty of Paris, the King's xxiv.] CASTLEREAGH'S SECOND NOTE. 231 Ministers wished to abolish this trade, but, in order that the King might, as much as possible, consult the interests of the colonial proprietors, those Ministers wished the ob- ject to be accomplished by degrees during the space of five years ; that now, however, when the abolition has been actually decreed, the matter assumes an entirely different shape, seeing that it is not now an abolition, but the re- fraining from revoking an abolition, that is proposed to be suggested to the King ; that, if the King were to do this, he would warrant among his own people, the injurious im- putation, more than once brought against his former gov- ernment, of countenancing the work of undoing and over- turning, and would, at the same time, confirm foreign na- tions, and particularly the English, in the belief that he had adopted a systematic opposition to liberal principles and views ; that, therefore, the interests of the King not less than those of humanity seem to call upon the Allies to give, formally and without delay, the weight of their influence in favor, as far as relates to France, of an entire and imme- diate abolition of the Slave Trade, an abolition, the neces- sity of which has, in principle at least, been acknowledged in the transactions of the Congress of Vienna." Now, as to the several faulty expressions in the Note of Castlereagh, though I have made great use of italics, I have not pointed out one half of the faults. Who ever before heard of a reason to foresee a thing? He meaned [meant] reason to believe that the thing would take place, and as it was a thing to be wished not to take place, to apprehend was the word ; because to apprehend means to think of with some degree of fear. Wishing to-morrow to be a fine day, what would you think of me if I were to say that I had reason to foresee that it would rain ? The might is clearly wrong. If the abolition were total, what had peremptory to 232 SIX LESSONS. [letter do there ? Could it be more than total? The nevertheless had no business there. He was about to give reasons why the abolition-decree ought to be confirmed ; but he had stated no reasons given by anybody why it should not. To lose no time to maintain ; and then the in France, and then the immediate ; altogether here is such a mass of confusion that one can not describe it. " To maintain in France" would lead one to suppose that there was, or had been, a slave trade in France. The next part, beginning with " that if" sets all criticism at defiance. Look at the verbs could wish, and should be ! Look at of having. Then comes prohibition for abolition, two very different things. To as- sume entirely a different shape is very different from to as- sume an entirely different shape. The latter is meaned [meant], and the former is said. Then what does the for do there? What consequence is he coming to? How was he going to show that the shape was different ? He attempts to show no such thing ; but falls to work to foretell the evils which [that] will fall on the King of France if he revoke Napoleon's decree. And here, Goddess of Grubb street, do hear him talking of the King of France giving hi77iself the disadvantage of authorizing reproaches ! If the King's conduct would justify people in believing ill of him, why should it justify the English in particular? They might, indeed, be more ready to believe ill of him ; but it could not be more just in them than in others. An opposition to ideas is a pretty idea enough : and so is the giving of weight in France to an immediate prohibition ! Never was there, surely, such a piece of writing seen before ! Fifty years hence, no man who [that] should read it, would be able to ascertain its meaning. I am able to pick it out, because, and only because, I am acquainted with the history of the matter treated of. And yet, most momentous xxiv.] CASTLEREAGH'S SECOND NOTE. 233 transactions, transactions involving the fate of millions of human beings, have been committed to the hands of this man! It is not unnecessary for me to observe that, though I have stated the meaning of this note in a way for it to be understood, I by no means think, that even in the words in which I have expressed it, it was a proper Note for the occasion. It was false in professions ; and it was, as to- ward the King of France, insolent in a high degree. Even if it had been just to compel the King to abolish the Slave Trade, the matter might have been expressed in a less offen- sive manner ; and, at any rate, he might have been spared the brutal taunt that we meet with toward the close of this matchless specimen of diplomatic stupidity. Hoping that this book will outlive the recollection of the transactions treated of by the Papers on which I have been remarking, it seems no more than justice to the par- ties to say that the abolition, which [that] was thus extorted, had effect but for a very short time ; and the French nation never acknowledged it as binding ; that at this moment (Jtine, 1822), complaints are made in the House of Com- mons of the breach of agreement on the part of the French ; that the French have revived and do carry on the traffic in African slaves ; * that our Ministers promise to make re- monstrance ; but that they dare not talk of war ; and that without declaring their readiness for war, their remon- strances can have no effect. * The influence of Great Britain was strenuously exerted at the peace of 1814 and 1815, and afterward at the Congress of Aix-la-Chapelle, to obtain the concurrence of foreign powers in the abolition of slavery. The Duke of Wellington, while ambassador at Paris in 1814, used every effort to obtain from the restored government a prohibition of the traffic ; but the West Indian interest, and commercial jealousy of England, frus- trated all his attempts, and Napoleon, during the hundred days on hi* return from Elba, first abolished the trade by law. 234 SIX LESSONS. [letter LESSON VI. Remarks on passages in Dispatches from the Marquis Wel- lesley, Lord Lieutenant of Ireland* to Viscount Sid- mouth^ and to Mr. Peel, Secretaries of State ; % dated Dublin Castle, from ^d January to 12th June, 1822 ; and also on the Charge of the Bishop of Winchester, de- livered in July, 1822. 31. " Concluding that your Lordship had been apprised be- fore my arrival in Dublin, of every important circumstance re- specting the unhappy disturbances which [that] have prevailed in this country, I proceed to submit to you, for his Majesty's consideration, such information as I have received on that sub- ject during the few days that have passed since my succession to this Government. 32. "I propose to arrange this information with reference to each county respectively, for the purpose of facilitating a com- parison with such statements as may already be in your Lord' ship's possession, a?id of enabling you to form a judgment of thtf relative state of each particular district at the different periods of time specified in each document.'''' The Marquis's style is not, in general, lon< and clumsy j it has the opposite faults, affectation and foppishness ; and where the meaning of the writer is obscure, it is not so much because he has not a clear head as because he can not con- descend to talk in the language and manner of common mortals. " Had been apprised before of disturbances which have prevailed " presents great confusion as to times. We can * Richard Colley Wellesley, Marquis of Wellesley, brother of the Duke of Wellington, was Lord Lieutenant of Ireland from 1821 to 1828. t Henry Addington, Viscount Sidmouth, entered parliament in 1784, and held various public offices between that time and his retirement into private life in 1822. He was Speaker of the House of Commons fol twelve years ; and Prime Minister from 1801 to 1804. \ Sir Robert Peel, then Mr. Peel, became Home Secretary hi 1822. xxiv.] WELLESLEY'S DISPATCHES. 235 hardly come at the precise meaning. It should have been : " Concluding that, before my arrival, your Lordship was ap- prised of every important circumstance respecting the un- happy disturbances prevailing in this country." For, the prevalence was still in existence. To submit is to place at the disposal of, to put under the power of; and, therefore, transmit, or send, was the proper word ; for it is the King to whom the information is submitted. The Marquis sent the information to Lord Sidmouth that he might submit it to the King. " Succession to this government " is a strangely pom- pous phrase at best. But, it is not correct ; for his succes- sion (if it were one) took place at his appointment ; and he is about to speak of what he has learned since his arrival in Dublin ; and why not say arrival? The 32d Paragraph is, perhaps, as complete a specimen of smoothness in words and of obscurity in meaning as ever found its way upon paper : and yet this was an occasion for being particularly clear, seeing that the Marquis was here explaining the plan of his dispatch. With reference to, means in relation to, as appertaining to, having a view to- ward. The first is the best for the Marquis : and that is little short of nonsense ; for what is arranging information in relation to each county? What does it mean? Not what the Marquis thought he was saying, which was that he proposed to speak of the state of all the counties, and that the information relating to each county he meaned [meant] to place under a separate head. This was what he meaned [meant] ; but this he does not say. And then again, what does respectively do here after each? Respectively means particularly or relatively ; and as he had before said, or meaned [meant] to say, that he proposed to place the information relating to each county 2 36 SIX LESSONS. [letter under the head of that county, what need was there of the addition of this long and noisy adverb ? To be sure, to place the information under separate heads, each head confining itself to the information relate ing to one county, was a very good way of facilitating a comparison of this information with that which [that] was already in Lord Sidmouth's possession ; but it was not enough to say "facilitating a comparison with such state- ments " ; and there appears, besides, to be no reason to con- elude that the information before possessed was arranged according to counties ; on the contrary, the Marquis's lay- ing down of his plan would induce us to suppose that the arrangement of his matter was new. The latter part of the sentence is all confusion. The Marquis means that, by placing his information as before described, he shall enable Lord Sidmouth to form a judg- ment of the state of each district, now, compared with the state in which it was at the date of the former information. The " relative state of each particular district " may mean its state at one paiod cojnpared with its state at another petiod ; but, "at different periods of time" by no means gives us this idea. And, even if it did, what are we to do with the "each document" at the close? Each means one of two, one of more than one. So that here we have the rela- tive state of a district at the different periods of time speci- fied in one document ; and the main point that the Marquis was driving at was to show Lord Sidmouth the manner in which he was going to enable him to compare the contents of the present document with those of the documents already held in his possession. I have taken here the first two sentences of the dispatch. They are a fair specimen of the Marquis's style, the great characteristic of which is obsciirity arising from affectation. xxiv.] WELLE SLEY'S DLSPATCHES. 237 What he meaned [meant] was this : " I propose to place the information relating to each county under a distinct head, for the purpose of facilitating a comparison of this in- formation with that which [that] your Lordship may already possess, and also for the purpose of enabling you to form a judgment of the present state of each county, compared with the state in which it was at the date of former dispatches." And would it not have been better to write thus than to put upon paper a parcel of words, the meaning of which, even if you read them a hundred times over, must still remain a matter of uncertainty ? But, there is another fault here ; and that is, all the lat- ter part of the sentence is a mere redundancy ; for of what was Lord Sidmouth to " form a judgment " ? A judgment of the comparative state of the country at the two periods ? What could this be more than the making of the compari- son ? Judgtnent, in this case, means opinion ; and, if the Marquis had said that his object was to enable Lord Sid- mouth to form a judgment as to what ought to be done, for instance, in consequence of the change in the state of the country, there would have been some sense in it ; but to enable him to see the change was all that the Marquis was talking about ; and the very act of making the comparison was to discern, or judge of, the change. It is not my intention to swell out these remarks, or, with this dispatch before me, I could go on to a great ex- tent indeed. Some few passages I can not, however, re- frain from just pointing out to you. 33. " The commanding officer at Ban try reports a daring attack made a few nights previously, on several very respectable houses in the immediate vicinity of that town, by a numerous banditti, who succeeded in obtaining arms from many ; and the officer stationed at Skibbereen states his opinion that the spirit of disaffection, which had been confined to the northern Baronies 238 SIX LESSONS. [letter of the county, had spread in an alarming measure through the whole of West Carbury ; that nightly meetings are held at vari- ous places on the coast, and that bands of offenders assemble, consisting of not less than three hundred in each band. 34. " It further appears, from various communications, that the greater part of the population of the northern part of the county of Cork had assembled in the mountains, and that they have in some places made demonstrations of attack, and in others have committed outrages by day, with increased force and bold- ness.'" " Reports an attack " is of the slang niilitary, and should not have forced its way into this dispatch. " States his opinion, that," is little better. But it is to the strange con- fusion in the times of the verbs that I here wish to direct your attention. This is a fault the Marquis very frequently commits. 35. " The Magistrates resident at Dunmanaway report that illegal oaths have for a long time been administered in that neigh- borhood ; that nocturnal meetings have frequently been held ; that in the adjoining parishes, notices of an inflammatory de- scription have been posted ; and in one parish, arms have been taken from the peaceable inhabitants. 36. " The Rector of reports, on the 10th, that six houses of his parishioners had been [were] attacked on the preceding night, and some arms obtained from them, and then an attempt had been made to assassinate Captain Bernard, an active yeo- manry officer, when only a short distance behind his corps, but that, owing to the pistol presented at him missing fire, he escaped, and his brother shot the assailant." We do not know from the words " have for a long time been administered," whether the oaths were administered a long time ago, or are now, and long have been administer- ing. The that should have been repeated between the and and the in toward the close of Paragraph 35 ; for the want of it takes the last fact out of the report of the Magistrates, and makes it an assertion of the Marquis. The same re- mark applies to the 36th Paragraph, where, for the want of the that between the and and the then, it is the Marquis, xxiv.] WELLESLEY'S DISPATCHES. 239 and not the Rector, who [that] asserts the fact of an attempt to assassinate the Captain. An odd sort of an attempt to assassinate, by-the-by, seeing that it was made by a pistol openly presented at him, and that, too, when his troop was just on before, and when his brother was so near at hand as to be able to shoot the assailant I But assassinate is become a fashionable word in such cases. 37. "On the evening of the same day a detachment of the nth Regiment was attacked, on its march from Macroom to Bandon, by a party of sixty men, who followed it for three miles, and took advantage of the inclosures to fire, and to retard the march of the King's troops." The meaning is that the party of sixty men followed it (the regiment), took advantage of the inclosures to fire on it, and to retard its march ; but, the Marquis, from a desire to write fine, leaves us in doubt whether the regiment and the King's troops be the same body of men ; and this doubt is, indeed, countenanced by the almost incredible circum- stance that a regular regiment should be folio-wed for three miles, and actually have its march retarded by sixty men ! 38. "A countryman's house is also stated to have been at- tacked by forty men, well mounted and armed, who severely beat and wounded him and took his horse. reports an attack on the house of Mr. Sweet, near Macroom, who, having received previous intimation of the attack, and having prepared for de- fense, succeeded in repulsing the assailants, about two hundred in number, with a loss of two killed, who were carried off by their associates, although their horses were secured." Here we have reports an attack again ; but, your atten- tion is called to the latter part of the paragraph, where it would appear that Mr. Sweet sustained a loss of two killed ; and yet these two dead men were carried off by their assail- ants. If the Marquis had stopped at the word killed, it would have been impossible not to understand him to mean that Mr. Sweet had two of his men killed. 240 SIX LESSONS, [letter 39. "A Magistrate communicates that information had [has] been received by him of several intended attacks upon houses in that neighborhood, but that they had been [were] prevented by the judicious employment of the police, stationed at Sallans, un- der the Peace Preservation Act." By employing the Police in a judicious manner, the Mar- quis means ; but says quite another thing. 40. " The Police Magistrate of Westmeath reports the setting fire to a farmer's outhouses, which, together with the cattle in them, WAS consumed." It should be " the setting of fire " ; and it should be were, and not was ; for the deuce is in it if outhouses, to* gether with the cattle in them, do not make up a. plural. 41. " The result of the facts stated in this Dispatch, and its inclosures, seems to justify an opinion that, although no material change has occurred in any other part of Ireland, the disturb- ances in the vicinity of Macroom have assumed a more decided aspect of general disorder, and accordingly I have resorted to additional measures of precaution and military operation." There should be an in between the and and the its. But it is not the result of the facts that seems to justify the opin- ion ; it is the facts themselves that justify the opinion, and the opinion is the result. Measures of military operation, too, is an odd sort of phrase. This paragraph is all bad, from beginning to end ; but I am merely pointing out promi- nent and gross errors. 42. " Another Magistrate reports several robberies of arms in the parishes of Skull and Kilmore, and the burning of a corn store at Crookhaven ; and. another, in representing the alarm- ing state of the county, adds, that the object of the insurgents, in one district at least, has not been confined to the lowering of rents and tithes, but extended to the refusal also of the Priest's dues." To rob applies to the person or thing from whom or [from] which, something is violently and unlawfully taken. Men rob a man of his money, or a house of its goods ; but, it is xxiv.] WELLESLEY'S DISPATCHES. 241 not the money and goods that are robbed. Yet this is a very common phrase with the Marquis, who, in other places, talks of "plundering arms from people," and who, by saying " six hundred and seventy-six fire-arms" and the like, leaves us clearly to understand that he is at liberty to use this noun in the singular, and, of course, to say a fire-arm whenever he may choose, a liberty, however, which [that] I would, my dear James, earnestly recommend to you never to think of taking. To confine and extend an object does not seem to be very clear sense : and, at any rate, to say that the object of low- ering rents and tithes has been extended to the refusal also of the Priest's dues makes sad work indeed. Without the also, the thing might pass ; but that word makes this part of the sentence downright nonsense. 43. " No additional military force, no improvement nor aug- mentation of the police, would now be effectual without the aid of the Insurrection Act ; with that aid it appears to be rational to expect that tranquillity may be maintained, confirmed, and ex- tended through Ireland. It is, therefore, my duty, in every view, to request the renewal of the law, of which the operation forms the subject of this dispatch." Did any man, in any writing of any sort, ever before meet with anything like this ? Suppose I were to say, " the waitings of which the inaccuracies form the subject of these remarks," what would the world think and say of me ? This is indeed " prose run 77iad." 44. "With respect to Westmeath, the Chief Magistrate of Police has stated the revival of those party feuds and personal conflicts in the neighborhood of Mullingar, which [that] are con- sidered in this country to be indications of the return of public tranquillity, and from which the magistrate expects the detection of past offenses against the state." One loses sight of all about language here, in contem- plating the shocking, the horrible fact ! For, what is so 16 242 SIX LESSONS. [letter horrible as the fact here officially stated, that party feuds and personal conflicts are deemed indications favorable to the government, and that they are expected by the magis- trate to lead to the detection of past offenses against the state ! As to the Grammar: to "state the revival" is just as good English as it would be to say that the magistrate has stated the fine weather. The u the return" ought to be "a re- turn" 45. " The early expiration of the Act would, at least, hazard the revival of that tyranny ; the restraints imposed on violence have not yet been of sufficient duration to form any solid foun- dation of a better and more disciplined disposition in the minds of the people. Even now it is believed that arms are retained in the hope of the expiration of the law on the 1st of August : and although a more auspicious sentiment may exist in the hearts of some, even of the guilty, it would be contrary to all prudent policy and provident wisdom, by a premature relaxation of the law, to afford facility to the accomplishment of the worst de- signs, and to weaken the protections and safeguards, which [that] now secure the lives and properties of the loyal and obedient, before the spirit of outrage had [shall have] been effectually ex- tinguished." " To hazard the revival " is not correct. To hazard ' is to expose to danger ; and certainly the Marquis did not mean that the revival of the tyranny was a thing that ought not to be put in danger. The word hazard had no business there. Another mode of expression ought to have been used : such as, " exposed the country to the danger of the revival of the tyranny." The semicolon after tyranny ought to have been a full- point. " In the hope of the expiration " is bad enough ! but, it is the arrangement of this sentence, the placing of the several parts of it, which [that] is most worthy of your at- tention, and which [that] ought to be a warning to eveiy one who [that] takes pen in hand. "Prudent policy and provident wisdom " would seem to xxiv.] A BISHOP'S CHARGE. 243 say that there are such things as imprudent policy and inu provident wisdom ; but, still, all the rest is inferior, in point of importance, to the confusion which [that] follows, and which [that] leaves you wholly in doubt as to the meaning of the writer. Now, observe with what facility this mass of confusion is reduced to order, and that, too, without add- ing to or taking from the Marquis one single word. I be- gin after the word wisdom : " to afford, by a premature re- laxation of the law, facility to the accomplishment of the worst designs, and to weaken, before the spirit of outrage had been effectually extinguished, the safeguards which [that] now secure the lives and properties of the loyal and obedient." How clear is this ! And how much more harmonious and more elegant too, than the sentence of the Marquis ; and yet the words are all the same identical words ! To- ward the close of Letter XXI, I gave you, from Dr. John- son and Dr. Watts, some striking instances of the wrong placing of words in sentences : and, lest these should be in- sufficient to keep so great a man as the Marquis in counte- nance, I will here show that a Bishop can commit errors of the same sort and greater in degree. I have before me " A Charge delivered to the Clergy of the Diocese of Winchester, at a p>i?nary visitation of that diocese, by George Tomline, D. D., F. R. S., Lord Bishop of Winchester, Prelate of the most Noble Order of the Gar- ter."* We will not stop here to inquire what a prelate's office may require of him relative to an Order which [that] * George Tomline, successively Bishop of Lincoln and Winchester, author of " Elements of Christian Theology," " Memoirs of Mr. Pitt," and a " Refutation of the Charge of Calvinism brought against thq Church of England," born 1750; died 1827. The family name of this prelate was Prettyman, but he took that of Tomline on inheriting an estate left to him. 244 SIX IESSONS. [letter history tells us arose out of a favorite lady [*s] dropping he? garter at a dance ; but I must observe that, as the titles here stand, it would appear that the last is deemed the most hon- orable and of most importance to the Clergy ! This Bishop, whose name was Prettyman, was the Tutor of that Will- iam Pitt who [that] was called the heaven-born Minister, and a history of whose life has been written by this Bishop. So that we have here, a Doctor of Divinity, a Fellow of the Royal Society, a Prelate of the Most Noble Order of the Gar- ter, and a Bishop of one of the richest Sees in the whole world, who, besides, is an [a] Historian, and was Tutor to a heaven-born Minister. Let us see then what sort of writ- ing comes from such a source. I could take an incorrect sentence, I could even take a specimen of downright non- sense, from almost any page of the Charge. But I shall content myself with the very first sentence of it. 46. " My Reverend Brethren, being called to preside over this distinguished Diocese, at a late period of life, I have thought it incumbent upon me not to delay the opportunity of becoming personally acquainted with my clergy longer than circumstances rendered absolutely necessary." There are two double meanings in this short sentence. Was he called at some former time, to preside over the dio- cese w hen he should become old? or was he, when he had become old, called to preside over the diocese ? But what follows is still worse. Does he mean that he thought it in- cumbent on him to become acquainted with his clergy as soon as possible, or in as short a time as possible ? To delay an opportunity is not very good ; and that which [that] is of a man's own appointment, and which [that] proceeds purely from his own will, can not strictly be called an op- portunity. But, it is the double meaning, occasioned by the wrong placing of the words, that I wish you to attend to. xxiv.] A BISHOP'S CHARGE. 245 Now, see how easily the sentence might, with the same words, have been made unequivocal, clear, and elegant : " My Reverend Brethren, being called, at a late period of life, to preside over this distinguished Diocese, I have thought it incumbent on me not to delay longer than cir- cumstances rendered absolutely necessary, the opportunity of becoming personally acquainted with my clergy." How easy it was to write thus! And yet this Bishop did not know how to do it. I dare say that he corrected and recorrected every sentence of this Charge. And yet what bungling work it is, after all ! And these are your college and university bred men ! These are the men who [that] are called Doctors on account of their literary ac- quirements, doctus being the Latin word for learned ! Thus it is that the mass of mankind have been imposed upon by big-sounding names, which, however, have seldom failed to insure, to those who [that] have assumed them, power, ease, luxury, and splendor, at the expense of those who [that] have been foolish or base enough to acquiesce, or to seem to acquiesce, in the fitness of the assumption. Such acquiescence is not, however, so general nowa- days as it formerly was ; and the chagrin which [that] the " Doctors " feel at the change is not more evident than it is amusing. In the very Charge which [that] I have just quoted, the Tutor of the heaven-born Minister says, " A spirit is still manifest among us, producing an impatience of control, a reluctance to acknowledge superiority, and an eagerness to call in question the expediency of established forms and customs" What ! is it, then, a sin, is it an offense against God, to be reluctant to "acknowledge superi- ority " in a Bishop who [that] can not write so well as our- selves ? Oh, no ! We are not to be censured, because we doubt of the expediency of those establishments, those Col- 246 SIX LESSONS. [letter xxiv, leges and Universities, which [that] cause immense reve- nues, arising from public property, to be expended on the education of men, who [that], after all, can produce, in the literary way, nothing better than writings such as those oa which we have now been remarking. INDEX *** The numerals indicate the paragraph unless the page is specified A' and o\ with the mark of elision, 126. A or an, indefinite article, 13, 35- Abbreviations, mischievous, 109. of prepositions, 126. slovenly and vulgar, 153. Abercrombie, Rev. Dr., faulty- passage from, selected by Lindley Murray as good grammar, 194. Absolute case, Lindley Murray on the, 191. Accent defined, 105. Active verbs, 83, 84. Active-intransitive verbs. Edi- tor's note, page 53. Active-transitive verbs. Edi- tor's note, page 53. Addison, faulty passage from, said by Dr. Blair to be a model sentence, 175. Adjectives defined, 21. etymology of, 72-81. degrees of comparison, 73. more and most with, 81. syntax of, 215-222. Admiration mark, 145, 148. Adverbs defined, 27, 28. etymology of, 121-124. Adverbs, simple or compound, 124. syntax of, 283, 284. bad grammar in the use of, page 179. Agreement of the verb with its nominative, 87, 89. of pronouns with the nouns they stand for, 178. Ambiguity in the use of rela- tive pronouns. Editor's note, pages 6-10. Any one used by Dr. Blair for either, 213. Apostrophe, the, 145, 149. Articles, a, an, the, 13, 35. etymology of, 34-36. syntax of, 157-163. bad grammar in the use of, page 168. As and than followed by an objective case, 85 . Auxiliary verbs, to be, to have, to let, to do, 103, 110-117. Bad grammar from Dr. John- son and Dr. Watts, pages 165-186. Bad writing, not always un- grammatical, page 202. Be, auxiliary verb, atone of all 248 INDEX. verbs, changes its form for a past time in sub- junctive mode, ioo. Be, conjugation of, 117. between singular and plural nouns, ^47. in the subjunctive mode, 275, 2S0. Big words, with the appear- ance of force, page 215. Blackstone, Judge, passage from, confused in its personal pronouns, 177. singular verb used by, after a plural nominative, 239. confused sentence by, 251. indicative used by, instead of subjunctive mode, 281. Blair, Dr. Hugh. See note, page 99. Blair, Dr. Hugh, confused pas- sages from, 171, 179. uses they for those, etc., 210. uses any one for either, 213. uses plural verb after a sin- gular nominative, 247. makes mistake in the time of an action, 259. uses wrongly the word done, 265. Branches of nouns, 40. By heart or hear't, 131. Capitals, 154. Caret or blunder mark, 155. Cases of nouns, 44. of personal pronouns, 54. of the pronoun who, 62. Castlereagh's, Lord, note, bad grammar in, page 219. second note, page 229. Ccbbett's grammar unrivaled for the purposes of self- education. Editor's note, page 5. Colon, the, 140. Comma, the. 142. Common nouns, 40. Comparison, degrees of, 73. Composition, no patching ot mending in, 155. rules for, pages 197, 199. Compound noun, an advantage to the English language, 169. Compound times of verbs, 102. Compound words, useless to waste time over them, 127. Conjugating defined, 98. Conjugation of to work, 98. to have, 115. to be, 117. Conjunctions defined, 31. etymology of, 128. copulative and disjunctive, 128. syntax of, 283, 284. bad grammar in the use of, page 183. Connecting words, how to use, page 198. Consonants, the, 6. Co-ordinating relative pro- nouns who and which. Editor's note, pages 6, 7. Crowding relative pronouns, 208. Dash, the, a cover for igno- rance, 156. Defective verbs, 119. Definite article, the, 35. Degrees of comparison, 73. Demonstrative pronouns, 67, 210. Dictionary, use of the, 133, 284. Do, auxiliary verb, in. caution in the use of, 265. can never in any of its parts supply the place of a neuter verb, 265, 266. Do and did, in, 258, 267. Done, wrong use of, 264-266. INDEX. 249 Double-negative and ellipsis, bad grammar in use of the, page 1S6. Each, either, every, wrongfully- used with plural verbs or plural pronouns, 211. Either and neither. Editor's note, page 125. Elision, 47, 145, 149. Ellipsis, meaning of the, 227. to omitted by, 273. Enemy not a noun of multi- tude, page 194. Errors and nonsense in a king's speech, page 187. Esteem themselves happy for deem themselves happy, 210. Et cetera (&c), remark on, 153. Etymology denned, 8. of articles, 34-36. nouns, 37-48. pronouns, 49-71. adjectives, 72-81. verbs, 82-120. adverbs, 121-124. prepositions, 125-127. conjunctions, 128. interjections, 32. Exclamation-mark, 145, 148. Expected to have seen for ex- pected to see, 259. Extremely worthy, 210. Fallen, I am, equivalent to I am in a fallen state, and so with some other words from neuter verbs, 270. Feel satisfied, a senseless ex- pression, 265. Figurative language in using the definite article, 40. in genders of nouns and per- sonal pronouns, 43. caution in using, pages 180, 199. Formation of plural of nouns, 41. of degrees of comparison, 74-77- of present time of verbs, 105. of past time and participles of verbs, 105. of adverbs from adjectives, 121, 122. Full-point, full-stop, or period, 139- Future time of verbs, 90. Genders of nouns and personal pronouns, 42, 53. Generally speaking equivalent to when we speak gener- ally, 248. Gone, adjective and participle, 270. Government of nouns and pro- nouns by active verbs, 230. by prepositions, 164. Grammar and its branches de- fined, 1-5. the business of, 284. Hall, Dr. Fitzedward, on than whom, 201. Hanged— hung, 109. Have, auxiliary verb, conju- gated, 115. wrong use of, with the pas- sive participle, when the past time or infinitive should be used, 259. Hume's bad grammar, 170 184. wrong use of that for who, 202. wrong use of a degree of comparison, 217. Hyphen, the, 124, 145, 150. put for possessive case, 168. I If, a mark of the subjunctive mode, 118 ; has nothing 250 INDEX. to do with the govern- ment of verbs, 277. Imperative mode, 96. Impersonal verbs, 119. Indefinite article, 35. Indeterminate or indefinite pronouns, 71, 211. Indicative mode, 94, 274. Infinitive mode, 93. may be a noun, and in the nominative case or ob- jective case, 273, 285. Insight into said to be im- properly used, but justi- fied by the editor, 172. Interjections, 32. Interrogation-mark, 145, 147. Interrogative pronouns, 69, 205. Irregular verbs, 107. It, personal pronoun, and in its impersonal capacity, 60. with the verb to be, 189, 193. the great troubler, 194. misuse of, 195. It had been better omitted said to be a sheer vulgarism, but justified by the edi- tor, 259. Italics, 154. Johnson, Dr., uses every one followed by their, 212. has eloped as an active verb, 269. other grammatical errors in, pages 168-186. King's speech, errors and non- sense in a, page 187. Learned languages, pages 166, 167. Let, auxiliary verb, no. Lie — lay, 84. Logic, Dr. Watts's, bad gram- mar in, pages 168-186. Long island, Cobbett's Gram« mar written on. Edi- tor's note, page 13. Lowth, Bishop. See note, page 95- Lowth, Bishop, uses the article wrongly, 158. on plural nouns after it, 190. on whom following than, 201. misplaces it, 201. on the relative pronoun as a nominative, 245. on the subjunctive mode, 277. Mine, my, 56. Misplaced words, page 184. Modes in verbs, 91. infinitive, 93. indicative, 94. subjunctive, 95. imperative, 96. Moods. See Modes. More and most in degrees of comparison, 81. Murray, Lindley. See note, page 112. Murray, Lindley, on the abso- lute case, 191. selects faulty passage from Rev. Dr. Abercrombie as correct, 194. on different persons disjoined by or and nor, and on nominatives to verbs, 243- on the relative pronoun as a nominative, 245. on the subjunctive mode, 277. Must corrected to should have to, by the editor, 169. Neuter verbs, 83, 84, 268. Nominative case, 46. explained, 231. may be one word, or two or more words, 240. INDEX. 251 Nominative case, may be of not only two or more nouns or personal pronouns, but of many other words along with them, 249. omission of the, 250. must always be kept in view, 251, 282. tfo patching, or mending in composition, 155. Nouns, defined, 14. etymology of, 37. branches of, 40. proper and common, 40. singular and plural numbers, 4i. genders, 42. cases, 44. nominative case, 46, 231, 240, 249, 282. possessive case, 46, 166, 167, 253- objective case, 48, 232, 252. syntax of, 164. of number or multitude, 181. governed by active verbs, 230. governed by prepositions, 236. may be the active participle, 272. or the infinitive mode, 273. bad grammar in the use of, page 169. Numbers, singular and plural, 4 1 - of personal pronouns, 52. in verbs, 89. in nouns of multitude, 181. Objective case, 48. explained, 232. has nothing to do with verbs, 252. Of, a sign of the possessive case, 36. Or and nor, effect of, 240, 242. Orthography defined, 6. Ought, defective verb, 119. Ought to and should, not to be used indiscriminately ; Cobbett sometimes cor- rected. Editor's note, page 79. Paragraph, meaning of a. In- troduction, page 19. as marked in the Bible, 152. how to use the, page 198. Parenthesis, the, 146. faulty omission of the, 146. Participles, 92, 262-264, 2 7 2 - wrong use of active, 260. past time of verbs used for passive, 263. bad grammar in the use of, page 178. Parts of speech, 11. Passive verbs, 83, 262. Past time of verbs, 90. Pension and pensioner defined by Dr. Johnson. See Per, a mystical sort of word, 160. Person, in personal pronouns, Si- in verbs, 86. explained, 238. Personal pronouns, 49. Personification, 182, 198. Plural number, 41. Points (punctuation), 9, 137* 156. importance of, 137. Possessive case, 47, 166, 167. has nothing to do with verbs;, 253- Potential modes only serve to puzzle the learner, 274. Practical hints for studying grammar, 10, 120, 131- *33, 135- Prepositions defined, 29. etymology of, 125. 252 INDEX. Prepositions, abbreviations of, 126. govern nouns and pronouns in the objective case, 236. syntax of, 283, 284. bad grammar in the use of, page 181. Present time of verbs, 90. Present time (tense), what is true at all times always to be expressed in the. Editor's note, page 188. Prince Regent's, the, speech, bad grammar in, page 213. Pronunciation, 7. Pronouns, defined, 17. etymology of, 49. personal, 49. relative, 62, 197. demonstrative, 67, 210. interrogative, 69, 205. indeterminate or indefinite, 71, 211. synta- of, 174. cases of, 184, 185. governed by verbs and prep- ositions in the objective case, 184, 185. crowding of, 208. bad grammar in the use of, page 171. Proper nouns, 40. Prosody, 7. Punctuation, 9, 137-156. Quotation-marks, 151. Raise — rise, 84. u Rambler," Dr. Johnson's, bad grammar in, pages 168- 186. Regular verbs, 104, 106. falsely deemed irregular, 108. Relative pronouns, discrimi- nating use of the. Edi- tor's note, page 6. Relative pronouns, 62, 197. can never be nominatives, 245. editor's remark on the above, page 141. Repetition better than bad grammar, 241. Restrictive relative pronoun that. Editor's notes, pages 6, 7, 119. Same words, but belonging to more than one part of speech, 130. Section, how marked, 152. Self and selves, 59. Self-education, Cobbett's gram- mar unrivaled for. Edi- tor's note, page 5. Semicolon, the, 141. Sentence, as a term in grammar. Introduction, page 19. simple and compound, T39. has always a verb expressed or understood, 224, 225. Sentence-making, page 196. Signs in verbs, shall, should, may, might, can, could, will, would, must, 119, 255, 258. Singular number, 41. Singular or plural number after a noun of multi- tude, 244. Six lessons to prevent states- men from using false grammar, page 201, et sea. So, soever, ever, 209. So, such, 143. Speaker's, the, speech to the Prince Regent, page 204, et sea. Specimens of false grammar, pages 165-187. " Spectator," No. 411, ungram- matical passage from. 175. INDEX. ■53 Speech, parts of, n. Star, a mark usually referring to a note, 152. Statesmen, six lessons to, page 201, et seq. Stops used in writing, 9, 137- 156. Study, method of, 10, 120, 131- 133, 135- Subjunctive mode, 95, 274. when to be used, 277-281. Syntax defined, 9. generally considered, 135. of points and marks, 137- 156. of articles, 157-163. nouns, 164-173. pronouns, 174-214. adjectives, 215-222. verbs, 223-283. adverbs, prepositions, con- junctions, 283, 284. I They and them v OCT 19 I960 '*■ ; / -^— ,.„_ „■ t=S 2!ffcy'60PM .11 8 '64 -2 PM H •■*■-- ;:. .. r Ftb 6. t$9 &PR&5 DEAD 40flW3SC •JE MAY 1 ■■■ JUN 26 \m REC'D LD 3C P 2 '6 3 - 2PM 7ltoW& fesrv c LD 21A-50m-4.'60 (A9562sl0)476B General Library University of California Berkeley U.C. BERKELEY LIBRARIES Ullillllllllilll M297V40 o°A '•<> * *