University of California • Berkeley 
 
 PAULINE FORE MOFFITT LIBRARY 
 
GRAMMAR 
 
 ENGLISH LANGUAGE, 
 
 IN A SERIES OF LETTERS. 
 
 INTENDED FOR THE USE OF SCHOOLS AND OF YOUNG PER- 
 SONS IN GENERAL; BUT MORE ESPECIALLY FOR THE 
 USE OF SOLDIERS, SAILORS, APPRENTICES, 
 AND PLOUGH-BOYS. 
 
 BY WILLIAM COBBETT. 
 
 TO WHICH ARE ADDED, 
 
 SIX LESSONS, INTENDED TO PREVENT STATESMEN FROM 
 
 USING FALSE GRAMMAR, AND FROM WRITING 
 
 IN AN AWKWARD MANNER. 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 miNTED tfOR W. COBBETT, FLEET-STIU'.ET. 
 182G. 
 
London : 
 
 Printed by Mills, Jowett and Mills, 
 
 Bolt Court. Fleet Street. 
 
DEDICATION. 
 
 TO HER MOST GRACIOUS MAJESTY, 
 QUEEN CAROLINE. 
 
 May it please your Majesty, 
 
 A work, having for its objects, to lay the solid 
 foundation of literary knowledge amongst the 
 Labouring Classes of the community, to give 
 practical effect to the natural genius found in the 
 Soldier, the Sailor, the Apprentice, and the 
 Plough-boy, and to make that genius a perennial 
 source of wealth, strength, and safety to the king- 
 dom ; such a work naturally seeks the approba- 
 tion of your Majesty, who, amongst all the Royal 
 Personages of the present age, is the only one 
 that appears to have justly estimated the value of 
 The People. 
 
 The Nobles and the Hierarchy have long had 
 the arrogance to style themselves, the Pillars 
 that support the Throne. But, as your Ma- 
 jesty has now clearly ascertained, Royalty has, 
 in the hour of need, no efficient supporters but 
 The People. 
 
 During your Majesty's long, arduous, magnani- 
 mous, and gallant struggle against matchless 
 fraud and boundless "power, it must have inspired 
 you with great confidence to perceive the won- 
 derful intelligence and talent of your millions of 
 friends ; while your Majesty cannot have failed 
 to observe, that the haughty and insolent few 
 
 33 2 
 
DEDICATION, 
 
 who have been your enemies, have, upon all oc- 
 casions, exhibited an absence of knowledge, a 
 poverty of genius, a feebleness of intellect, which 
 nothing but a constant association with malevo- 
 lence and perfidy could prevent from being as- 
 cribed to dotage or idiocy. 
 
 That, to Her, whose great example is so well 
 calculated to inspire us with a love of useful 
 kriowledge, and to stimulate us to perseverance 
 in its pursuit ; that, to Her, the records of whose 
 magnanimity and courage will make mean spite 
 and cowardice hide their heads to the end of 
 time ; that, to Her, who, while in foreign lands, 
 did honour to Britain's throne, and to Britain 
 herself, by opening the Debtor's prison, and by 
 setting the Captive Christian free; that, to Her, 
 who has so long had to endure all the sufferings 
 that malice could invent and tyranny execute ; 
 that, to Her, God may grant, to know no more 
 of sorrow, but long to live in health, prosperity, 
 and glory, surrounded and supported by a grate- 
 ful and admiring People, is the humble prayer of 
 
 Your Majesty's 
 
 Most dutiful 
 
 And most devoted Servant, 
 
 Wm. cobbett. 
 
 London, Nov. 25, 1820. 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
 
 Dedication, to her most gracious Majesty, Queen 
 Caroline. 
 
 Letter . .'. .1. Introduction. 
 
 Letter ... II. Definition of Grammar and of its dif- 
 ferent branches or parts. 
 
 Letter . . III. Etymology. The different Parts of 
 Speech, or, Sorts of Words. 
 
 Letter . . IV. Etymology of Articles, 
 
 Letter ... V. Etymology of Nouns. 
 
 Letter . . VI. Etymology of Pronouns. 
 
 Letter . . VII. Etymology of Adjectives. 
 
 Letter . VIII. Etymology of Verbs. 
 
 Letter . . IX. Etymology of Adverbs. 
 
 Letter ... X. Etymology of Prepositions. 
 
 Letter . . XI. Etymology of Conjunctions. 
 
 Letter . . XII. Cautionary Remarks. 
 
 Letter . XIII. Syntax generally considered. 
 
 Letter . XIV. Syntax. The Points and Marks made 
 use of in writing. 
 
 Letter . . XV. Syntax, as relating to Articles. 
 
 Letter . XVI. Syntax, as relating to Nouns. 
 
 Letter XVII. Syntax, as relating to Pronouns. 
 
 Letter XVIII. Syntax, as relating to Adjectives, 
 
 Letter . XIX. Syntax, as relating to Verbs. 
 
 Letter . . XX. Syntax, as relating to Adverbs, Pre- 
 positions and Conjunctions. 
 
 Letter . XXI. Specimens of false Grammar, taken 
 from the writings of Doctor Johnson 
 z and from those of Doctor Watts. 
 
 Letter XXII. Errors and nonsense in a King's 
 Speech. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 Letter XXIII. On putting Sentences together, and 
 
 on figurative language. 
 Letter XXIV. Six Lessons, intended to prevent 
 Statesmen from using false Gram- 
 mar, and from writing in an awk- 
 ward manner. 
 
 Lesson . . I. On the Speech of the Right Honour- 
 able Manners Sutton, Speaker of the 
 House of Commons. 
 
 Lesson . II. On His Majesty's Speech at the close 
 of the Session in 1819. 
 
 Lesson III. On the note of Lord Castlereagh rela- 
 tive to the Museums at Paris. 
 
 Lesson IV. On the Despatch of the Duke of 
 Wellington relative to the same sub- 
 ject. 
 
 Lesson . V. On a note of Lord Castlereagh rela- 
 tive to the French Slave Trade. 
 
 Lesson VI. On Despatches of the Marquis Wel- 
 lesley relative to the State of Ire- 
 land, in 1822. 
 
TO 
 
 Mr. JAMES PAUL COBBETT. 
 
 LETTER I. 
 INTRODUCTION. - 
 
 North Hempstead, Long Island ', Dec. 6, 1317* 
 My Dear Little James, 
 
 YOU have now arrived at the age of fourteen years 
 without ever having been bidden, or even advised, to 
 look into a book ; and all you know of reading or of 
 writing you owe to your own unbiassed taste and 
 choice. But while you have lived unpersecuted by 
 such importunities, you have had the very great advan- 
 tage of being bred up under a roof, beneath which no 
 cards, no dice, no gaming, no senseless pastime of any 
 description, ever found a place. In the absence of 
 these, books naturally became your companions during 
 some part of your time : you have read and have 
 written because you saw your elders read and write, 
 just as you have learned to ride and hunt and shoot, 
 to dig the beds in the garden, to trim the flowers and 
 to prune the trees. The healthful exercise, and the 
 pleasures, unmixed with fear, which you have de- 
 rived from these sources, have given you " a sound 
 mind in a sound body," and this, says an English 
 writer, whose works you will by-and-by read, " is the 
 greatest blessing that God can give to man." 
 
 It is true, that this is a very great blessing ; but, 
 mere soundness of mind, without any mental acquire- 
 ments, is possessed by millions ; it is an ordinary pos- 
 
introduction. [Letter- 
 
 session ; and it gives a man no fair pretensions to 
 merit, because he owes it to accident, and not to any 
 thing done by himself. But knowledge, in any art or 
 science, being always the fruit of observation, study, 
 or practice, gives, in proportion to its extent and use- 
 fulness, the possessor a just claim to respect. We do, 
 indeed, often see all the outward marks of respect be- 
 stowed upon persons merely because they are rich or 
 powerful ; but these, while they are bestowed with 
 pain, are received without pleasure. They drop from 
 the tongue or beam from the features, but have no 
 communication with the heart. They are not the 
 voluntary offerings of admiration, or of gratitude ; but 
 are extorted from the hopes, the fears, the anxieties, 
 of poverty, of meanness, or of guilt. Nor is respect 
 due to honesty, fidelity, or any such qualities; be- 
 cause, dishonesty and perfidy are crimes. To entitle 
 a man to respect there must be something of his own 
 doing, beyond the bounds of his well known duties 
 and obligations. x 
 
 Therefore, being extremely desirous to see you, my 
 dear James, an object of respect, I now call upon you 
 to apply your mind to the acquiring of that kind of 
 knowledge which is inseparable from an acquaintance 
 with books : for, though knowledge, in every art and 
 science, is, if properly applied, w T orthy of praise in 
 proportion to its extent and usefulness, there are some 
 kinds of knowledge which are justly considered as of 
 a superior order, not only because the possession of 
 them is a proof of more than ordinary industry and 
 talent, but because the application of them has natu- 
 rally a more powerful influence in the affairs and on 
 the condition of our friends, acquaintances, neigh- 
 bours, and country. Blake, the Titchfield thatcher, 
 who broke his leg into splinters in falling from a 
 
I.] INTRODUCTION. 
 
 wheat-rick, was, on account of the knowledge, which 
 he possessed beyond that of labourers in general, an 
 object of respect; but, in its degree, and in the feel- 
 ings from which it arose, how different was that re- 
 spect from the respect due to our excellent neighbour 
 Mr, Blundell, who restored the leg to perfect use, 
 after six garrison and army surgeons had declared 
 that it was impossible to preserve it, and that, if the 
 leg were not cut off, the jnan must die within twenty- 
 four hours. It is probable, that the time of Mr. Blun- 
 dell was not, on this occasion, occupied more, alto- 
 gether, than four days and four nights; yet, the effect 
 was, a great benefit to be enjoyed by Blake for proba- 
 bly thirty or forty years to come : and while we must 
 see, that this benefit would necessarily extend itself to 
 the whole of his numerous family, we must not over- 
 look those feelings of pleasure, which the cure would 
 naturally produce amongst friends, acquaintances, 
 and neighbours. 
 
 The respect due to the profession of the Surgeon or 
 Physician is, however, of an order inferior to that 
 which is due to the profession of the Law ; for, whe- 
 ther in the character of Counsellor or of Judge, here 
 are required, not only uncommon industry, labour, 
 and talent, in the acquirement of knowledge, but, the 
 application of this knowledge, in defending the pro- 
 perty of the feeble or incautious against the attacks 
 of the strong and the wiles of the crafty, in affording 
 protection to innocence, and securing punishment to 
 guilt, has, in the affairs of men and on their condition 
 in life, a much more extensive and more powerful in- 
 fluence than can possibly arise from the application of 
 Surgical or Medical knowledge. 
 
 To the functions of Statesmen and Legislators is 
 due the highest respect which can be shown by man 
 b 5 
 
introduction. [Letter 
 
 to any thing human; for, not only are the industry, 
 labour, and talent, requisite in the acquirement of 
 knowledge, still greater and far greater here, than in 
 the profession of the Law ; but, of the application of 
 this knowledge the effects are so transcendent in point 
 of magnitude as to place them beyond all the bounds 
 of comparison. Here it is not individual persons with 
 their families, friends, and neighbours, that are affect- 
 ed ; but whole countries and communities. Here the 
 matters to be discussed and decided on, are peace or 
 war, and the liberty or slavery, happiness or misery, 
 of nations. Here a single instance of neglect, a single 
 oversight, a single error, may load with calamity mil- 
 lions of men, and entail that calamity on a long series 
 of future generations. 
 
 But, my dear James, you will always bear in mind, 
 that, as the degree and quality of our respect rise 
 in proportion to the influence, which the different 
 branches of knowledge naturally have in the affairs 
 and on the condition of men ; so, in cases of an im- 
 perfection in knowledge, or of neglect of its applica- 
 tion, or of its perversion to bad purposes, all the feel- 
 ings which are opposite to that of respect, rise in the 
 same proportion. To ignorant pretenders to Surgery 
 and Medicine we award our contempt and scorn ; on 
 time-serving or treacherous Counsellors, and on cruel, 
 or partial Judges, we inflict our detestation and ab- 
 horrence ; while, on rapacious, corrupt, perfidious, or 
 tyrannical Statesmen and Legislators, the voice of hu- 
 man nature cries aloud for execration and vengeance. 
 The particular path of knowledge, to be pursued 
 by you, will be of your own choosing; but, as to 
 knowledge connected with books, there is a step to be 
 taken before you can fairly enter upon any path. In 
 the immense field of this kind of knowledge, innumer^ 
 
I.] INTRODUCTION. 
 
 able are the paths, and Grammar is the gate of 
 entrance to them all. And, if grammar is so useful 
 in the attaining of knowledge, it is absolutely neces- 
 sary in order to enable the possessor to communicate, 
 by writing, that knowledge to others, without which 
 communication the possession must be comparatively 
 useless to himself in many cases, and, in almost all 
 cases, to the rest of mankind. 
 
 The actions of men proceed from their thoughts* 
 In order to obtain the co-operation, the concurrence, 
 or the consent, of others, we must communicate our 
 thoughts to them. The means of this communication 
 are ivords; and grammar teaches us how to make 
 use of words. Therefore, in all the ranks, degrees, 
 and situations of life, a knowledge of the principles 
 and rules of grammar must be useful ; in some situa- 
 tions it must be necessary to the avoiding of really 
 injurious errors ; and in no situation, which calls on a 
 man to place his thoughts upon paper, can the posses- 
 sion of it fail to be a source of self-gratulation, or the 
 want of it a cause of mortification and sorrow. 
 
 But, to the acquiring of this branch of knowledge, 
 my dear son, there is one motive, which, though it 
 ought, at all times, to be strongly felt, ought, at the 
 present time, to be so felt in an extraordinary degree l 
 I mean, that desire, which every man, and especially 
 every young man, should entertain to be able to assert 
 with effect the rights and liberties of his country. 
 When you come to read the history of those Laws of 
 England, by which the freedom of the people has been 
 secured, and by which the happiness and power and 
 glory of our famed and beloved country have been so 
 greatly promoted ; when you come to read the history 
 of the struggles of our forefathers, by which thesfe 
 sacred Laws have, from time to, time, been defended 
 
introduction. [Letter 
 
 against despotic ambition ; by which they have been 
 restored to vigour when on the eve of perishing; by 
 which their violators have never failed, in the end, to 
 be made to feel the just vengeance of the People ; 
 when you come to read the history of these struggles 
 in the cause of freedom, you will find, that tyranny 
 has no enemy so formidable as the pen. And, while 
 you will see with exultation the long -imprisoned, the 
 heavily- fined, the banished William Prynne, re- 
 turning to liberty, borne by the people from Southamp- 
 ton to London, over a road strewed with flowers ; then 
 accusing, bringing to trial and to the block, the tyrants, 
 from whose hands he and his country had unjustly 
 and cruelly suffered ; while your heart and the heart 
 of every young man in the kingdom will bound with 
 joy at the spectacle, you ought all to bear in mind, 
 that, without a knowledge of grammar, Mr, Prynne 
 could never have performed any of those acts, by 
 which his name has been thus preserved, and which 
 have caused his memory to be held in honour. 
 
 Though I have now said what, I am sure, will be 
 more than sufficient to make you entertain a strong 
 desire to take this first step in the road to literary 
 knowledge, I canuot conclude this introductory letter, 
 without observing, that you ought to proceed in your 
 study, not only with diligence, but with patience; 
 that, if you meet with difficulties, you should bear in 
 mind, that, to enjoy the noble prospect from PortV* 
 Down Hill, you had first to climb slowly to the top ; 
 and that, if those difficulties gather about you and 
 impede your way, you have only to call to your recol- 
 lection any one of the many days that you have toiled 
 through briers and brambles and bogs, cheered and 
 urged on by the hope of at last finding and killing 
 your game. 
 
I.] INTRODUCTION. 
 
 I have put my work into the form of Letters, in 
 order that I might be continually reminded, that I 
 was addressing myself to persons, who needed to be 
 spoken to with great clearness. I have numbered the 
 Letters themselves, and also the paragraphs, in order 
 that I might be able, in some parts of the work, to 
 refer you to, or tell you where to look at, other parts 
 of the work. And here I will just add, that a sen- 
 tence, used as a term in grammar, means one of those 
 portions of words, which are divided from the rest by 
 a single dot, which is called a period, or full point ; 
 and that a paragraph means, one of those collections, 
 or blocks, of sentences, which are divided from the 
 rest of the work by beginning a new line a little 
 further in than the lines in general ; and, of course, 
 all this part, which I have just now written, beginning 
 with " / have put my work into the form/' is a pa- 
 ragraph. 
 
 In a confident reliance on your attentiveness, indus- 
 try, and patience, I have a hope not less confident of 
 seeing you a man of real learning, employing your 
 time and talents in aiding the cause of truth and jus- 
 tice, in affording protection to defenceless innocence, 
 and in drawing down vengeance on lawless oppres- 
 sion ; and, in that hope, I am your happy as well as 
 affectionate father. 
 
 WILLIAM COBBETT. 
 
LETTER II. 
 
 definition of grammar and of its diffe- 
 rent branches or parts. 
 
 My Dear James, 
 
 1 . In the foregoing Letter I have laid before you 
 some of the inducements to the study of Grammar. 
 In this, I will define, or describe, the thing called 
 Grammar ; and also its different Branches or Parts, 
 
 2. Grammar, as I observed to you before, teaches 
 us how to make use of words ; that is to say, it teaches 
 us how to make use of them in a proper manner, as 
 I used to teach you how to sow and plant the beds in 
 the garden; for you could have thro wed about seeds 
 and stuck in plants of some sort or other, in some way 
 or other, without any teaching of mine ; and so can 
 any body, without rules or instructions, put masses of 
 words upon paper ; but to be able to choose the words 
 which ought to be employed, and to place them where 
 they ought to be placed, we must become acquainted 
 with certain principles and rules ; and these principles 
 and rules constitute what is called Grammar. 
 
 3. Nor must you suppose, by-and-by, when you 
 come to read about Nouns and Verbs and Pronouns, 
 that all this tends to nothing but mere ornamental 
 learning, that it is not altogether necessary, and that 
 people may write to be understood very well without it. 
 This is not the case; for without a good deal of 
 knowledge relative to these same Nouns and Verbs, 
 those who write are never sure that they put upon 
 paper what they jnean to put upon paper, I will, 
 
definition of [Letter 
 
 before the close of these letters, show you, that even 
 very learned men have frequently written and caused 
 to be published, not only what they did not mean, but 
 the very contrary of what they meant ; and if errors, 
 such as are here spoken of, are sometimes committed 
 by learned men, into what endless errors must those 
 fall, who have no knowledge of any principles or rules, 
 by the observance of which the like may be avoided ? 
 Grammar, perfectly understood, enables us, not only 
 to express our meaning fully and clearly," but so to 
 express it as to enable us to defy the ingenuity of man 
 to give to our words any other meaning than that 
 which we ourselves intend them to express* This, 
 therefore, is a science of substantial utility. 
 
 4. As to the different Branches or Parts of Gram- 
 mar, they are four ; and they are thus named : 
 Orthography, Prosody, Etymology , and Syntax, 
 
 5. There are two of these branches, on which we 
 have very little to say, and the names of which have 
 been kept in use from an unwillingness to give up the 
 practice of former times ; but, as it is visual to give 
 them a place in books of this kind, I will explain to 
 you the nature of all the four Branches. 
 
 6. ORTHOGRAPHY is a word made up of two 
 Greek words, which mean spelling. The use pf 
 foreign words, in this manner, was introduced at the 
 time when the English Language was in a very bar- 
 barous state ; and, though this use has been continued, 
 it ought to be a rule with you, always, when you 
 either write or speak, to avoid the use of any foreign 
 or uncommon word, if you can express your meaning 
 as fully and clearly by an English word in common 
 use. However, Orthography means neither more 
 nor less than the very humble business of putting 
 Letters together properly, so that they shall form 
 
II.] GRAMMAR and its branches. 
 
 Words. This is so very childish a concern, that 
 I will not appear to suppose it necessary for me to 
 dwell upon it ; but, as you will, by-and-by, meet with 
 some directions, under the head of Etymology, in 
 which directions Vowels and Consonants will be 
 spoken of, I will here, for form's sake, just observe, 
 that the letters A, E, I, O, and U, are Vowels. Y, 
 in certain cases, is also a Vowel, All the rest of the 
 letters of the alphabet are Consonants. 
 
 7. PROSODY is a word taken from the Greek 
 Language, and it means not so much as is expressed 
 by the more common word PRONUNCIATION ; 
 that is to say, the business of using the proper sound 
 and employing the due length of time, in the uttering 
 of syllables and words. This is a matter, however, 
 which ought not to occupy much of your attention ; 
 because pronunciation is learned as birds learn to chirp 
 and sing. In some counties of England many words 
 are pronounced in a manner different from that in 
 which they are pronounced in other counties ; and, 
 between the pronunciation of Scotland and that of 
 Hampshire, the difference is very great indeed. But, 
 while all inquiries into the causes of these differences 
 are useless, and all attempts to remove them are vain, 
 the differences are of very little real consequence. 
 For instance, though the Scotch say coorn, the Lon- 
 doners cawn, and the Hampshire folks cam, we 
 know that they all mean to say com. Children will 
 pronounce as their fathers and mothers pronounce ; 
 and if, in common conversation, or in speeches, the 
 matter be good and judiciously arranged, the facts 
 clearly stated, the arguments conclusive, the words 
 well chosen and properly placed, hearers, whose ap- 
 probation is worth having, will pay very little atten- 
 tion to the accent. In short, it is sense, and not sound, 
 
efinition of [Letter 
 
 which is the object of your pursuit ; and, therefore, 
 I have said enough about Prosody. 
 
 8. ETYMOLOGY is a very different matter ; and, 
 under this head, you will enter on your study. This 
 is a word, which has been formed out of two Greek 
 words ; and it means, the 'pedigree, or relationship 
 of words y or, the manner in which one word grows 
 out of, or comes from, another word. For instance, 
 the word walk expresses an action, or movement, of 
 our legs ; but, in some cases we say walks, in others 
 tvalked 9 in others walking. These three latter words 
 are all different from each other, and they all differ 
 from the original word, walk; but the action or 
 movement, expressed by each of the four, is precisely 
 the same sort of action or movement, and the three 
 latter words grow out of, or come from, the first. The 
 words here mentioned differ from each other with re- 
 gard to the letters of which they are composed. This 
 difference is made in order to express differences as 
 to the Persons who walk, as to the Number of per- 
 sons, as to the Time of walking. You will come, 
 by-and-by, to the principles and rules, according to 
 which the varying of the spelling of words is made to 
 correspond with these and other differences ; and 
 these principles and rules constitute what is called 
 Etymology. 
 
 9. SYNTAX is a word, which comes from the 
 Greek. It means, in that language, the joining of 
 several things together ; and, as used by gramma- 
 rians, it means those principles and rules, which teach 
 us how to put words together so as to form sentences. 
 It means, in short, sentence-making. Having been 
 taught by the rules of Etymology , what are the re- 
 lationships of words, how words grow out of each 
 other, how they are varied in their letters in order to 
 
II.] GRAMMAR AND ITS BRANCHES. 
 
 correspond with the variation in the circumstances to 
 which they apply, Syntax will teach you how to give 
 to all your words their proper situations, or places, 
 when you come to put them together into sentences* 
 And here you will have to do with points as well as 
 with words. The points are four in number, the 
 Comma, the Semi- Colon, the Colon, and the Period. 
 Besides these Points, there are certain marks, such 
 as the mark of interrogation, for instance £ and, to 
 use these points and marks properly is, as you will 
 by-and-by find, a matter of very great importance. 
 
 10. I have now given you a description of Gram- 
 mar and of its separate Branches, or Parts. I have 
 shown you, that the two first of these Branches may 
 be dismissed without any further notice ; but, very 
 different indeed is the case with regard to the two 
 latter. Each of these will require several Letters • 
 and those Letters will contain matter, which it will 
 be impossible to understand without the greatest at- 
 tention. You must read soberly and slowly, and you 
 must think as you read. You must not hurry on 
 from one Letter to another, as if you were reading a 
 history ; but you must have patience to get, if possi- 
 ble, at a clear comprehension of one part of the sub- 
 ject before you proceed to another part. When I was 
 studying the French language, the manner, in 
 which I proceeded, was this : when I had attentively 
 read over, three times, a lesson, or other division of 
 my Grammar, I wrote the lesson down upon a loose 
 sheet of paper. I then read it again several times in 
 my own hand writing. Then I copied it, in a very 
 plain hand, and without a blot, into a book, which I 
 had made for the purpose. But, if, in writing my 
 lesson down on a loose sheet of paper, I committed 
 one single error, however trifling, I used to tear the 
 
etymology. [Letter 
 
 paper, and write the whole down again ; and, fre- 
 quently, this occurred three or four times in the writ- 
 ing down of one lesson. I, at first, found this labour 
 very irksome ; but, having imposed it on myself as a 
 duty, I faithfully discharged that duty ; and long be- 
 fore I had proceeded half the way through my Gram- 
 mar, I experienced all the benefits of my industry and 
 perseverance. 
 
 LETTER III. 
 
 ETYMOLOGY. 
 
 The different Parts of Speech, or, Sorts of Words. 
 My Dear James, 
 11. In the second Letter I have given you a de- 
 scription of Etymology, and shown you, that it treats 
 of the pedigree, or relationship, of words, of the na- 
 ture of which relationship I have given you a specimen 
 in the word walk. The next thing is to teach you 
 the principles and rules> according to which the 
 spelling and employing of words are varied in order to 
 express the various circumstances attending this re- 
 lationship. But, before I enter on this part of my 
 instructions, I must inform you, that there are several 
 distinct sorts of words, or, as they are usually called, 
 Parts of Speech ; and, it will be necessary for you to 
 be able, before you proceed further, to distinguish the 
 words, belonging to each of these Parts of Speech, 
 from those, belonging to the other Parts. There are 
 Nine Parts of Speech, and they are named thus : 
 
 ARTICLES, NOUNS, 
 
 PRONOUNS, ADJECTIVES, 
 
 VERBS, ADVERBS, 
 
 PREPOSITIONS, CONJUNCTIONS, 
 
 INTERJECTIONS. 
 
II.] PARTS OF SPEECH. 
 
 12. Before the Serjeant begins to teach young sol- 
 diers their exercise of the musket, he explains to 
 them the different parts of it ; the butt, the stock, 
 the barrel, the loops, the swivels, and so on ; because, 
 unless they know these by their names, they cannot 
 know T how to obey his instructions in the handling of 
 the musket. Sailors, for the same reason, are told 
 which is the tiller, which are the yards, which the 
 shrouds, which the tacks, which the sheets, which the 
 booms, and which each and every part of the ship. 
 Apprentices are taught the names of all the tools used 
 in their trade ; and Plough-boys the names of the 
 various implements of husbandry. This species of 
 preliminary knowledge is absolutely necessary in 
 all these callings of life ; but not more necessary thnn 
 it is for you to learn, before you go any further, how 
 to know the sorts of words one from another. To 
 teach you this, therefore, is the object of the present 
 Letter. 
 
 13. ARTICLES. There are but three in our lan- 
 guage; and these are, the, an, and a. Indeed, there 
 are but two, because an and a are the same word, the 
 latter being only an abbreviation, or a shortening of 
 the former. I shall, by-and-by, give you rules for the 
 using of these Articles ; but, my business in this place 
 is only to teach you how 10 know one sort of words 
 from another sort of words. 
 
 14. NOUNS. The word Noun means name, and 
 nothing more ; and Nouns are the names of persons 
 and things. As far as persons and other animals and 
 things that we can see go, it is very easy to distinguish 
 Nouns; but, there are* many Nouns, which express 
 what we can neither see, nor hear, nor touch. For 
 example : Conscience, Vanity, Vice, Sobriety, Stea- 
 diness, Valour) and a great number of others. Gram- 
 
etymology. [Letter 
 
 marians, anxious to give some easy rule, by which the 
 scholar might distinguish Nouns from other words, 
 have directed him to put the words, the good, before 
 any word : and have told him, that, if the three words 
 make sense, the last word is a Noun. This is fre- 
 quently the case ; as, the good house, the good dog ; 
 but the good sobriety would not appear to be very 
 good sense. In fact, there is no rule of this kind that 
 will answer the purpose. You must employ your mind 
 in order to arrive at the knowledge here desired. 
 
 15. Every word which stands for a person or any 
 anirfral, or for any thing of substance, dead or alive, 
 is a Noun. So far the matter is very easy. Thus, 
 man, cat, tree, log, are Nouns. But, when we come 
 to the words which are the names of things, and 
 which things are not substances, the matter is not so 
 easy ; and it requires a little sober thought. This 
 word, thought, for example, is a Noun. 
 
 16. The only sure rule is this : that a word, which 
 stands for any thing that has an existence, is a Noun. 
 For example, Pride, Folly, Thought, Misery, Truth, 
 Falsehood, Opinion, Sentiment. None of these have 
 any substance. You cannot see them, or touch them ; 
 but they all have an existence. They all exist in the 
 world ; and, therefore, the words which represent 
 them, or stand for them, are called Nouns. If you be 
 still a little puzzled here, you must not be impatient. 
 You will find the difficulty disappear in a short time, 
 if you exert your powers of thinking. Ask yourself 
 what existence means. You will find that the words, 
 very, for, think, but, pretty, do not express any 
 thing which has an existence, or a being ; but, that 
 the words, motive, zeal, pity, kindness, do express 
 things which have a being, or existence. 
 
 17. PRONOUNS. Words of this sort stand in the 
 
III.] ' PARTS OF SPEECH. 
 
 place of Nouns. Their name is from the Latin, and 
 it means For-nouns or For -names ; that is to say, 
 these words, called Pronouns, are used for, or instead 
 of, Nouns. He, She, Her, Him, Who, for example, 
 are pronouns. The use of them is to prevent the re- 
 petition of Nouns, and to make speaking and writing 
 more rapid and less encumbered with words. An ex- 
 Ample will make this clear to you in a minute. Thus : 
 
 18. A woman went to a man, and told him, that he 
 was in great danger of being murdered by a gang of 
 robbers, who had made preparations for attacking 
 him. He thanked her iox-her kindness, and, as he 
 was unable to defend himself, he left his house and 
 went to a neighbour's. 
 
 19. Now, if there were no pronouns, this sentence 
 must be written as follows : — A woman went to a man, 
 and told the man, that the man was in great danger 
 of being murdered by a gang of robbers ;. as a gang of 
 robbers had made preparations for attacking the man. 
 The man thanked the woman for the woman! s kind- 
 ness; and, as the man was unable to defend the 
 man's self, the man left the man's house, and went 
 to a neighbour's. 
 
 20. There are several different classes of Pronouns : 
 but, of this, and of the manner of using Pronouns, 
 you will be informed by-and-by. All that I aim at 
 here is, to enable you to form a clear idea with regard 
 to the difference in the sorts of words, or Parts of 
 Speech. 
 
 21. ADJECTIVES. The word Adjective, in its 
 full literal sense, means, something added to some- 
 thing else. Therefore this term is used in grammar 
 as the name of that Part of Speech, which consists of 
 words, which are added, or put, to Nouns, in order to 
 express something relating to the Nouns, which some- 
 
etymology. [Letter 
 
 thing could not be expressed without the help of Ad- 
 jectives. For instance, there are several Turkeys in 
 the yard, some black, some white, some speckled ; 
 and, then, there are large ones and small ones of all 
 the colours. I want you to go and catch a turkey ; , 
 but I also want you to catch a white turkey, and not 
 only a white turkey, but a large turkey. Therefore, 
 I add, or pat to the Noun, the words ivhite and large, 
 which, therefore, are called Adjectives. 
 
 22. Adjectives sometimes express the qualities of 
 the Nouns to which they are put ; and this being very 
 frequently their use, some grammarians have thrown 
 aside the word Adjective, and have called words of 
 this sort, Qualities. But, this name is not sufficiently 
 comprehensive ; for there are many words which are 
 Adjectives, which have nothing to do with the quality 
 of the Nouns to which they are put. Good and bad 
 express qualities, but long and short merely express 
 dimension, or duration, without giving any intimation 
 as to the quality of the things expressed by the Nouns 
 to which they are put ; and yet, long and short are 
 Adjectives. You must read very attentively here, and 
 consider soberly. You must keep in mind the above 
 explanation of the meaning of the word Adjective : 
 and, if you also bear in mind, that words of this sort 
 always express some quality, some property, some 
 appearance, or some distinctive circumstance, belong- 
 ing to the Nouns to which they are put, you will very 
 easily, and in a very short space of time, be able to 
 distinguish an Adjective from words belonging to any 
 other Part of Speech. 
 
 23. VERBS. Grammarians appear to have been 
 at a loss to discover a suitable appellation for this im- 
 portant sort of words, or Part of Speech ; for, the 
 word, Verb, means nothing more than Word. In the 
 
III.] PARTS OF SPEECH. 
 
 Latin it is verbum, in the French it is verbe ; and 
 the French in their Bible, say Le Verbe, where we say 
 The Word. The truth is, that there are so many pro- 
 perties and circumstances, so many and such different 
 powers and functions belonging to this Part of Speech, 
 that the mind of man is unable to bring the whole of 
 them into any short and precise description. The 
 first grammar that I ever looked into told me, that 
 " a Verb is a word which signifies, to do, to be, or to 
 suffer." What was I to understand from this laconic 
 account ? 
 
 24. Verbs express all the different actions and 
 movements of all creatures and of all things, whether 
 alive or dead. As, for instance, to speak, to bark, to 
 yrow, to moulder, to crack, to crumble, and the like. 
 In all these cases there is movement clearly under- 
 stood. But, in the cases of, to think, to reflect, to 
 remember, to like, to detest, and in an infinite num- 
 ber of cases, the movement is not so easily perceived. 
 Yet these are all verbs, and they do indeed express 
 movements which w T e attribute to the mind or the 
 heart. But what shall we say in the cases of to sit, 
 to sleep, to rot, and the like ? Still these are all verbs. 
 
 25. Verbs are, then, a sort of words, the use of which 
 is to express the actions, the movements, and the state 
 or manner of being, of all creatures and things, whe- 
 ther animate or inanimate. In speaking with reference 
 to a man, to fight is an action ; to reflect is a move- 
 ment ; to sit is a state of being. 
 
 26. Of the manner of using verbs you will hear a 
 great deal by-and-by ; but, what I have here said will, 
 if you read attentively, and take time to consider, be 
 sufficient to enable you to distinguish Verbs from the 
 words which belong to the other Parts of Speech. 
 
 27. ADVERBS are so called, because the words 
 
 C 
 
etymology. [Letter 
 
 which belong to this part of Speech are added to verbs. 
 But this is an inadequate description ; for, as you will 
 presently see, they are sometimes otherwise employed. 
 You have seen, that Verbs express actions, movements^ 
 and states of being ; and it is very frequently the use 
 of adverbs to express the manner of actions, move- 
 ments, and states of being. Thus: the man fights 
 bravely ; he reflects profoundly ; he sits quietly* In 
 these instances the adverbs perform an ofhce, and are 
 placed in a situation which fully justify the name 
 that has been given to this sort of words. But there 
 are many adverbs, which do not express the manner 
 of actions, movements, or states of being, and which 
 are not added to Verbs. For instance : " When you 
 sow small seeds, make the earth very fine, and if it 
 have, of late, been dry weather, take care to press 
 the earth extremely hard upon the seeds." Here are 
 four adverbs, but only the last of the four expresses 
 any thing connected with a verb. This shows, that 
 the name of this class of words does not fully convey 
 to our minds a description of their use. 
 
 28. However, with this name you must be con- 
 tent ; but, you must bear in mind, that there are ad- 
 verbs of time, of place, and of degree, as well as of 
 manner; and that their business is to express, or de- 
 scribe, some circumstances in addition to all that is 
 expressed by the Nouns, Adjectives, and Verbs. In 
 the above sentence, for example, the words when, 
 very, of late, and extremely, add greatly to the pre- 
 cept, which, without them, would lose much of its 
 force. 
 
 29. PREPOSITIONS. The prepositions are in, to, 
 for, from, of, by, with, into, against, at, and several 
 others. They are called P impositions, from two Latin 
 words, meaning before and place ; and this name is 
 
III.] PARTS OF SPEECH. 
 
 given them because they are in most cases placed 
 before Nouns and Pronouns : as, " Indian Corn is 
 " sown in May. In June and the three following 
 " months, it is carefully cultivated. When ripe, in 
 " October, it is gathered in the field, by men who go 
 "from hill to hill with baskets, into which they put 
 " the ears. The leaves and stalks are then collected 
 "for winter-use; and, they not only serve as food 
 "for cattle and sheep, but are excellent in the mak- 
 " ing of sheds to protect animals against the incle* 
 " mency of the weather." 
 
 30. Prepositions are not very numerous, and, 
 though you will be taught to be very careful in using 
 them, the above sentence will be quite sufficient to 
 enable you to know the words belonging to this Part 
 of Speech from the words belonging to any other Part 
 of Speech. 
 
 31. CONJUNCTIONS are so called, because 
 they conjoin or join together, words, or parts of sen- 
 tences : as, " Peas and Beans may be severed from 
 " the ground before they be quite dry ; but they must 
 " not be put into stacks or barns until perfectly dry, 
 "for, if they be, they will mould." The word and 
 joins together the w T ords Peas and Beans, and, by the 
 means of this junction, makes all the remaining part 
 of the sentence apply to both. The word but connects 
 the first with the seqpnd member of the sentence. 
 The word for, which is sometimes a conjunction, per- 
 forms, in this case, the same office as the word but : 
 it continues the connexion ; and thus does every part 
 of the sentence apply to each of the two nouns which 
 are the subject of it, 
 
 32. INTERJECTIONS. This name comes from 
 two Latin words : inter, which means between, and 
 jection, which means something thrown. So that, 
 
 c2 
 
etymology [Letter 
 
 the full literal meaning of the word is something 
 thrown between. The Interjections are Ah! Oh! 
 Alas! and such like, which, indeed, are not words, 
 because they have no definite meaning. They are mere 
 sounds, and they have been mentioned by me, mere- 
 ly because other grammarians have considered them 
 as being a Part of Speech. But, this one notice of 
 them will be quite sufficient. 
 
 33. Thus, then, you are now able to distinguish, in 
 many cases, at least, to what Part of Speech belongs 
 each of the several words which may come under 
 your observation. I shall now proceed to the Ety- 
 mology of each of these Parts of Speech. As we 
 have done with the Interjections, there will remain 
 only eight Parts to treat of, and this I shall do in 
 eight Letters, allotting one Letter to each Part of 
 Speech. 
 
 LETTER IV. 
 etymology of articles. 
 
 My Dear James, 
 
 34. In Letter III, paragraph 13, you have seen 
 what sort of words Articles are; that is to say, 
 you have there learnt how to distinguish the words be- 
 longing to this Part of Speech from words belonging 
 to other Parts of Speech. You must now turn to 
 Letter II, paragraph 8. Having read what you find 
 there under the head of Etymology, you will see at 
 once, that my business, in this present Letter, is, to teach 
 you those principles and rules, according to which ar- 
 ticles are varied in order to make them suit the differ- 
 ent circumstances which they are used to express. * 
 
IV.] OF ARTICLES. 
 
 35. You have seen, that there are hut three arti- 
 cles ; namely, A or AN, and THE. The two former 
 are, in fact, the same word, hut, of this, I shall say 
 more presently. They are called indefinite Articles, 
 because they do not define, or determine, what parti- 
 cular object is spoken of. The Nouns, to which they 
 are prefixed, only serve to point out the sort of person 
 or thing spoken of, without defining ivhat person or 
 what thing; as, a tree is Mowed down. From this 
 we learn that some tree is blowed down, but not what 
 tree. But, the definite Article, THE, determines the 
 particular object of which we speak; as, the tree, 
 which stood close beside the barn, is blowed down. 
 In this last instance, we are not only informed that a 
 tree is blowed down, but the sentence also informs us 
 what particular tree it is. This article is used before 
 nouns in the plural as well as before nouns in the sin- 
 gular number. It is sometimes used before words, 
 expressive of degrees of comparison : as, the best, the 
 worst, the highest, the lowest. When we use a 
 noun in the singular number to express a whole rpe- 
 cies, or sort, we use the definite article: thus, we say, 
 the oak is a fine tree, when we mean, that oaks are 
 fine trees. 
 
 36. The Article A becomes AN when this article 
 comes immediately before any word which begins 
 with a vowel. This is for the sake of the sound; as, 
 an adder, an elephant, an inch, an oily seed, an 
 ugly hat. The word an is also used before words 
 which begin with an h which is mute, that is to say, 
 which, though used in writing, is not sounded in 
 > speaking ; as, an hour. This little variation in the 
 article is, as I said before, for the sake of the sound ; 
 for, it would be very disagreeable to say, a adder, a 
 elephant, a inch, a oily seed, a ugly hat, a hour 7 
 
etymology [Letter 
 
 and the like. But, a is used, in the usual way, be- 
 fore words which begin with an h which is sounded 
 in speaking ; as, a horse, a hair, and the like. The 
 indefinite article can be used before nouns in the sw- 
 gular number only. There is a seeming exception 
 to this rule in cases where the words few and many 
 come before the noun ; as, a few horses ; a great 
 many horses ; but, in reality, this is not an exception, 
 because the words few and many, mean number ; 
 thus : a small number of horses ; a great number of 
 horses; and the indefinite article agrees with this 
 word number, w T hich is understood, and which is ia 
 the singular. 
 
 LETTER V. 
 
 ETYMOLOGY" OF NOUNS. 
 
 37. This, my Dear James, is a Letter of great 
 importance, and, therefore, it will require great at- 
 tention from you. Before you proceed further, you 
 will again look well at Letter II, paragraph 8, and 
 then at Letter III, paragraphs 14, 15, and 16, and 
 there read carefully every thing under the head of 
 Nouns, 
 
 38. Now, then, as Letter III. has taught you how 
 to distinguish Nouns from the words wdiich belong to 
 the other Parts of Speech, the business here is to 
 teach you the principles and rules, according to which 
 Nouns are to be varied in the letters of which they 
 are composed, according to which they are to be used, 
 and according to which they are to be considered in 
 their bearings upon other words in the sentences in 
 which they are used. 
 
V.] . OV NOUNS, 
 
 39. In a Noun there are to be considered, the 
 branches, the numbers, the genders, and the cases ; 
 and all these must be attended to very carefully. 
 
 40. THE BRANCHES. There are two; for 
 Nouns are some of them proper and some com- 
 mon. A Noun is called proper, when it is used to 
 distinguish one particular individual from the rest of 
 the individuals of the same species, or kind ; as, 
 James, Botley, Hampshire. The Noun is called 
 common, when it applies to all the individuals of a 
 kind ; as Man, Village, County, Botley is a proper 
 Noun, because all Villages have not this name; but 
 Village is a common Noun, because all villages are 
 called by that name : the name is common to them 
 all. Several persons have the name of James, to be 
 sure, and there is a Hampshire in America as well as 
 in England; but, still, these are proper names, be- 
 cause the former is not common to all men, nor the 
 latter to all counties. Proper nouns take no articles 
 before them, because the extent of their meaning is 
 clearly pointed out in the word itself. In figurative 
 language, of which you will know more by-and-by, 
 We sometimes, however, use the article ; as, u Gold- 
 " smith is a very pretty poet, but not to be compared 
 M to the Popes, the Drydens, or the Otways." And 
 again ; " I wish I had the wit of a Sivift." We also 
 use the definite article before proper nouns when a 
 common noun is understood to be left out ; as, The 
 Delaware, meaning the River Delaware. Also when 
 we speak of more than one person of the same name ; 
 as, " the Henries, the Edwards." 
 
 41. THE NUMBERS. These are the Singular 
 and the Plural. The Singular is the original word ; 
 and, in general, the Plural is formed by adding an S 
 to the singular; as dog, dogs. But, though the 
 
etymology [Letter 
 
 greater part of our Nouns form their plurals from the 
 singular in this simple manner, there are many which 
 do not ; while there are some Nouns which have no 
 plural number at all, and some which have no singu- 
 lar. Therefore, considering the above to be the 
 First Rule, I shall add other rules with regard to 
 the Nouns which do not follow that rule. — The 
 Second Rule. Nouns, the singular numbers of 
 which end in ch, sh, s, or x, require es to be added 
 in order to form their plural number ; as churchy 
 churches; brush, brushes ; lass, /asses ; fox, foxes. 
 -—The Third Rule is, that Nouns, which end in y, 
 when the y has a consonant coming immediately be- 
 fore it, change the y into ies in forming their plurals ; 
 as quantity, quantities. But, you must mind, that, if 
 the y be not immediately preceded by a consonant, the 
 words follow the First Rule, and take only an s in 
 addition to their singular ; as day, days. I am the 
 more anxious to guard you against error as to this 
 matter, because it is very common to see men of high 
 rank and profession writing vallies, vollies, attor- 
 nies, correspondencies, conveniencies, and the like, 
 and yet all these are erroneous. Correspondence 
 and inconvenience should have simply an s ; for they 
 end in e, and not in y. The Fourth Rule is, that 
 Nouns which end in a single f or infe, form their 
 plurals by changing the f, or fe, into ves ; as loaf, 
 loaves ; wife, wives. But, this rule has exceptions 
 in the following words, which follow the First Rule : 
 Dwarf, mischief, handkerchief chief, relief, grief. 
 The two last are seldom used in the plural number ; 
 but, as they sometimes are, I have included them. — 
 The Fifth Rule is, that the following Nouns have 
 their plural in en : man, men ; woman, women ; ox, 
 oxen ; child, children. And brethren is used some- 
 
V.] OF NOUNS. 
 
 times as the plural of brother. — The Sixth Rule 
 is, that all which nature, or art, or habit has made 
 plural have no singular ; as ashes, annals, bellows, 
 bowels, thanks, breeches, entrails, lungs, scissors, 
 snuffers, tongs, wages, and some others. There are 
 also some nouns which have no plural, such as those 
 which express the qualities, or propensities, or feelings 
 of the mind or heart ; as, honesty, meekrtess, com- 
 passion. There are, further, several names of herbs, 
 metals, minerals, liquids, and of fleshy substances, 
 which have no plurals ; to which may be added the 
 names of almost all sorts of grain. There are excep- 
 tions here ; for, while Wheat has no plural, Oats 
 have seldom any singular. But all these words, and 
 others which are irregular in a similar way, are of 
 such very common use, that you will hardly ever 
 make a mistake in applying them ; for I will not sup- 
 pose it possible for my dear James to fall into either 
 the company or the language of those persons, who 
 talk, and even write, about Barleys, Wheats, Clo- 
 vers, Flours, Grasses, and Malts. There remain 
 to be noticed, however, some words, which are too 
 irregular in the forming of their plurals to be brought 
 under any distinct head even of irregularity. I will, 
 therefore, insert these as they are used in both num- 
 bers. 
 
 SINGULAR. 
 
 TLURAL. 
 
 SINGULAR. 
 
 PLURAL. 
 
 Die, 
 
 Dice. 
 
 Goose, 
 
 Geese. 
 
 Mouse, 
 
 Mice. 
 
 Penny, 
 
 Pence. 
 
 Louse, 
 
 Lice. 
 
 Tooth, 
 
 Teeth. 
 
 Deer, 
 
 Deer. 
 
 Foot, 
 
 Feet. 
 
 42. THE GENDERS. In the French language, 
 and many other languages, every noun is of the mas- 
 culine or of the feminine gender. Hand, for instance, 
 is of the feminine and arm of the masculine, pen of 
 the feminine and paper of the masculine. This i* 
 C5 
 
etymology [Letter 
 
 not the case with our language, which, in this re- 
 spect, has followed the order of nature. The names 
 of all mates are of the masculine gender ; the names 
 of all females are of the feminine gender; and all 
 other nouns are of the neuter gender. And, you must 
 observe, that, even in speaking of living creatures, of 
 w r hich we do not know the gender, we consider them 
 to be of the neuter. In strictness of language, we 
 could not, perhaps, apply the term gender to things 
 destitute of all sexual properties ; but, as it is applied 
 with perfect propriety in the case of males and fe- 
 males, and, as the application in the case of inani- 
 mate or vegetable matter can lead to no grammatical 
 error, I have thought it best to follow, in this respect, 
 the example of other grammarians. It may be said, 
 that the rule, which I have here laid down, as being 
 without any exception, has many exceptions; for, 
 that, in speaking of a ship, we say she and her. And, 
 you know, that our country folks in Hampshire call 
 almost every thing he or she. Sailors have, for ages, 
 called their vessels shes, and it has been found easier 
 to adopt, than to eradicate, the vulgarism, which is 
 not only tolerated but cherished by that just admira- 
 tion, in which our country holds the species of skill 
 and of valour, to which it owes much of its greatness 
 and renown. It is curious to observe, that country 
 labourers give the feminine appellations to those things 
 only which are more closely identified with them- 
 selves, and by the qualities and condition of which 
 their own efforts and their character as workmen are 
 affected. The mower calls his scythe a she; the 
 ploughman calls his plough a she; but a prong, or a 
 6hovel, or a harrow, which passes promiscuously from 
 liand to hand, and which is appropriated to no par- 
 ticular labourer; is called a, he x Jt was, doubtless, 
 
V.] or xouns. 
 
 from this sort of habitual attachment that our famous 
 maritime solecism arose. The deeds of labourers in 
 the fields and of artisans in their shops ar« not of 
 public interest sufficiently commanding to enable 
 them to break in upon the principles of language ; if 
 they were, we should soon have as many lies and 
 shes as the French, or any other nation in the 
 world. 
 
 43. While, however, I lay down this rule as re- 
 quired by strict grammatical correctness, I must not 
 omit to observe, that the licence allowed to figurative 
 language enables us to give the masculine or feminine 
 gender to inanimate objects. This has been justly re - 
 garded as a great advantage in our language. We 
 can, whenever our subject will justify it, transform 
 into masculine, or into feminine, nouns which are, 
 strictly speaking, neuter ; and, thus, by giving the 
 functions of life to inanimate objects, enliven and 
 elevate our style, and give to our expressions great ad- 
 ditional dignity and force. 
 
 44. The Cases of Nouns. The word case, as ap- 
 plied to the concerns of life, has a variety of meanings, 
 or of different shades of meaning ; but, its general 
 meaning is, state of things, or state of something. 
 Thus we say, " in that case, I agree with you." 
 Meaning, " that being the state of things, or that 
 being the state of the matter, I agree with you." 
 Lawyers are said, " to make out their case ; or not 
 to make out their case:* 7 meaning the state of the 
 matter, which they have undertaken to prove. So, 
 when we say, that a horse is in good case, we mean 
 that he is in a good state. Nouns may be in differ- 
 ent states, or situations, as to other nouns, or other 
 words. For instance, a noun may be the name of a 
 person who strikes a horse, or of a person who pos* 
 
etymology [Letter 
 
 sesses a horse, or of a person whom a horse kicks. 
 And these different situations, or states, are, therefore, 
 called cases. 
 
 45. You will not fully comprehend the use of 
 these distinctions till you come to the Letter on Verbs ; 
 but, it is necessary to explain here the nature of these 
 cases, in order that you may be prepared well for the 
 use of the terms, when I come to speak of the Verbs. 
 In the Latin language each noun has several different 
 endings, in order to denote the different Cases in 
 which it may be. In our language there is but one 
 of the Cases of nouns which is expressed or denoted 
 by a change in the ending of the noun ; and of this 
 change I will speak presently. x 
 
 46. There are three Cases; the Nominative, the 
 Possessive, and the Objective. A noun is in the A r o- 
 viinative case, when it denotes a person, or thing, 
 which does something or is something ; as, Richard 
 strikes; Richard is good, 
 
 Al . A noun is in the Possessive case, when it 
 names a person or thing that possesses some other 
 person or thing, or when there is one of the persons 
 or things belonging to the other ; as Richard's hat ; 
 the mountains top ; the nation 's fleet. Here Rich- 
 ard, mountain, and nation, are in the possessive 
 case, because they denote persons or things which 
 possess other persons or things, or have other persons 
 or things belonging to them. And here is that change 
 in the ending of the noun, of which I spoke above. 
 You see that Richard, mountain, nation, has, each 
 of them, an s added to it, and a mark of elision over; 
 that is to say, a comma, placed above the line, be- 
 tween the last letter of the word and the s. This is 
 done for the purpose of distinguishing this case from 
 the plural number ; or, at least, it answers this pur- 
 
V.] OF NOUNS. 
 
 pose in all cases where the plural of the noun would 
 end in an s ; though there are different opinions as to 
 the origin of its use. In nouns, which do not end 
 their plurals in s, the mark of elision would not ap- 
 pear to be absolutely necessary. We might write 
 mans mind, womans heart ; but it is best to use the 
 mark of elision. When plural nouns end with s, you 
 must not add an s to form the possessive case, but put 
 the elision mark only after the s, which ends the 
 noun ; as, mountains' tops ; nations' fleets ; lasses' 
 charms. Observe, however, that, in every instance, 
 the possessive case may be expressed by a turn of the 
 words ; as, the hat of Richard ; the top of the moun- 
 tain ; the' fleet of the nation ; the mind of man ; and 
 so on. The nouns, notwithstanding this turn of the 
 words, are still in the possessive case ; and, as to when 
 one mode of expression is best, and when the other, it 
 is a matter which must be left to taste. 
 
 48. A Noun is in the objective case, when the per- 
 son or thing that it names or denotes is the object, 
 or end, of some act or of some movement, of somo 
 kind or other ; Richard strikes Peter ; Richard gave 
 a blow to Peter', Richard goes after Peter ; Richard 
 hates Peter) Richard ivants arms', Richard seeks 
 after fame ; falsehood leads to mischief; oppression 
 produces resistance. Here you see, that all these 
 nouns in the objective case, are the object, the end, 
 or the effect, of something done or felt by some per- 
 son or thing, and which other person, or thing, is in 
 the nominative case. 
 
etymology [Letter 
 
 LETTER VI. 
 
 etymology of pronouns. 
 My Dear James, 
 
 49. You will now refer to paragraphs 17, 18, and 
 19, in Letter III; which paragraphs will refresh your 
 memory as to the general nature and use of Pronouns. 
 Then, in proceeding to become well acquainted with 
 this part of speech, you will first observe, - that there 
 are four classes, or descriptions, of Pronouns : first, 
 the Personal ; second, the Relative ; third, the De- 
 monstrative; and, fourth, the Indefinite. 
 
 50. In PERSONAL PRONOUNS there are four 
 things to be considered ; the person, the number, the 
 gender, and the case. 
 
 51. There are three persons. The pronoun which 
 represents, or stands in the place of the name of the 
 person who speaks, is called the first person ; that 
 which stands in the place of the name of the person 
 who is spoken to, is called the second person ; that 
 which stands in the place of the name of the person 
 who is spoken of, is called the third person. For 
 example : " /am asking you about him." This cir- 
 cumstance of person you will, by-and-by, find to be 
 of great moment ; because, as you will see, the verbs 
 vary their endings sometimes to correspond with the 
 person of the pronoun ; and, therefore, you ought to 
 pay strict attention to it at the outset. 
 
 52. The number is either singular or plural, and 
 the pronouns vary their spelling to express a difference 
 of number ; as in this table, which shows, at once, all 
 the persons and all the numbers. 
 
 
 SINGULAR. 
 
 PLURAL, 
 
 First person. 
 Second person. 
 Third person. 
 
 I, 
 
 Thou, 
 He, 
 
 We. 
 
 You. 
 They. 
 
VI.] 
 
 or PRONOUNS. 
 
 53. The next thing is the gender. The pronouns 
 of the first and second person have no changes to ex- 
 press gender ; but the third person singular has changes 
 for that purpose : he, she, or it ; and I need not point 
 out to you the cases where one of these ought to be 
 used instead of the other. 
 
 54. The Case is the last thing to be considered iri 
 personal pronouns. The meaning of the word case, 
 as used in the rules of Grammar, I have fully ex- 
 plained to you in Letter V, paragraph 44. In para- 
 graphs 45, 46, 47, and 48, in that same Letter, I 
 have treated of the distinction between the cases. 
 Read all those paragraphs again before you proceed 
 further : for now you will find their meaning more 
 clearly explained to you ; because the personal pro- 
 nouns, and also some of the other pronouns, have dif- 
 
 J event endings, or are composed of different letters, 
 in order to point out the different cases in which they 
 are : as, He, His, Him. 
 ■ 55. The personal pronouns have, like the nouns, 
 three cases , the nominative, the possessive, and the 
 objective. The following table exhibits the whole of 
 them at one view, with all the circumstances of per- 
 son, number, gender, and case. 
 
 First person 
 
 Second person 
 /"Mas. Gen. 
 
 ££*Jft«ta. 
 
 (^Neuter. 
 
 SINGULAR NUMBER. 
 
 Nominative. 
 
 I, 
 
 Thou, 
 
 Pers. 
 
 1 He, 
 
 She, 
 It, 
 
 Possessive. 
 
 Object iv 
 
 My, i 
 
 Mine, $ 
 
 Me. 
 
 Thy, I 
 Thine, J 
 
 Thee. 
 
 His, 
 
 Him. 
 
 Her, \ 
 Hers, J 
 
 Her. 
 
 Its, 
 
 It, 
 
ETYMOLOGY 
 
 [Letter 
 
 PLURAL NUMBER. 
 
 Second person 
 
 C Mas. Gen. 
 Third 
 Pers. 
 
 (Neute 
 
 Femin. 
 
 Nominative. 
 
 Possessive. 
 
 Our, } 
 Ours, S 
 
 Your 
 Yours 
 
 Their,! 
 
 Theirs, ( 
 
 Objective. 
 Us. 
 You. 
 
 Them. 
 
 First Person We, 
 
 You, 
 
 They, 
 
 They, 
 
 They, 
 
 56. Upon this table there are some remarks to be 
 attended to. In the possessive cases of /, Thou, She, 
 We, You, and They, there are two different words; 
 as, My or Mine ; but, you know, that the former is 
 used when followed by the name of the person or 
 thing possessed ; and that the latter is used when not 
 so followed : as, " this is my pen; this pen is mine" 
 And, it is the same with regard to the possessive 
 cases of Thou, She, We, You, and They. 
 
 51 . Thou is here given as the second person sin- 
 gular ; but, common custom has set aside the rules of 
 Grammar in this case; and though we, in particular 
 cases, still make use of Thou and Thee, we generally 
 make use of You instead of either of them. Accord- 
 ing to ancient rule and custom this is not correct ; 
 but, what a whole people adopts and universally prac- 
 tises, must, in such cases, be deemed correct, and to 
 be a superseding of ancient rule and custom. 
 
 58. Instead of you the ancient practice was to put 
 ye, in the nominative case of the second person plu- 
 ral : but, this practice is now laid aside, except in 
 cases, which very seldom occur ; but, whenever ye is 
 made use of, it must be in the nominative, and never 
 in the objective, case. I may, speaking to several 
 persons, say, " Ye have injured me;" but not " I 
 have injured ye" 
 
 59. The words self and selves are sometimes add- 
 
VI.] OF PRONOUNS* 
 
 ed to the personal pronouns ; as, myself, thyself, 
 himself; but, as these compounded words are liable 
 to no variations that can possibly lead to error, it will 
 be useless to do any thing further than just to notice 
 them. 
 
 60. The Pronoun it, though a personal pronoun, 
 does not always stand for, or, at least, appear to stand 
 for, any noun whatever; but is used in order to point 
 out a state of things, or the cause of something 
 produced. For instance : " It freezed hard last 
 " night, and it was so cold, that it was with great 
 " difficulty the travellers kept on their journey. " 
 Now, what was it that freezed so hard ? Not the 
 frost ; because frost is the effect, and not the cause, 
 of freezing. We cannot say, that it was the weather 
 that froze ; because the freezing constituted in part 
 the weather itself. No : the pronoun it stands, in 
 this place, for state of things or circumstances ; and 
 this sentence might be written thus : " The freezing 
 " was so hard last night, and the cold was so severe, 
 " that the travellers found great difficulty in keeping 
 " on their journey." Let us take another example or 
 two. " It is a frost this morning. It will rain to- 
 " night. It will be fine to-morrow." That is to say, 
 " A state of things called frost exists this morning ; 
 " a state of things called rain will exist to-night; and 
 " to-morrow a state of things called fine weather." 
 Another example : " It is delightful to see brothers 
 *' and sisters living in uninterrupted love to the end 
 u of their days." That is to say ; " The state of 
 '" things, which exhibits brothers and sisters living in 
 " uninterrupted love to the end of their days, is de- 
 " lightful to see." The pronoun it is, in tills its imper- 
 sonal capacity, used in a great variety of instances $ 
 but I forbear to extend my remarks on the subject 
 
ETYMOLOGY 
 
 [Letter 
 
 here, because those remarks will find a more suitable 
 place, when I come to another part of my instructions. 
 I have said enough here to prevent the puzzling that 
 might have arisen from your perceiving, that the pro- 
 noun it was sometimes used without your being able 
 to trace its connexion with any noun either expressed 
 or understood. 
 
 61. In order, however, further to illustrate this 
 matter in this place, I will make a remark or two 
 upon the use of the word there. Example : " There 
 " are many men, who have been at Latin-Schools for 
 " years, and who, at last, cannot write six sentences 
 " in English correctly." Now, you know, the word 
 there, hi its usual sense, has reference to place ; yet 
 it has no such reference here. The meaning is : that 
 " many men are in existence, who have been at 
 " Latin-Schools/' Again : " There never was any 
 " thing so beautiful as that flower." That is to say : 
 " Any thing so beautiful as that flower never existed, 
 " or never was in being." 
 
 62. We now come to the RELATIVE PRO- 
 NOUNS, of which class there are only three ; name- 
 ly, who, which, and that. The two latter always 
 remain the same, through all numbers, genders, and 
 cases ; but, the pronoun who, changes its ending, in 
 order to express the possessive and objective cases : 
 as, who, whose, whom. 
 
 63. These pronouns are called relative, because 
 they always relate directly to some noun or some 
 personal pronoun, or to some combination of words, 
 which is called the antecedent ; that is to say, the 
 person or thing before going. Thus : " The soldier, 
 who was killed at the siege." Soldier is the antece- 
 dent. Again : f 4 The men (if I am rightly informed) 
 " who came hither last night, who went away this 
 
VI.] OF PRONOUNS, 
 
 " morning, whose money you have received, and to 
 " whom you gave a receipt, are natives of South 
 " America." Men is here the antecedent; and, in 
 this sentence there are all the variations, to which this 
 pronoun is liable. 
 
 64. Who, whose, and whom cannot be used cor- 
 rectly as relatives to any nouns or pronouns, which 
 do not represent men, women, or children. It is not 
 correct to say, the horse, or the dog, or the tree, who 
 was so and so ; or to whom was done this or that ; or, 
 whose colour, or any thing else, was such or such. 
 But, the word That, as a relative pronoun, may be 
 applied to nouns of all sorts ; as, the boy that ran ; 
 the horse that galloped ; the tree that was bio wed 
 down. 
 
 65. Which, as a relative pronoun, is confined to 
 irrational creatures, and here it may be used, as a re^ 
 lative, indifferently with that; as, the horse which 
 galloped; the tree which was blowed down. This 
 application of the relative which solely to irrational 
 creatures is, however, of modern date; for, in the 
 Lord's Prayer, in the English Church Service, we 
 say, " Our Father which art in Heaven. " In the 
 American Liturgy this error has been corrected ; and 
 they say, " Our Father, who art in Heaven." 
 
 66. I cannot, even for the present, quit these rela- 
 tive pronouns without observing to you, that they are 
 words of vast importance, and that more errors^ and 
 errors of greater consequence, arise from a misappli- 
 cation of them, than from the misapplication of almost 
 all the other classes of words put together. The rea- 
 son is this, they are relatives, and they frequently 
 stand as the representative of that which has gone 
 before, and which stands in a distant part of the sen- 
 tence. This will be more fully explained when I 
 
etymology [Letter 
 
 come to the Syntax of pronouns ; but the matter is 
 of such great moment, that I could not refrain from 
 giving you an intimation of it here. 
 
 67. The DEMONSTRATIVE PRONOUNS are 
 so called, because they more particularly mark, or de- 
 monstrate, the nouns, before which they are placed, 
 or for which they sometimes stand. They are, This, 
 These, That, Those, and Vfhat. The use of them is 
 so well known, and is liable to so little error, that my 
 chief object in giving them this separate place, is, to 
 show you the difference between That, when a rela- 
 tive and when not a relative. Take an example : 
 " That man is not the man, as far as I am able to 
 " discover, that came hither last night." The first 
 of these Thats does not relate to the man ; it merely 
 points him out: but the latter relates to him, carries 
 you back to him, and supplies the place of repetition. 
 This same, word, That, is sometimes a Conjunction : 
 as, " That man is not the man, as far as I can dis- 
 " cover, that came hither last night, and that was so 
 " ill that he could hardly walk." The relative is re- 
 peated in the third That : but, the fourth That is 
 merely a conjunction, serving to connect the effect of 
 the illness with the cause. 
 
 68. Perhaps a profound examination of the matter 
 would lead to a proof of That being always a pro- 
 noun ; but, as such examination would be more curi- 
 ous than useful, I shall content myself with having 
 clearly shown you the difference in its offices as a re- 
 lative, as a demonstrative, and as a conjunction. 
 
 69. What,- together with who, whose, whom, and 
 which, are employed in asking questions, and are, 
 sometimes, ranged under a separate head, and called 
 interrogative pronouns. I have thought this unne- 
 cessary ; but, here is an observation of importance to 
 
VI.] OF PRONOUNS. 
 
 attend to ; for, which, though, as a relative, it can- 
 not be applied to the intellectual species, is, as an in- 
 terrogative, properly applied to that species: as, 
 " which man was it who spoke to you ? " 
 
 70. What sometimes stands for both noun and re- 
 lative pronoun : as, " What I want is well known/' 
 That is to say, " The thing which I want is well 
 " known." Indeed, what has, in all cases, this ex- 
 tended signification; for, when, in the way of inquiry 
 as to words which we have not clearly understood, we 
 say, what ? Our full meaning is : " repeat to us that 
 which you have said, or the words which you have 
 spoken." 
 
 71. The INDETERMINATE PRONOUNS are 
 so called, because they express their objects in a ge- 
 neral and indeterminate manner. Several of them 
 are also adjectives. It is only where they are em- 
 ployed alone ; that is to say, without nouns, that they 
 ought to be regarded as pronouns. For instance: 
 " One is always hearing of the unhappiness of one 
 " person or another" The first of these ones is a 
 pronoun ; the last is an adjective, as is also the word 
 another ; for a noun is understood to follow, though 
 it is not expressed. These pronouns are as follows : 
 One, any, each, none, some, other, every, either, 
 many, whoever, whatever, neither, and some few 
 others, but all of them words invariable in their Or- 
 thography, and all of very common use. 
 
etymology [Letter 
 
 LETTER VII. 
 
 etymology of adjectives* 
 
 My Dear James, 
 
 72. In Letter III, paragraph 21, I have described 
 what an Adjective is. You will, therefore, now read 
 that paragraph carefully over, before you proceed in 
 studying the contents of the present Letter. 
 
 73. The adjectives have no changes to express 
 gender, or case ; but, they have changes to express 
 degrees of comparison. As adjectives describe the 
 qualities and properties of nouns, and as these may 
 be possessed in a degree higher in one case than in 
 another, the adjectives have degrees of comparison ; 
 that is to say, changes in their endings, to suit these 
 varying circumstances. A tree may be high, but 
 another may be higher, and a third may be the 
 highest. Adjectives have, then, these three degrees : 
 the first degree, or rather, the primitive word, is call- 
 ed the Positive; the second, the Comparative; the 
 third, the Superlative. For the forming of these de- 
 grees I shall give you four rules; and, if you pay 
 strict attention to these rules, you will need be told 
 very little more about this part of speech. 
 
 74. First Rule. Adjectives in general, which end 
 in a consonant, form their comparative degree by ad- 
 ding er to the positive, and form their superlative de- 
 gree by adding est to the positive : as, 
 
 POSITIVE. COMPARATIVE. SUPERLATIVE. 
 
 Rich, Richer, Richest. 
 
 75. Second Rule. Adjectives, which end in e, 
 add, in forming their comparative, only an r, and in 
 forming their superlative, st ; as, 
 
 POSITIVE. COMPARATIVE, SUPERLATIVE. 
 
 Wise, Wiser, Wisest, 
 
VII.] Or ADJECTIVES. 
 
 76. Third Rule. When the positive ends in d, g, 
 or t, and when these consonants are, at the same 
 time, preceded by a single vowel, the consonant is 
 doubled in forming the comparative and superlative ; 
 as, 
 
 POSITIVE* COMPARATIVE. SUPERLATIVE. 
 
 Red, Redder, Reddest. 
 
 Big, Bigger, Biggest. 
 
 Hot, Hotter, Hottest. 
 
 But, if the d, g, or t, be preceded by another con- 
 sonant,. or by more than one vowel, the final conso- 
 nant is not doubled in the forming of the two latter 
 degrees: as, 
 
 POSITIVE. COMPARATIVE. SUPERLATIVE. 
 
 Kind, Kinder, Kindest. 
 
 Neat, Neater, Neatest. 
 
 . 77. Fourth Rule. When the positive ends in y, 
 
 preceded by a consonant, the y changes to ie in the 
 
 other degrees. 
 
 POSITIVE. COMPARATIVE. SUPERLATIVE. 
 
 Lovely, Lovelier, Loveliest. 
 
 Pretty, Prettier, Prettiest. 
 
 78. There are some adjectives which can be re- 
 duced to no rule, and which must be considered as 
 irregular : as, 
 
 POSITIVE. COMPARATIVE. SUPERLATIVE. 
 
 Good, Better, Best. 
 
 Bad, Worse, Worst. 
 
 Little, Less, Least. 
 
 Much, More, Most. 
 
 79. Some adjectives can have no degrees of com- 
 parison, because their signification admits of no aug- 
 mentation : as, all, each, every, any, several, very, 
 some ; and all the numerical adjectives : as, one, 
 two, three ; first, second, third. 
 
 80. Adjectives which end in most, are superlative, 
 and admit of no change : as, utmost, uppermost. 
 
etymology [Letter 
 
 81. However, you will observe, that all adjectives 
 which admit of comparison, may form their degrees 
 by the use of the words more and most : as, 
 
 POSITIVE. COMPARATIVE. SUPERLATIVE. 
 
 Rich, More rich, Most rich. 
 
 Tender, More tender, Most tender. 
 
 When the positive contains but one syllable, the 
 degrees are usually formed by adding to the positive 
 according to the four rules. When the positive con- 
 tains two syllables it is matter of taste which method 
 you shall use in forming the degrees. The ear is, in 
 this case, the best guide. But, when the positive 
 contains more than two syllables, the degrees must 
 be formed by the use of more and most. We may 
 say tender and tenderest, pleasanter and pleasantest, 
 prettier and prettiest ; but who could tolerate deli' 
 cater and delicatest ? 
 
 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 at- 
 tending 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 
 
VIII.] OF VERBS. 
 
 when it expresses an action which is produced by the 
 nominative of the sentence : as " Pitt restrained the 
 Bank." It is passive, when it expresses an action, 
 which is received, or endured, by the person or thing 
 which is the nominative of the sentence : as, " The 
 Bank is restrained." It is neuter, when it expresses 
 simply the state of being, or of existence, of a person 
 or thing : as, " Dick lies in bed ;" or. when it ex- 
 presses an action confined within the actor. 
 
 84. It is of great consequence that you clearly 
 understand these distinctions, because I shall, by-and- 
 by, use these terms very frequently. And, in order 
 to give you a proof of the necessity of attending to 
 these distinctions, I will here give you a specimen of 
 the errors, which are sometimes committed by those 
 who do not understand Grammar. This last-men- 
 tioned Verb, to lie, becomes in the past time, lay. 
 Thus: " Dick lies on a bed now, but, some time 
 ago, he lay on the floor.'' This verb is often con- 
 founded 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, sometimes, 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 ; 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 object : as, I raise 
 
 D 
 
ETYMOLOGY [Letter 
 
 a stick, I raise my hand, I raise my head, and also 
 I raise myself ; because, though in this last instance, 
 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 con- 
 founded; though one is a neuter, and the other an 
 active verb, though one is regular and the other 
 •irregular, and though they are not, in any person, 
 time, or mode, composed 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 dis- 
 tinguishing the sorts of Verbs, I now proceed to 
 matters, which 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 
 Etymology of Pronouns. You will there clearly see 
 the use of 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 distinction 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 is the nominative of the 
 sentence. Look back at the Letter V., and at para- 
 graphs 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' 7 To say, " I writes ; he 
 write :" these 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 
 
•VIII.] OF VERBS. 
 
 in their spelling, except for the third person sin- 
 gular. For we say, " I write, you write, we write, 
 " they write ;" and only " he, she, or it writes. 19 
 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 ex- 
 press 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 
 " tyrants." The Times of a verb are, therefore, 
 called the present, the past, and the future. 
 
 91. The Modes. — The Modes of verbs are 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 : 
 " JHe 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 express 
 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 them- 
 selves. To make this matter clear, I will give you 
 
 d 2 
 
etymology [Letter 
 
 an example of the English compared with the French 
 language in this respect. 
 
 I march, Je marche, 
 
 I marched, Je marchois, 
 
 I might march, Je marchasse, 
 
 I should march, Je marcherois. 
 
 There are other variations in the French verb ; 
 but we effect 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 in- 
 finitive, because 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 part of the verb. 
 This word, to, is, of itself, a preposition; but, as 
 prefixed to verbs, it is merely a sign of the Infinitive 
 Mode. In other languages, there is no such sign. 
 In the French, for instance, alter, means, to go ; 
 Zcrire, 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 mode. 
 
 94. The Indicative Mode is that, in which we 
 express an action, or state of being, positively ; that is 
 to say, without any condition, or any dependent 
 circumstance. It merely indicates the action or state 
 of being, without being subjoined to any thing which 
 
VIII.] OF VERBS. 
 
 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 subjoined; 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 primitive, 
 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 commands, 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 
 matter is hardly worth notice, except as a mere 
 matter of form. 
 
 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 
 
etymology [Letter 
 
 partake of the qualities of other parts of speech as 
 well as of verbs. For instance: " I am working; 
 " working is laudable ; a working man is more 
 " worthy of honour than a titled plunderer who 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 circum- 
 stances 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 grammarians, it means, to 
 place under one view all the variations in the form 
 of a verb; beginning with the Infinitive Mode and 
 ending with the Participle. I will now lay before 
 you, then, the conjugation of the verb to work, 
 exhibiting that verb in all its persons, numbers, times, 
 and modes. 
 
 Infinitive Mode. 
 
 To Work. 
 
 Indicative Mode. 
 
 Singular. Plural. 
 
 •D..***«f C * st pers °n« I work, We work, 
 
 present y 2d PerS0Ilt Thou wor k e st, You work, 
 
 lime. (_ 3d Person. He, she, or it, works. They work* 
 
 p . C 1 worked, We worked, 
 
 *; ast J Thou workedst, You worked, 
 
 lime. £ He worked, They worked. 
 
 1 shall or will work, We shall or 
 
 will work. 
 
 Future J 'Thou shalt or wilt You shall or 
 
 Time. } work, will work. 
 
 He shall or will work. They shall 
 
 or will work. 
 
VIIL] or verbs. 
 
 Subjunctive Mode. 
 
 If 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. 
 
 Active. — 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 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 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 pro* 
 nouns 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. 
 
etymology [Letter 
 
 102. Some Grammarians put in their conjugations 
 Tvhat 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 to fill 
 up a book ; for all these consist merely in the intro- 
 duction and use of the verb to have in its various 
 parts. In the above conjugation all the changes or 
 variations of the verb are exhibited ; and it is those 
 changes and variations, which, 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 verb*. 
 To let and to do are also called auxiliaries; but they 
 are of far less importance 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 auxi- 
 liary means helper, or helping. 
 
 104. Verbs are called regular, when they have 
 their changes or variations according to a certain rule 
 or manner. Thus : " I walk, I walked; I work, I 
 worked." But, I cannot say, " I writed." I must 
 say, " I wrote" Now, observe, that we call regular 
 verbs all those which end their past lime of the Indi- 
 cative and their passive participle in ed ; and, if you 
 now look back at the conjugation of the verb to work, 
 you will find that that is a regular verb. Indeed, this 
 is the case with almost all our verbs. But, there are 
 some little irregularities even here,, and tfiey 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 
 
VIII.] OF VERBS. 
 
 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 numerous 
 others. But, if the infinitive, that is to say, the pri- 
 mitive 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 be- 
 comes moved and moves t. 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 /*, 
 s, x, or z 9 then cs must be added ; as, to wish, he 
 wishes ; to toss, he tosses ; to box, he boxes ; te 
 buzz, he buzzes. — II. When the infinitive ends in y, 
 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 indicative : as, to reply, 
 he replies. But, (and I beg you to mark it well) if 
 the ending y have a vowel immediately before it, the 
 verb follows the general rule, in the formation of the 
 third person singular of the present of the indicative : 
 as, to delay, he delays ; and not he delaies. It is 
 the same in the second person singular : as, to reply, 
 thou repliest / to delay, thou delayest. — III. When 
 the infinitive ends in y, with a consonant immediately 
 before it, the past time of the indicative and the pas- 
 sive 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 infinitive : as, to work, working ; to talk, talk- 
 ing. But, if the infinitive end in a single e , the e is 
 P 5 
 
etymology [Letter 
 
 dropped : as, to move, moving. 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 has a single vowel 
 immediately before it, the final consonant is doubled, 
 not only in forming the active participle, but also in 
 forming the past time of the indicative, and the pas- 
 sive participle: as, to rap, rapping ; I rapped, it was 
 rapped. But, observe well, this rule holds good only 
 as to w r ords 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 syl- 
 lable ; 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. 
 
 106. These irregularities, though very necessary to 
 be attended to, do not prevent us from considering the 
 verbs, which are subject to them, as regular verbs. 
 The mark of a regular verb, is, that its past time and 
 passive participle end in ed : every verb, which 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 ir- 
 regularities, (except the little irregularities just men- 
 tioned) which 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 
 
VIIL] 
 
 OF VERBS. 
 
 be sufficient to give a List, showing, in those two in* 
 stances, 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 alphabetical. 
 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. 
 
 PARTICIPLE, 
 
 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, 
 to begin, 
 to behold, 
 
 I begot, 
 I began, 
 I beheld , 
 
 begotten. 
 
 begun. 
 
 beheld. 
 
 to bend, 
 
 I bended, 
 
 bent. 
 
 to beseech, 
 
 I besought, 
 
 besought. 
 
 to bid, 
 
 I bade, 
 
 bidden. 
 
 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, 
 to buy, 
 to catch, 
 
 to choose, 
 
 I brought, 
 I bought, 
 I caught, 
 I chose, 
 
 brought, 
 bought, 
 caught, 
 ohosen. 
 
 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. 
 

 ETYMOLOGY 
 
 to eat, 
 
 I ate, 
 
 eaten. 
 
 to fall, 
 
 I fell, 
 
 fallen. 
 
 to feed, 
 
 I fed, 
 
 fed. 
 
 to feel, 
 
 I felt. 
 
 felt. 
 
 to fight, 
 to find, 
 
 I fought, 
 
 I found, 
 
 fought, 
 found. 
 
 to flee, 
 
 I fled, 
 
 fled. 
 
 to fling, 
 to fly, 
 
 I flung, 
 I flew, 
 
 flung, 
 flown. 
 
 to forbear, 
 
 I foebore, 
 
 forborn. 
 
 to forbid, 
 
 I forbade, 
 
 forbidden 
 
 to forget, 
 to forgive, 
 to forsake, 
 
 I forgot, 
 I forgave, 
 I forsook, 
 
 forgotten, 
 forgiven, 
 forsaken. 
 
 to get, 
 
 I got, 
 
 gotten. 
 
 to give, 
 
 I gave, 
 
 given. 
 
 to go, 
 
 I went, 
 
 gone. 
 
 to grind, 
 to have, 
 
 I ground, 
 I had, 
 
 ground, 
 had. 
 
 to hear, 
 
 I heard, 
 
 heard. 
 
 to hide, 
 
 J hid, 
 
 hidden. 
 
 to hit, 
 
 I hit, 
 
 hit. 
 
 to hold, 
 
 I held, 
 
 held. 
 
 to hurt, 
 
 I hurt, 
 
 hurt. 
 
 to keep, 
 to know, 
 
 I kept, 
 I knew, 
 
 kept, 
 known. 
 
 to lay, 
 to lead, 
 
 I laid, 
 lied, 
 
 laid, 
 led. 
 
 to leave, 
 
 I left, 
 
 left. 
 
 to lend, 
 
 I lent, 
 
 lent. 
 
 to let, 
 
 I let, 
 
 let. 
 
 to lie, 
 
 I lay, 
 
 lain. 
 
 to lose, 
 
 I lost, 
 
 lost. 
 
 to make, 
 
 I made, 
 
 made. 
 
 to meet, 
 
 I met, 
 
 met. 
 
 to overcome, 
 
 I overcame, 
 
 overcome 
 
 to overdo, 
 
 I overdid, 
 
 overdone. 
 
 to pass, 
 to pay, 
 
 I passed, 
 I paid, 
 
 past, 
 paid. 
 
 to put, 
 
 I put, 
 
 put. 
 
 [Letter 
 
VIIL] 
 
 to read, 
 to rend, 
 to ride, 
 to ring, 
 to rise, 
 to run, 
 to say, 
 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, 
 to b wear , 
 
 OF VERBS. 
 
 
 I read, 
 
 read. 
 
 I rent, 
 
 rent. 
 
 I rode, 
 
 ridden. 
 
 I rang, 
 
 rung. 
 
 I rose, 
 
 risen. 
 
 I ran, 
 
 run. 
 
 I said, 
 
 said. 
 
 I saw, 
 
 seen. 
 
 I sought, 
 
 sought. 
 
 I sold, 
 
 sold. 
 
 I sent, 
 
 sent. 
 
 I set, 
 
 set. 
 
 I shook, 
 
 shaken. 
 
 I sheared, 
 
 shorn. 
 
 I shed, 
 
 shed. 
 
 I showed, 
 
 shown. 
 
 I shrank, 
 
 shrunk. 
 
 I shod, 
 
 shod. 
 
 I shot, 
 
 shotten. 
 
 I shut, 
 
 shut. 
 
 I sang, 
 
 sung. 
 
 I sunk, 
 
 sunk. 
 
 I sat, 
 
 sitten. 
 
 I slew, 
 
 slain. 
 
 1 slept, 
 
 slept. 
 
 I slid, 
 
 slid den. 
 
 I slit, 
 
 slit. 
 
 I smote, 
 
 smitten. 
 
 I spoke, 
 
 spoken. 
 
 I sped, 
 
 sped. 
 
 I spent, 
 
 spent. 
 
 I span, 
 
 spun. 
 
 I spit, 
 
 spitten. 
 
 I spread, 
 
 spread. 
 
 I stood, 
 
 stood. 
 
 I stole, 
 
 stolen. 
 
 I stuck,** 
 
 stuck. 
 
 I stunk, 
 
 stunk. 
 
 I struck, 
 
 stricken 
 
 I swore, 
 
 sworn. 
 

 ETYMOLOGY 
 
 
 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. 
 
 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. 
 
 [Letter 
 
 108. It is usual with Grammarians to insert several 
 verbs in their List of Irregulars, which I have not 
 inserted here. But, I have, in the above List, placed 
 every verb in our language which is really irregular. 
 However, I will here subjoin a list of those verbs, 
 which 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 the regular form. 
 
 LIST OF VERBS, WHICH, BY SOME PERSONS, ARE 
 ERRONEOUSLY DEEMED IRREGULARS. 
 
 INFINITIVE. 
 
 To awake, 
 to bereave, 
 to blow, 
 to build, 
 to burn, 
 to burst, 
 to cast, 
 to chide, 
 to cling, 
 to creep, 
 to crow, 
 to curse, 
 to dare, 
 
 PASSED TIME. 
 
 1 awoke, 
 I bereft, 
 I blew, 
 I built, 
 I burnt, 
 I burst, 
 I cast, 
 I chid, 
 I clung, 
 I crept, 
 I crew, 
 I curst, 
 I dared, 
 
 PARTICIPLES. 
 
 awaked. 
 
 bereft. 
 
 blown. 
 
 built. 
 
 burnt. 
 
 burst. 
 
 cast. 
 
 chidden 
 
 olung. 
 
 crept. 
 
 crowed. 
 
 curst. 
 
 dared. 
 
VIII.] 
 
 or VERBS. 
 
 to deal, 
 to dig, 
 to dip, 
 to draw, 
 to dream, 
 to dwell, 
 to freeze, 
 to geld, 
 to gild, 
 to gird, 
 to grow, 
 to hang, 
 to help, 
 to hew, 
 to kneel, 
 to knit, 
 to lade, 
 to leap, 
 to light, 
 to load, 
 to mean, 
 to mow, 
 to overflow, 
 to saw, 
 to shave, 
 to shred, 
 to shine, 
 to sling, 
 to slink, 
 to slip, 
 to smell, 
 to snow, 
 to sow, 
 to spell, 
 to spill, 
 to split, 
 to spring, 
 to stamp, 
 to sting, 
 to strew, 
 
 dealt, 
 dug, 
 dipt, 
 drew, 
 dreamt, 
 dwelt, 
 froze, 
 gelt, 
 gilt, 
 girt, 
 grew, 
 hung, 
 helpt, 
 hewed, 
 knelt, 
 knit, 
 loaded, 
 leaped, 
 light, 
 loaded, 
 meant, 
 mowed, 
 overflowed, 
 sawed, 
 shaved, 
 shred, 
 shone, 
 slung, 
 slunk, 
 slipt, 
 smelt, 
 t snowed, 
 sowed, 
 spelt, 
 spilt, 
 split, 
 sprang, 
 stampt, 
 
 stung or stang, 
 strewed, 
 
 dealt. 
 
 dug. 
 
 dipt. 
 
 drawn. 
 
 dreamt. 
 
 dwelt. 
 
 frozen. 
 
 gelt. 
 
 gilt. 
 
 girt. 
 
 grown. 
 
 hung. 
 
 helpt. 
 
 hewn. 
 
 knelt. 
 
 knit. 
 
 laden. 
 
 leapt. 
 
 light. 
 
 loaden. 
 
 meant. 
 
 mown. 
 
 overflown. 
 
 sawn. 
 
 shaven. 
 
 shred. 
 
 shone. 
 
 slung. 
 
 slunk. 
 
 slipt. 
 
 smelt. 
 
 snown. 
 
 sown. 
 
 spelt. 
 
 spilt. 
 
 split. 
 
 sprung. 
 
 stampt. 
 
 stung. 
 
 strewn. 
 
* 
 
 ETYMOLOGY 
 
 
 to strow, 
 
 I strowed, 
 
 strown. 
 
 to stride, 
 
 I strode, 
 
 stridden, 
 
 to string, 
 to strip, 
 to strive, 
 
 I strung, 
 I stript, 
 I strove, 
 
 strung. 
 
 stript. 
 
 striven. 
 
 to sweep, 
 to swell, 
 
 I swept, 
 I swelled, 
 
 swept, 
 swollen. 
 
 to swim, 
 
 I swam, 
 
 swum. 
 
 to swing, 
 to thrive, 
 
 I swung orswang,swung. 
 I throve, thriven. 
 
 to throw, 
 
 I threw, 
 
 thrown. 
 
 to thrust, 
 
 I thrust, 
 
 thrust. 
 
 to wax, 
 
 I waxed, 
 
 waxen. 
 
 to weave, 
 
 I wove, 
 
 woven. 
 
 to weep, 
 to whip, 
 
 I wept, 
 I whipt, 
 
 wept, 
 whipt. 
 
 [Letter 
 
 109. The greater part of these verbs have become 
 irregular by the bad practice of abbreviating, or short- 
 ening, in writing. We are always given to cut our 
 words short ; and, with very few exceptions, you find 
 people writing lovd, movd, waWd; 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 lovd, 
 movd, walked, it is very easy to slide into lovt, movt, 
 walkU And this has been the case with regard to 
 curst, dealt, dwelt, leapt, help t, 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 ortho- 
 graphy 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 con- 
 sonants already at the end of the words, that it could 
 
VIII.] OF VERBS. 
 
 add none. It could not enable the organs even of 
 English speech to pronounce bursVd, 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 bwsted," than it is to say, 
 u . the bubble is almost burst" 7 . 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 diffi- 
 cult 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 habit of contracting, or 
 shortening, is a very mischievous habit. It leads to 
 the destruction of all propriety 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 warning 
 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 may be used in the regular form : as, past, 
 which may be, in the participle, passed, and with full 
 as much propriety. 
 
 110. Auxiliary Verbs. — In the present Letter, 
 paragraph 103, I opened 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 
 
etymology [Letter 
 
 mode : as, let me go ; let us go ; let him go. That 
 is to say, leave me to go, leave us to go, leave him 
 to go. Perhaps, the meaning, fully expressed, would 
 be, act in such a way that I may be left to go, or suf- 
 fered to go. 
 
 111. The Auxiliary do, which, for the passed 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 
 tvork, 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 of affirming or denying in a manner pecu- 
 liarly strong : as, I do work, means, that I work, not- 
 withstanding all that may be, or may have been said, 
 or thought, to the contrary; or it means, that I work 
 710W, and have not done it at some other stated, or 
 supposed time. It is the same, with the exception of 
 time, as to the use of did. These are amongst 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 extraor- 
 dinary portion of your attention. They are principal 
 verbs as well as auxiliaries. The verb to have, as a 
 principal verb, signifies possessioyi : as, i" have a pen ; 
 
VIII.] OF VERBS. 
 
 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 head-ache, I have a hatred 
 of such a thing, / have a mind to go ; and hundreds 
 of similar phrases. I possess a head-ache, has the 
 same meaning ; but, the other is more agreeable to 
 the natural turn of our language. As auxiliary this 
 verb is absolutely necessary in forming what are called 
 the compound times of other verbs, and those times 
 are called compound, because they are 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 cannot, in 
 a short manner, tell you this without the help of the 
 verb to have. To say, / work, or, / worked, or, I 
 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 1 
 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 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, therefore, 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 have 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 
 
etymology [Letter 
 
 these phrases mean as follows; existing in work, he 
 exists in ivork, 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, / 
 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 retain, 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 
 making 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 subsequent difficulties will 
 speedily vanish before you. 
 
 115. I now proceed to close this long and impor- 
 tant 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. 
 
 Infinitive Mode. 
 
 To have. 
 Indicative Mode. 
 Singular* Plural. 
 
 £ 
 
 r lst Person. I have, We have, 
 
 )2d Person. Thou hast, You have, 
 
 H ^3d Person. He, she, or it has Th have> 
 
 g r_ I had, 
 
 1£< — -Thouhadst, 
 
 ^ (^ — He, she, or it 
 
 We had, 
 You had, 
 had, They had. 
 
 f — I shall, or will, have, We shall, or will, have, 
 
 ) — Thou shalt, or wilt, have, You shall, or will, have, 
 )_He, she^or^ shall, or They shalI(0r will , have . 
 
VIII.] OF VERBS. 
 
 Subjunctive Mode. 
 If I have, or may, might, would, could, or should, have. 
 
 If thou have, or may, have. 
 
 If he, she, or it, have, or may, have. 
 
 If we have, or may, — — — — . have. 
 
 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 per- 
 son singular of the present of the indicative, it is 
 hardly ever used. It is out of date, and ought to be 
 wholly laid aside. 
 
 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. PluraU 
 
 p ("1st Person. I am, We are, 
 
 Fires. 1 2d Person Thou art> y ou are> 
 
 lime. ^ 3d p erSon He> sne ^ or it is# They are. 
 
 Past f— Iwas > We were, 
 
 £,? < — Thou wast, You were, 
 
 ime * (_ — He, she, or it was, They were. 
 
 {— I shall, or will, be, We shall, or will, be, 
 
 — Thou shalt, or wilt, be, You shall, or will, be, 
 -He, i 
 
 Subjunctive Mode. 
 
 r If I be, or may, might, would, could, or should, be. 
 
 If Thou be, or may, be. 
 
 Pres. 1 If He, she, or it, be, or may, • be. 
 
 Time. ^ If We be, or may, be. 
 
 If You be, or may, ___— be. 
 
 If They be, or may, . be. 
 
 ae ' win; be. il ' shal1 ' or The y sUal1 ' or wiU > be - 
 
etymology [Letter 
 
 If I were, 
 If Thou wert, 
 
 Past Time 1 Jf He > she ' or ifc Were ' 
 ^ If We were, . 
 
 If You were, 
 
 Tf They were. 
 
 Imperative Mode. 
 
 Let me be, Let us be, . 
 
 Be thou, Be you, 
 
 Let him, her, or it, be. Let them be. 
 
 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. 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 ex- 
 pressed conditionally ; or when the action or state of 
 being is, in some 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, ivill, 
 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, " / 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 regarding the origin of these 
 
VIII.] OF VERBS. 
 
 words are more curious than useful. A mere idea of 
 the nature of their origin is enough. The word ought 
 is a verb defective in most of its parts. It certainly, 
 however, is no other than a part of the verb to owe, 
 and is become ought by corruption. For instance ; 
 " I ought to write to you," means, That " I owe the 
 performance of the act of writing to you." Ought is 
 made use of only in the present time, and, for that 
 jeason, a great deal has been lost to our language by 
 this corruption. As to the verbs, which some Gram- 
 marians have called impersonal, there are, in fact, 
 no such things in the English language. By imper- 
 sonal verb is meant, a verb that has no noun or pro- 
 noun for its nominative case ; no person or thing that 
 is the actor, or receiver of an action, or that is in be- 
 ing. Thus : " It rains," is by some called an imper- 
 sonal 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. 
 
 120. Thus I have concluded my Letter on the Ety- 
 mology of verbs, which is by far the most important 
 part of the subject. Great as have been my endea- 
 vours 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 every thing 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 writing. 
 Think as you proceed ; and, at the end of your copy- 
 ing, you will understand clearly all the contents of the 
 Letter. Do not attempt to study the Letter piece by 
 
etymology [fetter 
 
 piece. In your readings, as well as in your copyings, 
 go clean throughout. If you follow these instructions, 
 the remaining part of your task will be very easy and 
 pleasant. 
 
 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 variations. Adverbs are very nu- 
 merous, and may be divided into five principal classes ; 
 that is to say, Adverbs of time, of place, of order, 
 of quality, and of manner. This last class, which 
 is the most numerous, is composed of those which are 
 derived, immediately, from adjectives, and which end 
 in ly: as, especially, particularly, thankfully. 
 
 122. These adverbs, ending in ly, are, for the most 
 part, formed by simply adding ly to the adjective ; as 
 especial becomes especially ; but, if the adjective end 
 in y, that y is changed into i in forming the adverb : 
 as happy, happily ; steady, steadily. If the adjec- 
 tive end in le, the e is dropped in forming the adverb ; 
 as, possible, possibly. 
 
 123. Some few adverbs have degrees of compa- 
 rison: as, often, oftener, oftenest; and those which 
 are derived from irregular adjectives, are irregular in 
 forming their degrees of comparison : as well, better, 
 best. 
 
 124. Some adverbs are simple, or single ; others 
 compound. The former consist of one word, the 
 latter of two, or more words : as, happily ; at present^ 
 
X.] OF PREPOSITIONS. 
 
 now-a-days; which last means, at the days that now 
 are. Another adverb 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 beside. When ad- 
 verbs are compound, the words composing them ought 
 to be connected by a hyphen, or hyphens, as in the 
 above examples of noiv-a-days and by-and-by. 
 
 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 dif- 
 ferent relations or connexions s which nouns have 
 with each other, or, in which nouns stand with re- 
 gard to each other : as, John gives money to Peter ; 
 Peter receives money from John. It is useless to 
 attempt to go into curious inquiries as to the origin 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. They 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. In mercantile accounts 
 
 E 
 
ETYMOLOGY OF PREPOSITIONS. [Letter 
 
 you will frequently see this a made use of in a very 
 odd sort of way : as, " six bales marked 1 a 6." 
 The merchant means, <c six bales marked from 1 to 
 6." But, this I take to be a relick of the Norman 
 French, which was once the' law and mercantile 
 language of England ; for, in French, a, with an ac- 
 cent, 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 } r ou, 
 my dear James, to bear in mind, that the only use of 
 words is to cause our meaning to be clearly under- 
 stood ; and that the best words are those, which are 
 familiar to the ears of the greatest number of persons. 
 The o\ with the mark of elision, means, of, or of 
 the, or 071, 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 are joined to 
 rerbs or other words: as, to outlive, to undervalue y 
 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 w T e stop? Thank/wZ, thank- 
 less, withoi^, -within. These are all compound 
 words, but, of what use to us to enter on, and 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 every thing that tends not to real 
 utility. 
 
XII.] CAUTIONARY REMARKS. 
 
 LETTER XL 
 
 ETYMOLOGY OE CONJUNCTIONS. 
 
 128. In Letter III, paragraph 31, you have had a 
 description of this sort of words, and also some account 
 of the tises of them. Some of them are called copu- 
 lative conjunctions, and others disjunctive. They 
 all serve to join together words, or parts of sentences; 
 but, the former express an 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 diffi- 
 culty ; but, as you will see by-and-by, to use them 
 properly, with other words, in the forming of sen- 
 tences, 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 w r ords, which, under different 
 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 descrip- 
 tion of w r ords. 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 ; 
 
 e 2 
 
caution auy remarks. [Letter 
 
 he stood by at the time. In the first of these exam- 
 ples 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 ofwhichit is composed, that deter- 
 mines what is the part of speech to which it belongs. 
 
 131, Never attempt to get by rote any part of 
 your instructions. 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 parlour 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 en- 
 dowments equalled those of a parrot or a bulfinch! 
 Yet, a Germ an bird -teacher would make either of these 
 more perfect in this species of oratory. It is this 
 mode of teaching, which is practised in the great 
 schools, that assists very much in making dunces of 
 Lords and Country Squires. They M get their 
 lesson ;" that is to say, they repeat the words of it ; 
 but, as to its sense and meaning, 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 retain 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 tune of a song with perfect correctness, at 
 the very time when 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 piece-meal ; that is to say, 
 
XII.] CAUTIONARY REMARKS. 
 
 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 Etymology, read all the Letters through, 
 at once ; do this repeatedly ; 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 your- 
 self a little, thus : copy a short sentence from any 
 book. Then write down the words, one by one, and 
 write against eacb 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 de- 
 noted by little letters after the word : s. is for sub- 
 stantive, 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 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 acquired something which you 
 can never lose. You will begin, and with reason, to 
 think yourself learned ; your sight, though trfe objects 
 will still appear a good deal confused, will dart into 
 every part of the science ; and, you will pant to com- 
 plete what you will be convinced you have successfully- 
 begun. 
 
 
syntax. [Letter 
 
 LETTER XIII. 
 syntax generally considered. 
 
 My Dear James, 
 
 134. In Letter II, paragraph 9, I shortly explained 
 to you the meaning of the word Syntax, as that 
 word is used in the teaching of grammar. Read that 
 paragraph again. 
 
 135. We are, then, now entering upon this branch 
 of your study; and it is my object to teach you 
 how to give all the words you make use of their 
 proper situation 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 sen- 
 tences. I shall make some remarks upon the manner 
 of putting sentences together ; and on the things 
 necessary to be understood, in order to enable a 
 person to write a series of sentences. 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 unintelli- 
 gible. 
 
XIV.] 
 
 LETTER XIV. 
 
 SYNTAX. 
 
 The Points and Marks made use of in Writing. 
 
 My Dear James, 
 137. There are, as I informed you in para- 
 graph 9, Letter II, Points made use of in the making, 
 or writing, of sentences; and, therefore, we must first 
 notice these; because, as you will soon see, the 
 sense, or meaning, of the words is very much de- 
 pendent upon the points which are used along with 
 the words. For instance : you will be rich if you be 
 industrious, in a few years." Then again: " yoic 
 will be rich, if you be industrious in a few years. 19 
 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 
 industrious now. The second means, that you will 
 be rich, some time or other, if you be 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 w T ord industrious, 
 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, respecting certain political clubs. A 
 secretary of one of those clubs presented a petition to> 
 
syntax. [Letter 
 
 the House, in which he declared positively, and 
 offered to prove at the bar, that a part of the report 
 was totally false. At first their Lordships 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 made that false, which would otherwise have 
 been, and which was intended to be, true ! 
 
 138. These points being, then, things of so much 
 consequence in the forming of sentences, it is ne- 
 cessary that I explain to you the use of them, before 
 I proceed any further. There are four ofthem : the 
 Full- Point, or Period; the Colon; the Semi- Colon; 
 the Comma. 
 
 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 makes a full and complete meaning, 
 and is not necessarily connected with other col- 
 lections of words. But a sentence may consist of 
 several members or divisio?is, and then it is called 
 a compound sentence. When it has no division, it 
 is called a simple sentence ; Thus : " The people 
 <i suffer great misery." This is a simple sentence; 
 but, " The people suffer great misery, and daily perish 
 for want," is a compound sentence ; that is to say, it 
 is compounded, or made up, of two simple sentences. 
 
 140. The Colon, which is written thus [:], is next 
 to 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 tends to make the sense fuller or clearer. 
 
 141. The Semi- Colon is written thus [;], and it is 
 used to set off, 'or divide simple sentences, in cases 
 
XIV.] POINTS AND MARKS. 
 
 where the Comma is not quite enough to k^ep the 
 meaning of the simple sentences sufficiently distinct. 
 142. The Comma is written thus [,], and is used to 
 mark the shortest pauses in reading, and the smallest 
 divisions in writing. It has, by some grammarian, 
 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, commas are used, in numerous cases, 
 to set off parts which have no verbs in them ; and 
 even to set off single words, which are not verbs ; and 
 of this the very sentence, which I am now writing, 
 gives you ample proof. The comma marks the shortest 
 pause that we make in speaking; and it is evident, 
 that, in many cases, its use must depend upon taste. 
 It is sometimes used to give emphasis, or weight, to 
 the word after which it is put. Observe, now, the 
 following two sentences : " I was very well and 
 " cheerful last week; but, am rather feeble and low- 
 u 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, portions of words, are 
 throwed into a sentence, and which are not absolutely 
 necessary to assist in its grammatical construction. 
 For instance: " There were, in the year 1817, 
 u petitions from a million and a half of men, who, 
 " as they distinctly alleged, were Suffering the 
 " greatest possible hardships." The two phrases, in 
 italicks, may be left out in the reading, and still 
 the sentence will have its full grammatical construc- 
 tion. 
 
 1143. Let us now take a compound sentence or two, 
 containing all the four points. " In a land of liberty 
 e 5 
 
syntax. [Letter 
 
 u it is extremely 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 defend 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 soldier. 
 " 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." 
 
 This passage is taken from Blackstone's Commen- 
 taries, Book I. Chap. 13. Here are four complete sen- 
 tences. The first is a simple sentence. The other 
 three are compound sentences. Ea^h of these latter 
 has its members, all very judiciously set off by points. 
 The word so, in the third sentence, ought to be suck, 
 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 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. 
 
XIV.] POINTS AND MARKS. 
 
 145. Besides these points, however, there are cer- 
 tain grammatical signs, or marks, which are made use 
 of in the writing of sentences : the mark of parenthesis, 
 the mark of interrogation, the mark of exclamation, 
 the apostrophe, otherwise called the mark of elision, 
 and the hyphen. 
 
 146. The mark of parenthesis consists of two 
 curved strokes drawed across the line of writing, or of 
 print. Its use is to enclose a phrase, th rowed in hastily 
 to assist in elucidating our subject, or to add force 
 to our assertions or arguments. But, observe, the 
 parenthesis ought to 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. 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 
 Ci 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 enchant- 
 " men'cs, which he, who has the patience or curiosity 
 " to read, may find, under the title aforementioned, 
 " in Cato, in Varro (and even Columella is as 
 ie fulsome as any of them), all written in very fine 
 " language ; which is most of the erudition that can 
 " be acquired, as to field husbandry, from the Greek 
 " and Latin w T riters, whether in verse or prose." For 
 want of the mark of parenthesis in the first of these 
 sentences, we almost think, at the close of it, that the 
 author is speaking of the crows, and not of Heaven- 
 
syntax. [Letter 
 
 being frightened 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 man is that?" In these 
 and numerous 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 of 
 interrogation is, you see, absolutely necessary in order 
 to accomplish the purpose. 
 
 148. The mark of exclamation, or admiration, is 
 written 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 I What do 
 you say ?"? The difference in the sense is very obvious 
 here. Again: " He is going away to-night! He 
 is going away to-night" 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, be- 
 cause it is used properly enough in poetry ; but, I beg 
 you never to use it in prose in one single instance 
 during your whole life. It ought to be called the 
 
XIV.] POINTS AND MARKS. 
 
 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 to connect words, or parts of words: as in 
 sea-ftsh, water-rat* For, here are two distinct words, 
 though they, in these instances, make but one. Some- 
 times the Hyphen is used to connect many words to- 
 gether : " 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 begins the 
 next line. 
 
 151. These are all the grammatical marks; but, 
 there are others, used in writing for the purpose of 
 saving time 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 en- 
 close words, taken from other writings, or from other 
 persons' discourse; and, indeed, it is frequently used 
 to enclose 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 are at the present time coming 
 from the mind of the writer. 
 
 152. This mark [11] is found in the Bible. It 
 
syntax. [Letter 
 
 stands for Paragraph, This [§] is sometimes used 
 instead of the word Section. As to stars [*] and the 
 other marks which are used for the purpose of leading 
 the eye of the reader to Notes, in the same page, or 
 at the end of the hook, 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 parentheses, they are 
 interrupters, and much more troublesome interrup- 
 ters, 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, there- 
 fore, 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 text, we 
 soon lay down the volume, and, of course, read nei- 
 ther 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 in- 
 dulge themselves in this practice, until at last, they 
 come to write the greater part of their words in single 
 letters. The frequent use of abbreviations is always 
 a mark of slovenliness and of vulgarity. 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 8f. For what reason I should 
 like to know. But to this Sf is sometimes added a c ; 
 thus, Sfc. And is, in Latin, et, and c is the first letter 
 
XIV.] POINTS AND MARKS. 
 
 of the Latin word ccetera f which means the like, or 
 so on. Therefore this 4*c. means and the like, or and 
 so on. This abbreviation of a foreign word is a most 
 convenient thing for such writers as have too much in- 
 dolence 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 abbreviation is 
 very frequently made use of without the writer having 
 any idea of its import. A writer on grammar says; 
 " When these words are joined u to if, since, fyc. 
 they are adverbs." But, where is the like of if, or 
 of since? The best way to guard yourself against 
 the committing of similar errors is never to use this 
 abbreviation. 
 
 154. The use of capitals and italicks 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 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 language ; 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 oiitalick 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 drawed under such words as we wish 
 to be considered to be in italicks. If we wish words 
 to be put in small capitals, we draw two strokes 
 
syntax, [Letter 
 
 under them ; if in FULL CAPITALS, 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 up- 
 wards to a part which has been omitted, and which 
 is inserted between the line, w T here 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 w T hen 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 after -pointing. As your pen moves, bear con- 
 stantly in mind, that it is making strokes which are 
 to remain for ever. Far, I hope, from my dear 
 James, will be the ridiculous, the contemptible affec- 
 tation, 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 
 
XV.] AS RELATING TO ARTICLES. 
 
 wild work indeed ! Who is to know what is intended 
 by the use of these dashes ? Those who have thought 
 proper, like Mr. Lindley Murray, to place the dash 
 amongst the grammatical points, ought to give us 
 some rule relative to its different longitudinal dimen- 
 sions in different cases. The inch, the three quarter- 
 inch, the half -inch, the quarter-inch: these would 
 be something determinate ; but, " the dash," without 
 measure, 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 paragraphs. 
 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. 
 
 LETTER XV. 
 
 syntax, as relating to articles. 
 
 My Dear James, 
 
 157. Before you proceed "to my instructions re- 
 lative to the employing of articles, you will do well to 
 read again all the paragraphs in Letter IV. Our ar- 
 ticles are so few in number, and they are subject to so 
 little variation in their orthography, that very few er- 
 rors can arise in the use of them. But, still, errors 
 may arise ; and it will be necessary 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 erro- 
 neous passage cited by Doctor Lowth, " and I per- 
 
syntax, [Letter 
 
 secuted tills way unto the death," meaning death 
 generally ; but you may commit errors less glaring. 
 ii 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 un- 
 certainty 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 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 this, is, that, we are, in 
 this last case, limiting our meaning to the grass and 
 the wheat, which 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 is faulty. "Neither could weeds 
 be of any prejudice to corn" It should be " the com-" 
 for, be does not mean corn. universally, but the stand- 
 ing corn, and the corn amongst which weeds grow ; 
 and, therefore, the definite article is required. 
 
 160. 6i Ten shillings the bushel," and like phrases, 
 are perfectly correct. They mean, " ten shillings by 
 the bushel, or 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 ex- 
 pression is far preferable to per bushel ; for the per is 
 not English, and is, to the greater part of people, a 
 mystical sort of word. 
 
XVI.] AS RELATING TO NOUNS. 
 
 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 hest. The 
 same may he 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 hundred, or ten for 
 a hundred ; and why can w r e not, then, say, in plain 
 English, what we mean ? 
 
 162. When there are several nouns following the 
 indefinite article, care ought to be taken, that it ac- 
 cord 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 individuals : as thousand, hundred, dozen, score, 
 take the indefinite article, though they are of plural 
 meaning. It is a certain ?nass, or number, or multi- 
 tude, 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 sort of words cause nouns to he in such or 
 such a case ; and there must be a concord, or an 
 
syntax, [Letter 
 
 agreement, between the nouns and the other words, 
 which, 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 cannot go far in giving rules 
 for the forming of sentences. Under the present 
 head, therefore, I shall content myself with doing lit- 
 tle more than to give some further account of the man- 
 ner of using the Possessive Case of nouns; that being 
 the only case, to denote which any of our nouns vary 
 their endings, 
 
 166. This 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 is in 
 the possessive case, is expressed by a circumlocution ; 
 that is to say, by many w r ords in lieu of one, the sign 
 of the possessive case is joined to the last word : as, 
 " John, the old 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 
 conjunction, the sign of the possessive case is, when 
 the thing possessed 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 Rich- 
 ard's estate," implies that each has an estate; or, 
 at least, it will admit of that meaning 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, u Ed- 
 
XVI.] AS RELATING TO NOUNS. 
 
 " wards, 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 ;" that is to say, cham- 
 ber 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 Yorkshire-men flew to 
 arms." If we could not compound our words, we 
 must 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 pos- 
 sessive case, not to use after it words which create a 
 confusion 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 
 " Northumberland, whom they put to death." 
 
 171. A passage from Doctor Hugh Blair, the 
 author of Lectures on Rhetoric, will give you another 
 instance of error in the use of the possessive case. I 
 take it from the 24th Lecture: " In comparing De- 
 " mosthenes and Cicero, most of the French critics 
 6 l are disposed to give the preference to the latter. 
 
syntax, [Letter 
 
 " P. Rapin the Jesuit, in the parallels which he has 
 " drawn between some of the most eminent Greek and 
 " Roman writers, uniformly decides in favour of the 
 " Roman. For the preference which he gives to Cicero, 
 " he assigns, and lays stress x>n one reason of a pretty 
 " extraordinary nature, viz. that Demosthenes could 
 " not possibly have so dear an insight as Cicero into 
 " the manners and passions of men; Why? because 
 " he had not the advantage of perusing Aristotle's 
 " Treatise of Rhetoric, wherein, says our critic, he 
 " has fully laid open that mystery : and to support 
 " this weighty argument, he enters into a controversy 
 " with A. Gellius, in order to prove that Aristotle'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 is usually employed in examin- 
 ing writings that are to be put into print, and especi- 
 ally writings 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 generally is 
 clear to our minds : and we read on. But, in this - 
 passage of Doctor Blair, all is confusion : the mind 
 is puzzled : we, at last, hardly know ivhom or what 
 the writer is talking about ; and Ave fairly come to a 
 stand. 
 
 172. In speaking of the many faults in this pas- 
 sage, I shall be obliged to make here observations 
 which would come under the head of pronouns, verbs, 
 adverb?, and prepositions. The first two of the three 
 
XVI. ] AS RELATING TO NOUNS. 
 
 sentences are, in themselves, rather obscure, and 
 are well enough calculated for ushering in the 
 complete confusion that follows. The he which 
 comes immediately after the word because may re- 
 late to Demosthenes ; but to what noun does the 
 second lie relate ? It would, when we first look at it, 
 seem to relate to the same noun as the first he relates 
 to; for, the Doctor cannot call Aristotle's Treatise 
 of Rhetoric a he. JNo: 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 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 he supposed to have 
 laid open a mystery in the perusing of the treatise ; 
 and the words which follow the he would seem to 
 give countenance to this supposition: for what 
 mystery is meant by the words, " that mystery ? " 
 Is it the mystery of Rhetoric, or the mystery of the 
 manners and passions of men 1 This is not all, 
 however ; for the Doctor, as if bewitched fry 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, 
 amidst the general confusion, wholly forgotten. 
 There is an error also in the use of the active par- 
 ticiple, 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 
 
syntax, [Letter 
 
 possess, a certain kind of knowledge, at the time when 
 he made his orations, because, at that time, he had 
 not, or did not possess, the advantage of having 
 perused, or having finished to peruse, the treatise of 
 Aristotle. Towards the close of the last sentence the 
 adverb, " at least, 11 is put in a wronsf place. The 
 Doctor means, doubtless, that the adverb should ap- 
 ply to considerable, and not to spoken ; but, from 
 its being improperly placed, it applies to the latter, 
 and not to the former. He means to say, that De- 
 mosthenes 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 error in the 
 use of the word " insight, 11 followed, as it is, by 
 " into, 11 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, 
 
 173. We have, here, a pretty good proof, that a 
 knowledge of the Greek and Latin is not sufficient to 
 prevent men from writing bad English. Here is a 
 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 incorrectly than 
 you will, I hope, be liable 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 
 brothers, in reading it through, marked a great num- 
 ber of erroneous passages, from amongst which I have 
 selected the passage just cited. With what propriety, 
 then, are the Greek and Latin languages called the 
 " learned languages ? " 
 
XVII.] AS RELATING TO PRONOUNS. 
 
 LETTER XVII. 
 
 SYNTAX, AS RELATING TO TRONOUNS. 
 
 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, 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 Doctor 
 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 any thing else. 
 Little words,~of great and sweeping influence, ought to 
 be used with the greatest care ; because errors in the 
 using of them make such great errors in point of 
 meaning. In order to impress, at the out-set, theses 
 precepts on your mind, I will give you an instance of 
 this kind of error from Addison ; and, what is well 
 calculated to heighten the interest you ought to feel 
 upon the occasion, is, that the sentence, which con-* 
 tains the error, is, by Doctor Blair, held forth to stu- 
 dents of languages, in the University of Edinburgh, as 
 a perfect model of correctness and of elegance. The 
 sentence is from Addison's Spectator, Number 411. 
 " There are, indeed, but very few, who know how 
 " to be idle and innocent, or have a relish of any 
 " pleasures that are not criminal ; every diversion 
 " they take, is at the expense of some one virtue 
 
syntax, [Letter 
 
 t€ or other, and their very first step out of business is 
 " into vice or folly/' Doctor Blair says: " Nothing 
 " can be more elegant, or more finely turned, than 
 " this sentence. It is neat, clear, and musical. We 
 u could hardly alter one word, or displace one mem- 
 u ber, without spoiling it. Few sentences are to be 
 46 found more finished, or more happy." See Blair's 
 20th Lecture on Rhetoric. 
 
 1 76T Now, then, my dear little James, let us see whe- 
 ther 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 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, ox stand 
 for } What noun is the nominative of the sentence ? 
 The nominative of the sentence is the word few, 
 jne&mng few persons. Very well, then, the pronoun, 
 they, relates to this nominative ; and the meaning of 
 the sentence is this : " that but few persons know 
 4i 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 
 4( the expense of some one virtue or other, and that 
 £( the very first step of these few persons out of bu- 
 U siness is into vice or folly." So that the sentence 
 jsays precisely the contrary of what the author meant ; 
 or, rather, the whole is perfect nonsense. All this 
 arises from the misuse of the pronoun, they. If, in- 
 stead 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 conse- 
 quence of being careless in the use of personal pro- 
 
XVIL] AS RELATING TO PRONOUNS. 
 
 nouns. It is from Judge Blackstone, Book If, 
 Chapter 6. " For, the custom of the manor has, in 
 " both cases, so far superseded the will of the Lord, 
 " that, provided the services be performed, or sti- 
 " pulated. for by fealty, he cannot, in the first in- 
 " stance, refuse to admit the heir of his tenant upon 
 " his death ; nor, in the second, can he remove his 
 l < present tenant so long as he lives." Here are lord, 
 heir, and tenant, all confounded. We m&y guess at 
 the Judge's meaning; but, we cannot say, that we 
 know what it is : we cannot say that we are certain 
 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 
 sentence, be found to relate to. There must be a 
 noun, expressed or understood, to which the pronoun 
 clearly relates, or you will not write sense. " The 
 " land-holder has been represented as a monster 
 " which must be hunted down, and the fund-holder 
 " as a still greater evil, and both have been described 
 " as rapacious creatures, who take from the people 
 " fifteenpence out of every quartern loaf. They have 
 u 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 no- 
 " thing short of that would avail them" This is 
 taken from the memorable report of a committee of 
 the House of Lords, in 1817, on which report the 
 cruel dungeon-bill was passed. Now, to what nouns 
 do these pronouns relate ? Who 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 £old, that the people must 
 go to the land j that nothing else would avail the 
 If % 
 
syntax; [Letter 
 
 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 have been, them, and not it. 
 
 180. When, however, the nouns take the disjunc- 
 tive conjunction, or, the pronoun must be in the singu- 
 lar : as, " When he shoots a partridge, a pheasant, 
 or a woodcock, he gives it away." 
 
 181. Nouns of numbers, or multitude, such as 
 Mob, 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 having sold a 
 " seat;" or, " it 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 ap- 
 plicable to the same noun, use the singular in one part 
 of the sentence 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 
 
XVIL] AS RELATING TO PRONOUNS. 
 
 " voted unanimously, that dear corn was an evil." 
 There are persons, who pretend to make very nice 
 distinctions as to the cases when these nouns of mul- 
 titude ought to take the singular, and when they 
 ought to take the plural, pronoun ; but these distinctions 
 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 j but not both in the same 
 sentence. 
 
 182. As to gender, it is hardly possible to make a 
 mistake. There are no terminations to denote gender, 
 except in the third person singular, he, she, or it. 
 We do, however, often personify things. 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 con- 
 sistent, and not call a thing he, or she, in one part of 
 a sentence, and it in another part. The occasions 
 when you ought to personify things, and when you 
 ought not, cannot be stated in any precise 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 denote sorts, or kinds, of living 
 creatures, and which do not of themselves distinguish 
 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 shot 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 correspondent nouns or pronouns : " John 
 
syntax, [Letter 
 
 *' and Thomas have been so foolish as to sell their 
 u land and to purchase what is called stock; but their 
 " sister, who has too much sense to depend on a bub- 
 <{ ble for her daily bread, has kept her land : theirs 
 u is gone for ever ; 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 re- 
 Cf gularly be paid to her ; and Richard will also enjoy 
 cc his income, which is to be paid to him by his sister." 
 If there be nouns of both genders used before pronouns, 
 care must be taken, that no confusion, or obscurity, 
 arise from the misuse of the pronoun. Hume says: 
 <( they declared it treason to attempt, imagine, or 
 <e 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 cases the noun should be 
 repeated. 
 
 185. Take care, in using the personal pronouns, 
 not to employ the objective case where you ought to 
 employ the 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 w r ords come in between the discordant parts, the 
 ear does not detect the error. " It was some of 
 " those, who came hither last night, and went away 
 €C this morning, who did the mischief, and not my 
 " brother and me." It ought to be u my brother 
 and /." For, I am not, in this instance, the object, 
 hut the actor, or supposed actor. <{ Who broke that 
 glass ? It was me" It ought to be i* ; that is to say, 
 " it was / who broke it." Fill up the sentence with 
 all the words that are understood 5 and if there be 
 errors, you will soon discover them. After the words 
 than and as, this error, of putting the objective for the 
 
XVII.] AS RELATING TO PRONOUNS. 
 
 nominative, is very frequently committed : as, (e John 
 <e 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: 
 u I give you more than him : I love you as well as 
 M him :" That is to say, I love you more than 2" 
 love him : I give you more than 7" give to him: I love 
 you as well as I love him. Take away him and put 
 he, in all these cases, and the grammar is just as 
 good, only the meaning is quite different. " 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 dis- 
 tinction 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 is to be your 
 sole guide. When the 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 
 confounding of cases, arise most frequently, when 
 the pronouns are placed, in the sentences, at a great 
 distance from the words which are connected with 
 them, and which determine the case. " He and his 
 <f 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 
 
syntax , {Letter 
 
 demands the objective case : say, the estate was given 
 to ke ; and then, you perceive the grossness of the 
 error in a moment. " The work of national ruin was 
 " pretty effectually carried on by the ministers; hut 
 " more effectually by the paper- money makers than 
 " they" This does not hurt the ear; but, it ought 
 to be them : u 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. " This 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 6\, Letter VI. Think well upon 
 what you find there; and, when you have done that, 
 proceed with me. This pronoun, 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 ivas your uncle iv ho came hither 
 last night," though the fact related be the same. 
 " It is I who write," is very different from " I write, 1 * 
 though, in both cases, my being writing is the fact 
 very clearly expressed, and is one and the same fact. 
 " It is those men, who deserve well of their country," 
 means a great deal more than, " Those men deserve 
 well of their country." The principal verbs are 
 the same : the prepositions are the same ; but the real 
 meaning is different. " It is the dews and showers 
 that make the grass grow," is very different from' 
 merely observing, that " Deivs 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 pro- 
 
XVII.] AS RELATING TO PRONOUNS. 
 
 nouns, after the it, thus used ; an opinion which arose 
 from the want of a little more reflection. The'it has 
 nothing to do, grammatically speaking, with the rest 
 of the sentence. The it, together with the verb to 
 be, express 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 pronouns 
 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 prin- 
 ciple being once in your mind, it will be ready to be 
 applied to every class of cases, and to every particular 
 case of each class. 
 
 191. For want of a reliance on principles, instead 
 of examples, how the latter have swelled in number, 
 and grammar-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 this sentence is this: " It being, or the 
 " state of things being such, that shame is lost, all 
 u 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 
 immediately follow, conform to the cases, which the 
 verbs and prepositions of the sentence demand. " It 
 " is them, and not the people whom I address myself 
 M to." " It was him, and not the other man, that 
 
 t5 
 
syntax, [Letter 
 
 I sought after" The prepositions, to and after, 
 demand an objective case ; and they have it in the 
 words whom and that. The pronouns which follow 
 the it and the verb to be, must always be in the 
 nominative case. 
 
 193. This it with its verb to be is sometimes em- 
 ployed with the preposition for, with singular force 
 and effect. " 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 
 u scorn all disguise, and to carry themselves 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 : u To the state of being, or state of things 
 " called guiltiness, to live in fear is fitting, or is 
 " appropriate" If you pay attention to the reason, 
 on which the use of these w r ords 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 con- 
 venient, 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 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 
 composition, where we might, with justice, insist on 
 correctness. This piece is on the subject of grammar ; 
 it is a piece written by a Doctor of Divinity, and 
 read by him to students in grammar and language in 
 nn academy ; and the very sentence that I am now 
 about to quote is selected by the author of a grammar) 
 
XVII.] AS RELATING TO PRONOUNS. 
 
 as testimony of high authority in favour of the ex- 
 cellence of his work. Surely, if correctness be ever 
 to be expected, it must be in a case like this. I 
 allude to two sentences in the " Charge of the Re- 
 " verend Doctor Abercrombie to the Senior 
 " Class of the Philadelphia Academy," published in 
 1806; which sentences have been selected and re- 
 published by Mr. Lindley Murray, as a testi- 
 monial of the merits of his Grammar; and which 
 sentences are, by Mr. Murray, given to us in the 
 following words : u The unwearied exertions of this 
 " gentleman have done more towards elucidating the 
 " obscurities, and embellishing the structure, of our 
 " language, than any other tvriter on the subject. 
 " Such a work has long been wanted ; and, from the 
 " success with which it is executed, cannot be too 
 " highly appreciated." 
 
 195. As, in the learned Doctor's opinion, obscuri- 
 ties can be elucidated, and, as, in the same opinion, 
 Mr. Murray is an able hand at this kind of work, it 
 would not be amiss were the grammarian to try his 
 skill upon this article 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 exertions have done more than 
 " any other writer :" for, mind you, it is not the 
 gentleman that has done any thing: it is " the 
 exertions that have done" what is said to be done. 
 The word gentleman is in the possessive case, and 
 has nothing to do with the action of the sentence. 
 
syntax, [Letter 
 
 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 ivriter" This is upon a level with u this 
 " gentleman's dog has killed more hares than any 
 " other sportsman." No doubt, Doctor Aber- 
 crombie meant to say: u the exertions of this gen- 
 " tleman 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 
 a manner of its execution, cannot be too highly com- 
 " mended." Meant ! No doubt at all of that ! And, 
 when we hear a Hampshire plough-boy say : " Poll 
 Cherrycheek have giv'd I thick handkecher," we 
 know very well that he means to say " Poll Cherry- 
 cheek 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 pre- 
 tensions to a knowledge of 'grammar, and he may be 
 very skilful as a plough-boy. However, we will not 
 laugh at Doctor Abercrombie, 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 certainly 
 does arise, when we see a professed grammarian, the 
 author of voluminous precepts and examples on the 
 subject 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 
 striking instance of the misuse of the word it serve you 
 in the way of caution. Never put an it upon paper 
 
XVII.] AS RELATING TO PRONOUNS. 
 
 without thinking 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 correct. We must say ; " the 
 country, the fertility of which." But, if we per- 
 sonify ; if, for instance, we call a nation a she, or 
 the sun a he, we must then, if we have need of re- 
 lative pronouns, take these, or the word that, which is 
 a relative applicable to rational as well as irrational 
 and even inanimate beings. 
 
 199. The errors which are most frequent, in the 
 use of these relatives pronouns, arise from not taking 
 care to use ivho 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 glaringly wrong to pass from our 
 pens to the paper. But, as in the case of personal 
 pronouns, when the relatives are placed, in the sen- 
 tence, 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 
 
syntax, [Letter 
 
 the office was given ; and, you see the error at once. 
 But, take care ! u Whom of all the men in the world, 
 " do you think teas chosen to be sent as an ambas- 
 " sador ? Whom for the sake of his numerous 
 " services had an office of honour bestowed upon 
 u him." These are nominative cases, and ought to 
 have who ; that is to say, " ivho ivas chosen ; who 
 had an office." I will not load you with numerous 
 examples. Read again about the nominative and 
 objective cases in Letter V. Apply your reason to 
 the subject. 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 em- 
 ploying whom which I must point out to your par- 
 ticular attention, because it is so often seen in very 
 good writers, and because it is very deceiving. " The 
 " duke of Argyle, than whom no man was more 
 " hearty in the cause. Cromwell, than whom no 
 " man was better skilled in artifice. " A hundred 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 common parliament- 
 house phrase, and, therefore, presumptively 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, de- 
 " scribed a pensioner as a slave of state, and having 
 " afterwards myself become a pensioner." 
 
 201. I differ, as to this matter, from Bishop Lowth, 
 
XVII.] AS RELATING TO PROKOUNs/ 
 
 who says, that " the relative who, having reference to 
 " no verb or preposition understood, but only to its 
 u antecedent, when it follows than, is always in the 
 " objective case ; even though the pronoun, if sub- 
 " stituted in its place, would be in the nominative." 
 And, then, he gives an instance from Milton. " Beel- 
 zebub, 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 who, or to its ante- 
 cedent. However, 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 example 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 a reason in the words, " having 
 reference to no 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 pronoun can 
 exist in a grammatical state without having reference 
 to some verb or preposition, either expressed or un- 
 derstood. What is meant by Milton? " Than Beel- 
 zebub 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 has reference to no verb, and no 
 preposition, is certainly a mistake. 
 
 202. That, as a relative, may, as we have seen, 
 
syntax, [Letter 
 
 be applied either to persons or things ; but it has no 
 possessive 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 in- 
 stances, when it can hardly be called proper to use 
 that instead of who, or whom. Thus ; directly after 
 a proper name, as in Hume : " The queen gave or- 
 *■? ders for taking into custody the Duke of Northum- 
 " berland, who fell on his knees to the Earl of 
 u Arundel, that arrested him." Who would have 
 been much better, though there was a who just before 
 in the sentence. In the same author : " Douglas, 
 " who had prepared his people, and that was bent 
 " upon taking his part openly." This never ought to 
 be, though we see it continually. Either may do ; 
 but both never ought to be relatives of the same ante- 
 cedent 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. " The 
 " Lords, who made the first false report, and the 
 " Commons, that seemed to vie with their Lordships 
 u in falsehood, became equally detested." That, 
 as a relative, cannot take the preposition or verb 
 immediately before it : as, " the man to whom I 
 gave a book ;" but I cannot say, " the man to 
 that I gave a book ;" nor " the knife to that I 
 put a handle." " Having defeated whom, he 
 remained quiet;" but, we cannot, in speaking of 
 persons, say, " having defeated that, he remained 
 quiet." 
 
 203. Which, as a relative pronoun, is applied to 
 irrational beings only, and, as to those beings, it may 
 be employed indifferently with that, except in the 
 cases, where the relative comes directly after a verb 
 
XVII.] AS RELATtNG TO PRONOUNS. 
 
 or a preposition in the manner just spoken of. We 
 say " the town, the hcrse, the tree, which ; or to 
 which ; n 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 iv ho or zohom, or of which, 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 cannot make use of both in the same sentence 
 and relating to 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 individuals 
 in our minds; and, therefore, we make use of who 
 and whom. " The assembly, who rejected the peti- 
 " tion, but, to whom another was immediately pre- 
 " sented." 
 
 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 ivhich:" as " give me what I 
 want." It may be used in the nominative and in the 
 objective case : " What happens to-day, may happen 
 " next week; but I know not to what we shall come 
 " at last :" or, " the thing which happens to-day, 
 " may happen next week; but I know not the thing 
 " which we shall come to at last." 
 
 206. Which, though, in other cases, it cannot be 
 employed as a relative with nouns which are the 
 
syntax, [Letter 
 
 names of rational beings, is, with Such nouns, em- 
 ployed in asking questions : as, " the tyrants allege, 
 i( that the petition was disrespectful. Which of the 
 " tyrants ? " Again : " one of the petitioners had his 
 head cleaved by tbe yeomanry. Which ? " That is 
 to say, " which of the petitioners was it ? " 
 
 207. What t when used in asking for a repetition 
 of what has been said : as, what ? means, " tell me 
 that which, or the thing which, you h'ave said." 
 This word is used, and with great force, in the way 
 of exclamation : " What ! rob us of our right of suf- 
 " frage, and, then, when we pray to have our right re- 
 " stored to us, shut us up in dungeons!" The full 
 meaning is this: " What do they do ? They rob us 
 of our right." 
 
 208. It is not, in general, advisable to crowd these 
 relatives together ; but it sometimes happens that it is 
 done. " Who, that has any sense, can believe such 
 " palpable falsehoods ? What, that can be invented, 
 " can disguise these falsehoods? By whom, that you 
 " ever 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 heard of before, were taken 
 " away by ignorance and stupidity ? 
 
 209. Whosoever, ivhosesoever, whomsoever, what- 
 soever, whichsoever, follow the rules applicable to the 
 original words. The so is an adverb, which, in its 
 general acceptation, means in like manner; and 
 ever, which is also an adverb, means, at any time, at 
 all times, or ahvays. These two words thus joined 
 in whosoever, mean, tvho, in any case that may be ; 
 and so of the other three words. We sometimes omit 
 the so, and say, whoever, whomever, whatever, and 
 even ivhosever. It is a mere abbreviation. The so is 
 
-XVII.] AS RELATING TO PRONOUNS. 
 
 understood ; and, it is best not to omit to write it. 
 Sometimes the soever is separated from the pronoun : 
 " What man soever he might be." But, the main 
 thing is, to understand 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 sub- 
 ject. They never change their endings, to denote 
 gender or case ; and the proper application of them is 
 so obvious, that it requires little to be said about it. 
 However, we shall hear more of these pronouns, when 
 we come to the syntax of verbs. One observation I 
 will make here, however, because it will serve to cau- 
 tion 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 regard for them, who are wise and 
 good ;" It ought to be, "for those who are wise and 
 good ;" because the word persons is understood : 
 " those persons who are wise and good:'' and it is 
 bad grammar to say, <( them persons who are wise 
 and good." But, observe, in another sense, this sen- 
 tence would be correct. If I be speaking of particu- 
 lar persons, and, if my object be to make you under- 
 stand, that they are ivise and good, and also, that / 
 love them ; then, I say very correctly, " I love them, 
 " who are wise and good." Thus: " The father has 
 " two children : he loves them, who are wise and 
 " good; and they love him, who is very indulgent/' 
 It is the meaning that must be your guide ; and rea- 
 son must tell you what is the meaning. " They, who 
 can write, save a great deal of bodily labour," is very 
 different from " Those who can write, save a great 
 
syntax, ' [Letter 
 
 deal of bodily labour." The those stands for those 
 persons ; that is to say, any persons, persons in ge- 
 neral, who can write ; whereas, the they, as here 
 used, relates to some particular persons ; and the sen- 
 tence means, that these particular persons are able to 
 "write, and, by that means, they save a great deal of 
 bodily labour. Doctor Blair, in his 21st Lecture, 
 has fallen into an error of this sort : thus, " These 
 " two paragraphs are extremely worthy of Mr. Addi- 
 " son, and exhibit a style which they, who can suc- 
 Cl cessfully imitate, may esteem themselves happy." 
 It ought to be those instead of they. But, this is 
 aot the only fault in this sentence. Why say " ex- 
 tremely worthy ? " Worthiness is a quality which 
 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 " esteem 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 convey your 
 meaning: say that a thing is quite worthy of a man ; 
 and that men may deem themselves happy. 
 
 211. The Indeterminate Pronouns have been 
 enumerated in Letter VI, paragraph 71. They are 
 sometimes adjectives, as is stated in that paragraph. 
 Whoever, Whatever, and Whichever (that is, w/to- 
 soever, whatsoever, whichsoever), though relatives, 
 are indeterminate too. But, indeed, it signifies little 
 how these words are classed. It is the use of them 
 that we ought to look to. Every, which I have 
 reckoned amongst these pronouns, is never, now-a- 
 days, used without a noun, and is, therefore, in fact, 
 
XVIL] AS RELATING ttf PRONOUNS. 
 
 an adjective. The error that is most frequently com- 
 mitted in using these pronouns is, the putting of 
 the plural verb, or plural pronoun, after nouns pre- 
 ceded 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 be in the singular : as, " every body 
 is disgusted;'' and not " every body are dis- 
 gusted." 
 
 212. Before you use any of these words, yon 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- 
 " haviour brutal, their merriment bluntly sarcastic, 
 " and their seriousness gloomy and suspicious." 
 Now these theirs certainly relate to every one, 
 though the author meant, without doubt, that 
 they should relate to the whole body of virtuosos r 
 including the every one. The word therefore, adds 
 to the confusion. The virtuosos were, therefore,. 
 fretful and waspish. What fori Was it because 
 every one saw his associates in a bad light ? How earn 
 my thinking meanly of others make their conversa- 
 tion fretful ? If the Doctor had said : " These vir- 
 tuosos looked on each other . ..." The meanings 
 would have been clear. 
 
 213. The pronoun either, which means owe of two y 
 is very often improperly employed. It is used to> 
 denote one of three or mQre 7 which is always incor* 
 
syntax, [Letter 
 
 rect. 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 answ T er 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 
 " present case, any one of them w r ould have been 
 « sufficient/ 7 , 
 
 214. In concluding this Letter on the Syntax of 
 Pronouns, I must observe, that I leave many of these 
 indeterminate pronouns unnoticed in a particular man- 
 ner. To notice every one individually could answer 
 no purpose except that of swelling the size of a book ; 
 a thing which I most anxiously wish to avoid. 
 
 LETTER XVIII. 
 
 SYNTAX, AS RELATING TO ADJECTIVES. 
 
 215. By this time, my dear James, you will hardly 
 want to be reminded of the nature of Adjectives. 
 However, it may not be amiss for you to read again 
 attentively the w T hole of Letter VII. 
 
 216. Adjectives, having no relative effect, con- 
 taining no representative quality, have not the dan- 
 gerous power, possessed by pronouns, of throwing 
 whole sentences into confusion, and of perverting or 
 totally destroying the writer'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 con- 
 gfuity ? or fitness, in the things, or qualities compared. , 
 
XVIII.] AS RELATING TO ADJECTIVES. 
 
 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 
 M 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 innocent, the rich, the poor, are mixed 
 u together." But, we cannot say, " a guilty," mean- 
 ing to use the word guilty as a noun. 
 
 219. If two or more Adjectives be used as appli- 
 cable to the same noun, there must be a comma, or 
 commas, to separate 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 
 Adjectives. One, which 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 endeavouring to strengthen the 
 Adjective by putting an adverb before it, and which 
 adverb conveys the notion, that the quality or pro- 
 perty expressed by the Adjective admits of degrees : 
 as, M very honest, extremely just" A man may 
 be wiser than another wise man, an act may be 
 more wicked than another wicked act ; but, a man 
 cannot be more honest than another : every man, 
 who is not honest, must be dishonest ; and every act 
 which 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 common than Qthersj but, that which is not 
 
syntax, [Letter 
 
 right is wrong ) and that which 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 
 u honest in a trifling degree ; that act was too just." 
 But, our ears are accustomed to the adverbs of ex- 
 aggeration. Some writers deal in these to a degree 
 that tires the ear and offends the understanding. With 
 them, every thing is excessively or immensely or ex- 
 tremely 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-sounding words, without thoughts cor- 
 responding, are effort without effect. 
 
 221. Care must be taken, too, not to use such 
 Adjectives as are improper to be applied to the nouns 
 along with which they are used. " Good virtues; 
 bad vices ; painful tooth-achs ; pleasing pleasures/' 
 These are staringly absurd ; but, amongst a select 
 society of empty heads, " moderate Reform" has 
 long been a fashionable expression ; an expression 
 which has been well criticised by asking the gentlemen 
 who 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 com- 
 mitting such errors, you have only to take care to 
 ascertain the full meaning of every word you employ. 
 
XlX.] AS RELATING TO VERBS. 
 
 LETTER XIX. 
 
 SYNTAX, AS RELATING TO VERBS. 
 
 223. Let us, my dear James, get well through 
 this Letter ; 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 
 call themselves Latin and Greek scholars, and who 
 dignify their having studied those languages with the 
 name of " Liberal Education" 
 
 224. There can be no sentence, there can be no 
 sense in words, unless there be a verb, either express- 
 ed or understood. Each of the other parts of speech 
 may, alternately, be dispensed with ; but the verb 
 never can. The verb being, then, of so much import- 
 ance, you will do well to read again, before you pro- 
 ceed further, paragraphs 23, 24, 25 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 meaning of the writer. There must, you 
 will bear in mind, always be a verb, expressed or 
 understood. One would think, that this was 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 Goldsmith, 
 4$ 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 follows the Sir, is complete ; but the 
 Sir appears to stand wholly without connexion. 
 
 o 
 
syntax, [Letter 
 
 However, the full meaning is this : " 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 } ff Again, in the date of a 
 letter: « Long Island, 25 March 1818." That is: 
 " / am now writing in Long Island ; this is the 
 " twenty-fifth day of March, and this month is in the 
 if one thousand eight hundred 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 confuse and bewilder and 
 torment those who read their books. 
 
 227. We almost always, whether in speaking or 
 in writing, leave out some of the words, which are 
 necessary to Kfull expression of our meaning. This 
 leaving out is called the Ellipsis. Ellipsis is, in geo- 
 metry, an oval figure ; and, the compasses, in the 
 tracing of the line of this figure, do not take their full 
 sweep all round, as in the tracing of a circle, but they 
 make skips and leave out parts of the area, or 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 
 " the gunsmith brought the other night." That is : 
 M He told to me, that he had given to John the gun, 
 " which the gunsmith brought to this place, or 
 " hither, on the other night." This would, you see, 
 be very cumbrous and disagreeable ; and, therefore, 
 
XIX.] AS RELATING TO VERBS. 
 
 seeing that the meaning is quite clear without the 
 words, marked by italicks, 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 leav- 
 ing the sentence too bare, and making it 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, 
 always, when you are examining a sentence, you will 
 take into your view the words that are left out. If 
 you have any doubt as to the correctness of the sen- 
 tence, fill it up by putting in the left-out words, and, 
 if there be an error, you will soon discover it. 
 
 229. Keeping in mind these remarks on the sub- 
 ject of understood words, you will now listen atten- 
 tively to me, while I endeavour to explain to you the 
 manner in which verbs ought to be used in sentences. 
 
 230. The first thing is, to come at a clear under- 
 standing with regard to the cases of nouns and pro- 
 nouns as connected, in use, with verbs and preposi- 
 tions; for, on this connexion, depends a great deal. 
 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. Nouns do not 
 vary their endings to denote different cases ; but pro- 
 nouns do ; as you have seen in Letter VI. There- 
 fore, to illustrate this matter, I will taks the pronoun 
 personal of the third person singular, which in the no- 
 minative case, is, he, possessive case, his, objective 
 case, him. 
 
 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 name case exists 
 
 g 2 
 
syntax, [Letter 
 
 when the man is the receiver or endurer, of an ac- 
 tion. " 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 difference in 
 these two latter instances ; for, " he is stricken/' is 
 no other than to say that " he is in a state, or condi- 
 tion, called stricken" 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 6e-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 Zand 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 this puzzler, let us 
 come back to our nominative case. The actor, the 
 doer, the receiver of an action, the be-er, must al- 
 ways be in the nominative case; and, it is called no- 
 minative case, because it is that state, or situation, or 
 case, in which the person, or thing, is named without 
 being pointed out as the object, or end, of any fore- 
 going action or purpose : as, " he strikes ; he is strick- 
 en ; 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 taken from the 
 Latin. It U bad \ it is inadequate to its intended pur* 
 
XIX.] AS RELATING TO VERBS. 
 
 pose ; but, it is used; and, if we understand its mean- 
 ing, or, rather, what it is designed to mean, its intrinsic 
 insufficiency is of no consequence. Thus, I hope, then, 
 that we know what the nominative is. " He writes; 
 " he sings ; he is sick j 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 per- 
 forms it, but also the person upon whom it is per- 
 formed. Here, therefore, we state the actor, the 
 action, and the object; and, the person or thing 
 which 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 in- 
 stead of he. 
 
 233. However, I remember, that I was very much 
 puzzled on account of these cases. I saw, that when 
 " Peter was smitten,' 1 Peter was in the nominative 
 case ; but, that, when any person or thing <c had 
 smitten Peter/' Peter was in the objective case. This 
 puzzled me much ; and the loose and imperfect de- 
 finitions 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 nominated, as the receiver of an action : and that, 
 in the latter instance, Peter is mentioned as the ob- 
 ject of the action of some other person or thing, ex- 
 pressed or understood. I perceived, that, in the first 
 
syntax, [Letter 
 
 instance, " Peter is smitten" I had a complete sense. 
 I was informed as to the person who had received an 
 action, and also as to what sort of action he had re- 
 ceived. 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 to the nominative, and put Peter in the ob- 
 jective 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 mentioned 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 used the pronoun, I 
 must say, u he is smitten by John ;" and nojt " 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 
 reconcile 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, <l ha 
 is smitten by John;" but my reason doubted the in- 
 formation and assurances of my ear. 
 
 236. At last, the little insignificant word, by, at- 
 tracted my attention. This word, in this place, is a 
 preposition. Ah ! That is it ! prepositions govern 
 nouns and pronouns : 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 smit- 
 ten by him." 
 
XIX.] AS RELATING TO VEIiBS* 
 
 237. Now, then, my dear James, do you clearly 
 understand 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 regard to the cases is one 
 of the main inlets to a perfect knowledge of grammar. 
 
 238. Verbs, of which there must be one at least, ex- 
 pressed or understood, in every sentence, must agree 
 in person and in number with the nouns or pronouns, 
 which are the nominatives of the sentence; that is to 
 say, the verbs must be of the same person and same 
 number as the nominatives are. Verbs frequently 
 change their forms and endings to make themselves 
 agree with their 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, thirdperson, 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." 
 
 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 country.' ' 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 the errors that are com- 
 
syntax, [Letter 
 
 mitted. " The intention of the act of parliament, and 
 " not its several 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 judgment. But, the noun, 
 intention, is the nominative to the verb, which, there- 
 fore, ought to be decides. Let us. take a sentence 
 still more deceiving. " Without the aid of a fraudu- 
 u lent paper money, the tyrants never could have per- 
 u formed any of those deeds, by which their safety 
 u have been endangered, and which 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 Peter." Watch me, now, in the next 
 sentence. " It must be observed, that land fell greatly 
 u in price as soon as the cheats began to draw in their 
 u paper money. In such cases the quantity and qua- 
 <e lity of the land is the same as it was before ; but, the 
 " price is reduced, all of a sudden, by a change in the 
 <f value and power of the money, which becomes very 
 u different from what it was." Here are two complete 
 sentences, which go very glibly off the tongue. There 
 is nothing in them that offends the ear. The first is, 
 indeed, correct ; but, the last is a mass of error. 
 Quantity and quality, which are the nominative in 
 the first member of the sentence, make, together, a ' 
 plural, and should have been followed, after the word 
 land, , by are and not by is; and, the it was, which 
 follows, should, of course, have been, they were. In 
 
XIX.] AS RELATING TO VERBS. 
 
 the second member of the sentence, value and pow6r 
 are the nominative of becomes, which, therefore, should 
 have been, become; and, then, again, there follows 
 an it tuas instead of they were. We are misled, 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 ; value and power becomes" But 
 when a singular noun comes in between such nomina- 
 tives and the verbs, we are very apt to be thinking of 
 that noun, and to commit error. When we once be- 
 gin, we keep on ; and, if the sentence be long, we get 
 together, at last, a fine collection of verbs and pronouns, 
 making as complete nonsense as heart can wish. 
 Judge Blackstone, 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 more 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 has served his country 
 " faithfully, is fairly entitled to a pension; but who 
 " will say, that a prostituted peer, a pimp, or a buf- 
 " foon, merits a similar provision from the public ? " 
 
 241. It sometimes happens, that there are, in the 
 nominative, two or more nouns, or pronouns, and that 
 
 g 5 
 
syntax, [Letter 
 
 they are in different numbers, or in different per* 
 sons: as, " The minister, or the Borough-tyrants" 
 These nouns cannot have the verb to agree with them 
 both. Therefore, if it be the conspiring of these 
 wretches against the liberties of the people, of which. 
 we have to speak, we cannot say, ll The minister, 
 or the Borough-tyrants, conspire)" because the verb 
 would then not agree in number with the noun, mi- 
 nister ; 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 conspires, 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 non- 
 sense. 
 
 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 
 nominatives of different numbers present themselves, 
 we must not give them a verb which disagrees with 
 either the one or the other. We must not say : 
 " Neither the halter ?wr the bayonets are sufficient 
 to prevent us from obtaining our rights." We must 
 avoid this bad grammar by using a different 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 
 different persons, these nouns and pronouns, though 
 they be all of the same number, cannot be the nomi- 
 native of one and the same verb. We cannot say, 
 " They or I am in fault; I, or they, or he, is the au- 
 
XIX.] AS RELATING TO VERBS. 
 
 thor 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 agree 
 with that person, which 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 any thing to chance or to discre- 
 tion, 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 sus- 
 pect, 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 principle and no rule of grammar. 
 244. The nominative is frequently a noun of mul- 
 titude ; as, mob, 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, to- 
 gether with ample illustrations in the way of example, 
 have been given you in Letter XVII, paragraph 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 not say: " the gang of borough- 
 
syntax, [Letter 
 
 " tyrants is cruel, and are also notoriously as igno- 
 " rant 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 stum- 
 bling 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 are here, the man 
 " who is here ; the cocks that crow, the cock that 
 " crows. J> 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 no- 
 " minative when no other nominative comes between 
 " it and the verb ;" and Mr. Murray has very faith- 
 fully copied this erroneous observation. " 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 relative and the verb ; and yet the verb is conti- 
 nually varrying. Why does it vary? Because it dis- 
 regards the relative and goes and finds the antecedent, 
 and accommodates its number to that antecedent. 
 The antecedents are, in these instances, understood ; 
 " What person isAO. the house ? What persons are 
 " in the house ? What person strikes the iron ? What 
 " persons strike the iron ? What person was in the 
 tc 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 
 
XIX.] AS RELATING TO VERBS. 
 
 " same person as the antecedent : and the verb agrees 
 " with it accordingly." Oh, oh ! But, the relative 
 is always the same, and is of any and of every num- 
 ber 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 cannot any more than it can with a 
 preposition ; for the relative has, like the preposition, 
 no changes to denote cases ; but, the danger is, that, 
 in certain instances, the relative may be taken for a 
 nominative, without your looking after the antecedent, 
 which is the real nominative, and that, thus, not hav- 
 ing the number and person of the antecedent clearly 
 in your mind, you may give to the verb a wrong 
 number or person. It is very seldom that those who 
 lay down erroneous rules furnish us with examples by 
 the 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 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 J is the nominative, and, in the 
 second, the noun general. The first means, " /, who 
 am the general here, give the orders to-day." The 
 second means, " The general, who gives the orders 
 to-day, is I." Nothing can more clearly show, that 
 the relative cannot be the nominative, and that, to 
 consider it as a nominative must lead to error and 
 confusion. You will observe, therefore, that, when 
 I, in the Etymology and Syntax as relating to relative 
 pronouns, speak of relatives as being in the nomina- 
 
synta^/ [Letter 
 
 live case, I mean, that they relate to nouns or to per- 
 sonal pronouns, which are in that case. The same 
 observation applies to the other cases. 
 
 246. We are sometimes embarrassed to fix pre- 
 cisely 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 deter- 
 mine, whether the Tyrant alone, is the nominative, 
 or whether the nominative includes 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 ac- 
 co?nplice; then we must use the plural of the verb. 
 " The Tyrant, with his Proclamation, 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 fla- 
 grant 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 ; 
 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 good- 
 ness of a leg of mutton and these vegetables taken all 
 together, we must use are. When with means along 
 with, together with, in company with, and the like, 
 it is nearly the same as and] and then the plural 
 
XIX.] AS RELATING TO VERBS. 
 
 verb must be used. " He, with his bare hand, takes 
 up hot iron." Not, " he, with his bare hand, take 
 up." " He, with bis 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 : 
 u 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 tbe nominatives. " The bag, with the guineas and 
 dollars in it, ~. ere stolen." For, if we say was stolen, 
 it is possible for us to mean, tbat the bag only was 
 stolen. " Sobriety, with great industry and talent, 
 enable a man to perform great deeds." And not 
 enables : 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. 
 
 247. The verb to be sometimes comes between two 
 nouns of different numbers. " The great evil is the 
 borough-debt." In this instance there is nothing to 
 embarrass us; because evil and borough debt are 
 both in the singular. But : " the great evil is the 
 taxes," is not so clear of embarrassment. The em- 
 barrassment is the same, when there is a singular 
 noun on one side and two or more singulars or plurals 
 on the other side : as, " the curse of the country is 
 
syntax, [Letter 
 
 u ike profligacy, the rapacity, the corruption of the 
 * law- makers, the base subserviency of the adminis- 
 *" trators of the law, and the frauds of the makers of 
 <c 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 puzzling. " The 
 evil is the taxes." That is, the taxes constitute the 
 cvai; but, we cannot say, " the evil are the taxes;" 
 aior 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 produced by. Dr. Blair, in his 19th 
 Lecture, says: " a feeble, a harsh, or an obscure 
 style, are always faults." The or rehired the sin- 
 gular verb is ; but faults required are. If he had 
 put is and faulty, there would have been no doubt of 
 iris 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, cannot well be called a defect, 
 which means a want of goodness in a part. Feeble- 
 ness, harshness, obscurity, are faults. But, to call the 
 style itself, to call the whole thing a fault, is more 
 than the Doctor meant. The style may be faulty, 
 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 
 must now see, constitutes the main spring and regu- 
 lator of every sentence, I will here point out to you 
 some instances, wherein there is used, apparently, 
 neither verb nor nominative. (< In general I dislike 
 to drink wine." This in general is no more, in fact, 
 than one word. It means generally* But, some- 
 
XIX.] AS RELATING TO VERBS. 
 
 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 understood, 
 and that there never can be a verb without a nomina- 
 tive case, expressed or understood. 
 
 249. Sometimes not only two or more nouns, or 
 pronouns, may be the nominative of a sentence ; but 
 many other words along with them may assist in 
 making a nominative : as, " Pitt, Rose, Steel, and 
 " their associates giving to Walter a sum of the 
 " public money, as a reward for libelling the sons of 
 " the king, was extremely profligate and base." That 
 is to say, this act of Pitt and his associates was ex- 
 tremely profligate and base. It is, when you come 
 to inquire, the act which 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 nomi- 
 native, and that it be clearly expressed or understood. 
 u The Attorney General, Gibbs, whose malignity in- 
 " duced him to be extremely 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 nominative, 
 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 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 
 
syntax, [Letter 
 
 which I could draw from Judge Blackstone and 
 Doctor Johnson, arises very often from a desire to 
 avoid a repetition of the noun or pronoun ; but, repe- 
 tition is always to be preferred before obscurity. 
 
 251. Now, my dear James, I hope that I have ex- 
 plained to you sufficiently, not only what the nomi- 
 native is, but what are its powers in every sentence ; 
 and that I have imprinted deeply on your mind the 
 necessity of keeping the nominative constantly in your 
 eyei For want of doing this, Judge Blackstone has, 
 in Book IV, Chap. 17, committed some most ludicrous 
 errors. " Our ancient Saxon laws nominally pu- 
 " nished 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 
 16 German ancestors ." What confusion is here ! 
 Whose ancestors ? Theirs. Who are they ? Why 
 the criminal. Theirs, if it relate to any thing, must 
 relate to Idws ; and then the laws have ancestors. 
 Then, what is it that was to be of above the value of 
 twelvepence? The death or the theft? By, tc if 
 above the value of twelvepence," the Judge without 
 doubt, meant, " if the thing stolen were above the 
 value of twelvepence ;" but he says no such thing j 
 and the meaning of the words is, if the death were 
 above the value of twelvepence. The sentence should 
 have stood thus : " Our ancient Saxon laws nomi- 
 " nally punished theft with death, if the thing stolen 
 " were above the value of twelvepence ; but the 
 " criminals were permitted to redeem their lives by a 
 ** pecuniary ransom ; as among their German ances- 
 " tors." I could quote, from the same author, hun- 
 dreds of examples of similar errors ; but, were there 
 only this one to be found in a work, which is com- 
 posed of matter, which was read, in the way of Lee- 
 
XIX.] AS RELATING TO VERBS. 
 
 tures, 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 I have given you relative to this part 
 of our subject. 
 
 252. As to the objective case it has nothing to da 
 with verbs ; because, a noun which is not in the 
 nominative must be in the objective ; and because 
 verbs do never vary their endings to make themselves 
 agree with the objective. This case has been suf- 
 ficiently explained under the head of personal pro*! 
 nouns, which have endings to denote it. 
 
 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. 
 11 The quality of the apples were good." No: it 
 must be was ; for quality is the nominative and 
 apples the possessive. " The want of learning, talent, 
 u 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 learning, 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 bewilder, confuse, and disgust the 
 
syntax, [Letter 
 
 learner* There can be but three times, the "present, 
 the past, and the future ; and, for the expressing of 
 these, our language provides us with words and ter- 
 minations the most suitable that can possibly be con- 
 ceived. In some languages, which 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 : 
 I will give you an example in order to explain this 
 matter, " The working men, every day, gave money 
 " to the tyrants, who, in return, gave the working 
 u men dungeons and axes." Now here is our word 
 gave, which is the passed 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. " Tousles jours 
 *' les ouvriers donnoient de Targentaux tyrans, qui, en 
 4< retour, donnerent aux ouvriers des cachots et des 
 ** haches." You see, that, in one place, our give is 
 translated by donnoient, and, in the other place, by 
 donnerent. One of these is called, in French, thepas* 
 imperfect, and the other, the past perfect. This 
 distinction is necessary in the French ; but similar 
 distinctions are wholly unnecessary in English. 
 
 256. In the Latin language, the verbs change their 
 endings 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 circum- 
 stances of time 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 various circumstances of time, or states of an 
 
XIX.] AS RELATING tO VERBS. 
 
 action ; but, such distinction of appellations can be 
 of no use to us, whose verbs never vary their endings, 
 to express time, except the single variation from the 
 present to the past; for, even as to the future, the 
 signs answer our purpose. In our compound times, 
 that is to say, such as, I 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 cannot, by 
 any possibility, be of any use in practice ? These 
 distinctions have been introduced from this cause : 
 those who have written English Grammars, have been 
 taught Latin ; and, either unable to divest them- 
 selves of their Latin rules, or unwilling to treat with 
 simplicity that, which, if made somewhat of a mystery > 
 would make them appear more learned than the 
 mass of the people, they have endeavoured to make 
 our simple language turn and twist itself so as to be- 
 come as complex in its principles as the Latin lan- 
 guage is. 
 
 258. There are, however, some fe,w 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 also at the conjugations 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 compound times. I need not 
 tell you, that / was working, means the same as 
 I worked, only that the former supposes that some- 
 thing 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 circumstance of action or 
 gf existence collateral with my working ; as, " I 
 
syntax, [Letter 
 
 " 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 ; I need not say, that I 
 do work is the same as, I work, only the former ex- 
 presses the action more positively, and adds some 
 degree of force to the assertion ; and that did ivork 
 is the same as worked, only the former is, jn 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 mis- 
 apply which words argues, not only a deficiency in 
 the reasoning faculties, but almost a deficiency in 
 instinctive discrimination. I will not, my dear 
 James, in imitation of the learned doctors, pester you 
 w T ith a philological 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 in- 
 stantly 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 princi- 
 pal 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 
 Doctor Blair could make a mistake in describing tn% 
 
XIX.l AS RELATING TO VERBS. 
 
 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 vulgarism, like, " I had as lief be killed as en- 
 slaved." 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 time, 
 simply, or the infinitive, of the verb ought to be used. 
 " Mr. Speaker, I expected, from the former language, 
 " and positive promises, of the Noble Lord and the 
 u Right Honourable 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 
 ploughed my land last Monday. 7 ' That is to say, 
 " I last Monday was in the act of expecting to have 
 ploughed 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 plough his land on that day. " I call- 
 " ed on him and wished to have submitted my manu- 
 (i script to him." Five hundred of 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 do something there, and did not then 
 wish that I had done something before. 
 
 260. When you use the active participle, take care 
 that the times be attended to, and that you do not, by 
 misapplication, make confusion and nonsense. " I 
 " had not the pleasure of hearing his sentiments, when 
 < * I wrote that letter." It should bo of having heard ; 
 
syntax, [Letter 
 
 because the hearing must be supposed to have been 
 wanted previous to the act of writing. This word 
 wanted, and the word ivanting, are frequently mis- 
 used. " All that was ivanting was honesty." It 
 should be wanted. " The Bank is weighed in the 
 balance and found wanting," and not wanted. Found 
 to be wanting, or in ivant : in want of money to pay 
 its notes. 
 
 261. I will not fatigue your memory with more 
 examples relating to the times of verbs. Consider 
 well what you mean ; what you wish to say. Ex- 
 amine well into the true meaning of your w r ords ; and 
 you will never make a mistake as to the times. u / 
 " thought to have heard the Noble Lord produce some- 
 u thing 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 Exchequer Bills." A phraseology 
 like this can be becoming only in those Houses, 
 where it was proposed to relieve the distresses of the 
 nation by setting the labourers to dig holes one day 
 and 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 participles are : you have seen, that 
 working is the active participle, and worked 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, in its origin, 
 
XIX.] AS RELATING TO VERBS. 
 
 differs from an active verb, in like manner as ^neuter 
 verb differs from an active verb. To sleep is neuter 
 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 expresses, as we have seen above, the action as 
 being received, or endured ; and it is called passive, 
 because, the receiver or endurer of the action is pas- 
 sive ; 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 ; because the past time and the passive parti- 
 ciple are written in the same manner : as " John 
 worked ; John is worked." But, when 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! y This is 
 gross. It offends the ear; but when a company, con- 
 sisting of men who have been enabled, by the favour 
 of the late William Pitt, to plunder and insult the 
 people, meet under the name of a Pitt Club, to cele- 
 brate the birth-day of that corrupt and cruel minister, 
 those who 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 I drank, were drunk by me. In the 
 lists of irregular verbs, in Letter VIII, the differences 
 between the past times and the passive participles are 
 all clearly shown. You often hear people say, and 
 see them write, "We have spoke; it was spole 
 
 H 
 
syntax, [Letter 
 
 in my hearing;" but, u we have came ; 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 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 tcished y 
 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. 
 
 2(15. 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 little 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, there- 
 fore, 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 Number of the 
 *' Spectator did not end, as it might very well have 
 * done, with the former beautiful period." That is 
 to say, " done it." 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 per- 
 
XIX.] AS RELATING TO VERBS. 
 
 form nothing: it was, by the Doctor, wished to have 
 ceased to proceed. " Did not end, as it very well 
 might have ended, . . . ." This would have been cor- 
 rect ; 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 Honourable Gentleman had explained 
 " the matter more fully." You constantly hear talk 
 like this amongst those whom the Boroughs make law- 
 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, or performed the act of feeling! 7 ' 
 What incomprehensible words ! Very becoming in the 
 creatures of corruption, but ridiculous in any other 
 persons in the world. 
 
 266. But do not misunderstand me. Do not con- 
 found do and did, as parts of a principal verb, with 
 the same words, as parts of an auxiliary. Read 
 again Letter VIII, paragraph 111. Do and did, as 
 helpers, are used with neuter 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 distinction 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 are negative, or interro- 
 
 h 2 
 
syntax, [Letter 
 
 gative, do and did express time: as, " You do not 
 sleep ; did 3^011 not feel ? v But they do not here sup- 
 ply the place of other verbs : they merely help ; and 
 their assistance is useful only as to the circumstance 
 of time ; for we may say : u you sleep not ; felt you 
 not?" And if, in answer to this question, I say, " I 
 did" the word feel is understood : u I did feel" 
 
 268. Well, then, I think, that as far as relates to 
 the active verb, the passive verb, and the passive par- 
 ticiple, enough has now been said. You have seen, 
 too, something of the difference between the functions 
 of the active verb and those of the neuter ; but, there 
 are a few remarks to be made with regard to the lat- 
 ter. A neuter verb cannot have a noun or 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. a I 
 walk my horse about," means, that I lead, or conduct 
 my horse in the pace called a walk. Nor, can a neu- 
 ter verb become passive ; because a passive verb is no 
 other than a verb describing an action received, or 
 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 en- 
 dured, 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 any thing. There are verbs which are 
 inactive : such as to sit, to sleep, to exist. These 
 are also neuter verbs, of course. But, inactivity is 
 
XIX.] AS RELATING TO VERBS. 
 
 not necessary to the making of a verb neuter. It is 
 sufficient, 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, writing : yet. any body might do it upon 
 the authority of Dr. Johnson : for he says, in his 
 Dictionary, that to elope is an active verb, though, 
 he says that it is synonymous with to run away, 
 which, in the same Dictionary, he says is a neuter 
 verb. However, let those who prefer Doctor Johnson's 
 authority to the dictates of reason and common sense, 
 say, that " his Grace eloped the Countess ; and, that, 
 " accordingly, the Countess ivas eloped" 
 
 270. The danger of error, in cases of this kind, 
 arises from the circumstance of there being many 
 verbs, which 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 cannot say the earth is endured 
 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 mouldered, the pitcher is 
 cracked ; though to grow, to rot, to crumble, to 
 moulder, 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 
 
syntax, [Letter 
 
 participle of the verb to go: it is merely an adjective, 
 meaning abseiit. If we put any word after it, which 
 gives it a verbal signification, it becomes erroneous. 
 " He found that the Countess was gone out of the 
 house. 11 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 dis- 
 cussed ; but, I have said quite enough on it to answer 
 every useful purpose. Here, as every where else, take 
 time to think. 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. 
 
 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, para- 
 graph 97, in Letter VIII, will have told you nearly 
 all that is necessary. We know well that, / am ivork- 
 ing, means that I work/ and so on. There is great 
 nicety in distinguishing the circumstances which call 
 for the use of the one from those which call for the 
 use of the other: but, like many other things, though 
 very difficult to explain by words, these circumstances 
 are perfectly well understood, and scrupulously at- 
 tended to, by even the most illiterate persons. The 
 active participle is, you know, sometimes a noun in 
 its functions : as, " working is good for our health." 
 Here it is the nominative case to the verb is. Some- 
 times it is an adjective, as, " the working people." As 
 a noun it maybe in any of the three cases : as, working 
 is good ; the advantage of working ; I like working." 
 It may be in the singular, or in the plural : " The 
 
XIX.] AS RELATING TO VERBS. 
 
 working of the mines : the workings of corruption/* 
 Of course it requires articles and ])repositions 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. Head 
 those paragraphs again. The infinitive mode has, 
 in almost all respects, the powers of a noun. " To 
 work is good for our health." Here it is the nomina- 
 tive of the sentence. " To eat, to drink, and to sleep, 
 are necessary." It cannot become a plural ; but it 
 may be, and frequently is, in the objective case ; as, 
 " i" want to eat." The to is, in some few cases, 
 omitted, when the infinitive is in the objective case ; 
 as, * / dare write." 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 
 /o, if you thereby make the meaning doubtful. Re- 
 petition 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 con- 
 jugation of the verb to work in Letter VIII, you will 
 see that I have there set down the three other Modes 
 with all their persons, numbers, and times. The Im- 
 perative Mode I dispatched very quietly by a single 
 short paragraph ; and, indeed, 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 Mode. The Indica- 
 tive Mode is that manner of using the verb which is 
 
syntax, [Letter 
 
 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 conse- 
 quence dependent on this working and riding; and, 
 in that case, these verbs must be in the subjunctive 
 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 verbs here ; and the 
 true cause is this, that there is a sign understood. If 
 filled up, the sentence would stand thus : " if he 
 should ivork ; if he should ride out." So that, after 
 all, the verb has, in reality, no change of termination 
 to denote what is called mode. And all the fuss, 
 which Grammarians have made about the potential 
 modes and other fanciful distinctions of the kind, only 
 serve to puzzle and perplex the learner. 
 
 275. Verbs in general, and, indeed, all the verbs, 
 except the verb to be, have always the same form in 
 the present time of the indicative and in that of 
 the subjunctive, in all the persons, save the second 
 and third persons singular. Thus we say, in the pre- 
 sent 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 may est 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 any thing can happen to render any 
 distinction of mode necessary. But, the verb to be 
 
XIX.] AS RELATING TO VERBS. 
 
 has more of 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 singular : as, to have, to write, to 
 work, to run ; I have, I write, I work, I run. But, 
 the verb to be, becomes in its present time of the indica- 
 tive ; I am, thou art, he is, we are, you are, they 
 are ; which are great changes. Therefore, as the 
 subjunctive, 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 subjunc- 
 tive 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, the 
 verb to be, has a form, in some of its persons, appro- 
 priated to the subjunctive mode. This is a matter of 
 consequence. Distinctions, without differences in the 
 things distinguished, are fanciful, and, at best, useless. 
 Here is a real difference; a practical difference ; a differ- 
 ence in tl»:e 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. Tf 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 indicative 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, 
 ii 5 
 
syntax, [Letter 
 
 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 follow these con- 
 junctions are not always in the subjunctive mode ; 
 and, the using of that mode must depend, not upon 
 the conjunction, but upon the sense of the whole 
 sentence. How, then, can the conjunctions govern 
 the verb ? It is the sense, the meaning of the whole 
 sentence, which must govern : and of this you will 
 presently see clear proof. " If it be dark, do not 
 " come home, If eating is necessary to man, he 
 6 ' ought not to be a glutton/' In the first of these 
 sentences, 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 : " If it should be dark, do not come home." 
 But, in the second sentence, there exists no such un- 
 certainty. 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 
 w r hich 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 w r e make use of the modes indis- 
 criminately. Let us take an instance. " Though 
 " her chastity be right and becoming, it gives her no 
 
XIX.] AS RELATING TO VERBS. 
 
 M claim to praise; because she would be criminal, if 
 " she were not chaste." Now, by employing the 
 subjunctive in the first member of the sentence, we 
 leave it uncertain whether it be tight 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, notwith- 
 standing here are a though and an if, both the verbs 
 ought to be in the indicative. " Though her chas- 
 " tity is right and becoming, it gives her no claim to 
 " praise ; because, she would be criminal, zyshe was 
 " not chaste." Fill up with the signs. M Though her 
 chastity may be right ; if she should not be chaste z" 
 and, then, you see, at once, what a difference there is 
 in the meaning. 
 
 279. The subjunctive is necessarily always used 
 w T here 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 : 
 ei Were he 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. It were to violate every 
 M principle of morality to consider honesty as a virtue, 
 " when not to be honest is a crime which the law 
 (t punishes." The it stands for a great deal here. " Ri- 
 " diculous, 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, because they appear unac- 
 
syntax. [Letter XIX. 
 
 countable: and, I never like to slur things over. 
 Those expressions, for the using of which we cannot 
 give a reason, ought not 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 Black- 
 stone 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 gavel- 
 " kind, where all the sons inherit equally ; yet, 
 " upon the king's demise, his eldest son shall succeed 
 u to these lands alone!* Here is fine confusion, not 
 to say something inclining towards 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 pur- 
 chase lands in gavelkind, nor any other lands ; 
 whereas, from the form of the verb, it is taken for 
 granted, that he does it. It should hare 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. Every part of the Letter ought to be carefully 
 read, and its meaning ought to be well weighed in 
 your mind ; but, always recollect, that, in the using 
 of verbs, that which requires your first and most ear- 
 nest care, is the ascertaining of the nominative of 
 the sentence ; for, out of every hundred grammatical 
 errors, full fifty, I believe, are committed for want of 
 due attention as to this matter. 
 
LETTER XX. 
 
 SYNTAX, AS RELATING TO ADVERBS, PREPO- 
 SITIONS, 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 Conjunc- 
 tions are all words, which 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 is yet to come, and which will con- 
 tain 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 an elaborate account of that which it is, 
 by this time, hardly possible for you not to understand. 
 
 284. Some grammarians have given lists of ad- 
 verbs, prepositions, and conjunctions. For what 
 reason I know not, seeing that they have not attempt- 
 ed to give lists of the words of other parts of speech. 
 These lists must be defective, 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 connexion between words, 
 and the manner of using words properly. The sole 
 cause of this dwelling upon these parts of speech ap- 
 pears 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 per- 
 sons will think, that, because we descant very fre- 
 quently, 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. 
 
syntax. [Letter 
 
 285. I omitted in the Letter on verbs, to notice the 
 use of the word thing ; and I am not sorry that I did, 
 because, by my noticing it in this concluding para- 
 graph, the matter may make a deeper impression on 
 your mind. Thing is, of course, a nou\i. A pen is 
 a thing, and every animal, or creature, animate or 
 inanimate, is a thing. We apply it to the represent- 
 ing of every creature in the universe, except to men, 
 women, and children; and a creature is that which 
 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 crea- 
 ture. 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 infinitive mode, 
 has, in almost all respects, the functions and powers of 
 a noun. " It was a most atrocious thing to uphold 
 " the Bank of England in refusing to give gold for 
 " its promissory notes, and to compel the nation to 
 " submit to the wrong that it sustained from that re- 
 " fusal." The meaning is, that the whole of these 
 measures, or transactions, constituted a most atrocious 
 deed or thing. 
 
 LETTER XXI. 
 
 specimens of false grammar, taken from 
 the writings of doctor johnson and from 
 those of doctor watts. 
 
 My Dear James, 
 The chief object of this Letter is to prove to you 
 the necessity of using great care and caution in the 
 construction of your sentences. When you see writers 
 
XXL] SPECIMENS OF .FALSE GRAMMAR. 
 
 like Doctor Johnson and Doctor Watts committing 
 grammatical errors, and, in some instances, making 
 their words amount to nonsense, or, at least, making 
 their meaning doubtful : when you see this in the 
 author of a grammar and of a dictionary of the English 
 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 ever 
 produced, you cannot fail to be convinced, that con- 
 stant care and caution are necessary to prevent you 
 from committing not only similar, but much greater, 
 errors. 
 
 Another object, in the producing of these speci* 
 mens, 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, " the learned 
 languages ;" and those who 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, or possessed of knowledge. Learning is, 
 then, to be acquired by conception ; and, it 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- 
 stance, written in Welsh, or in the language of the 
 Chipewaw Savages, is more learned than bad gram- 
 mar written in Greek. The learning is in the mind 
 and not on 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 which are compositions discovering, in 
 every sentence, ignorance the most profound, were 
 written in Latin, should we then call them learned 7 . 
 
SPECIMENS OF FALSE GRAMMAR. [Letter 
 
 Should we say, that the mere change of the words from 
 one tongue into another, made that learned which was 
 before unlearned ? As well may we say, that a false- 
 hood written in English would have been truth if written 
 in Latin ; and as well may we say, that a certain hand- 
 writing is a learned handwriting, or, that certain 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 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 or dependants of the Aristocracy. In order 
 to give a colour of reasonableness to this species of 
 appropriation, the languages taught by the possess- 
 ors are called " the learned languages ;" and, 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 appellation, like many others, is a trick which 
 fraud has furnished for the purpose of guarding the 
 6nug possessors of the property against the conse- 
 quences of the people's understanding the matter. 
 
 It is curious enough, that this appellation of 
 " learned languages " is confined to the English nation, 
 and the American, 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 re- 
 sort to this species of imposition. But, in England, 
 
XXL] SPECIMENS OF FALSE GRAMMAR. 
 
 •the thing required to be glossed over. There was 
 something or other required in that country as an apo- 
 logy 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 lan- 
 guages" than others, the impostors and their dupes tell 
 us, that this is not what they mean. They mean, 
 they say, not that those languages are, in themselves, 
 more learned than others ; but that, to possess a know- 
 ledge of them is a proof that the possessor 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 gram- 
 matical errors when they write in their native language. 
 
 I have, for this purpose, fixed upon the writings of 
 Doctor Johnson and of Doctor Watts ; because, 
 besides its being 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, respectively, the 
 most celebrated : the Rambler of Doctor Johnson 
 and the Logic of Doctor Watts. These are works of 
 very great learning. The Rambler, though its ge^ 
 neral 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 benevolent author, has led him into the 
 very great error of taking his examples of self-evident 
 propositions from amongst those, many of which, 
 great numbers of men think not to be self-evident, is a 
 
SPECIMENS OF FALSE GRAMMAR. [Letter 
 
 work wherein profound learning is conveyed in a style 
 the most simple and in a manner the most pleasing. 
 It is impossible to believe that the Logic was not re- 
 vised with great care ; and, as to the Rambler, 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 Number, 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 a day in viewing a seat 
 and gardens. 11 — R. No. 34. 
 
 " For all our speculative acquaintance with 
 " things should be made subservient to our better 
 " conduct in the civil and religious life."" — L. Intro- 
 duction. 
 
 The indefinite Article, a, cannot, you know, be put 
 before a plural noun. We cannot 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 general and indefinite in 
 the second extract The article, therefore, was un- 
 necessary, and is improperly used. Look back at the 
 use of Articles, Letter IV. 
 
 NOUNS. 
 
 u Among the innumerable historical authors, tvho 
 " fill every nation with accounts of their ancestors, 
 
XXL] SPECIMENS OF FALSE GRAMMAR. 
 
 " or undertake to transmit to futurity the events of 
 " their own time, the greater part, when fashion and 
 " novelty have ceased to recommend them, are of no 
 " other use than chronological memorials, Which 
 " necessity may sometimes require to be consulted." 
 — R. No. 122. 
 
 This is all confusion. Whose ancestors ? The ?ia- 
 tions 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 con- 
 fusion 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 ivork ; 
 yet, in a case like this, where we are speaking of the 
 authors as actors, we cannot take such a liberty. 
 
 " Each of these classes of the human race has 
 11 desires, fears, and conversation, peculiar to itself; 
 " cares which another cannot feel, and pleasures 
 " which he cannot partake. * — R. No. 160. 
 
 The noun of multitude, classes, being preceded 
 by each, 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, 
 " therefore, spent whole days in the woods, pursuing 
 " game, w 7 hich, 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, cannot 
 have a plural pronoun to stand for it. 
 
SPECIMENS OF FALSE GRAMMAR. [Letter 
 
 " The obvious duties of piety towards God and 
 " love towards 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, 
 
 " 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 relates to opinion. It should have been " the 
 opinion of the lady, for w T hose use." See Syntax 
 of Nouns, Letter XV l > paragraphs 170 and 171. 
 
 PRONOUNS. 
 
 " Had the opinion of my censurers been unani- 
 <f mous, 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 the 
 sentence, the censurers in his eye, and he forgets his 
 nominative, 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, 
 11 will generally find the sharpest pains, and most 
 
XXL] SPECIMENS OF FALSE GRAMMAR. 
 
 " stubborn maladies, among them whom confidence 
 " in the force of nature formerly betrayed to ne- 
 " gligence or irregularity; and that superfluity of 
 " strength, which was at once their boast and their 
 u snare, has often, in the end, no other effect, than 
 " that it continues them long in impotence and an- 
 " guish."-R. No. 38. 
 
 The They and the first them ought to 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, re- 
 " commended by her mother, who taught her all the 
 u arts of domestic management, and was, on every 
 " occasion, her chief agent and directress. They 
 u soon invented one reason or other to quarrel with 
 " all my servants, and either prevailed on me to turn 
 " them away, or treated them so ill, that they left me 
 " of themselves, and always supplied their places 
 ei 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 mother, was it that 
 taught the arts of 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 supplied the places 
 of the servants ? The meaning of the zvords clearly 
 is, that the servants themselves supplied the places. 
 It is very rarely that we meet with so bad a sentence 
 as this. 
 
 " I shall not trouble you with a history of the 
 u stratagems practised upon my judgment, or the 
 " allurements tried upon my heart, which, if you 
 " have, in any part of your life, been acquainted 
 
SPECIMENS OF FALSE GRAMMAR. [Letter 
 
 " with ruralpolitichs, you will easily conceive. Their 
 " arts have no great g variety, they think nothing 
 " worth their car el but money. — R. No. 35. 
 
 " Their arts :" but whose arts ? There is no ante- 
 cedent, except " rural politicks ;" 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: y —K. No. 4. 
 
 An author cannot be said to fear not to be ap- 
 proved as just copiers. The w T ord author ought to 
 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 
 ei man to think he instructs him." — R. No. 188. 
 
 Which of the two is allowed ? The scholar, or the 
 no man 7 . Which of the two does he relate to? Which 
 of the two does the him relate to ? By a little reflec- 
 tion we may come at the Doctor's meaning ; but, if 
 w^e may stop to discover the grammatical meaning of 
 an author's words, how are we to imbibe the science 
 which he would teach us ? 
 
 " The state of the possessor of humble virtues, to 
 " the affecter of great excellences, is that of a small 
 " cottage of stone, to the palace raised with ice by 
 u the empress of Russia : it was, for a time, splendid 
 " and luminous, but the first sunshine melted it to 
 " nothing/'— R. No. 21. 
 
 Which, instead of it, would have made clear that 
 which 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 have been most en- 
 
XXI/] SPECIMENS OF FALSE GRAMMAR. 
 
 <{ larged by knowledge, or elevated by genius. Those 
 " who enjoyed every thing 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 every 
 thing ? The Doctor means happiness, but his words 
 do not mean it. 
 
 ie Yet there is a certain race of men, that make it 
 (i their duty to hinder the reception of every work of 
 " learning or genius, ivho stand as sentinels in the 
 " avenues of fame, and value themselves upon giving 
 " ignorance and envy the first notice oiaprey" — 
 R. No. 3. 
 
 That, or who, may, as we have seen, be the re- 
 lative of a noun, which is the name of a rational 
 being or beings ; but both cannot be used, as appli- 
 cable 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 impressed deformity and horror, there, was 
 " none whom 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, the author is speaking of such crea- 
 tures only. " Horror " is not a thing that can be im- 
 pressed upon another thing so as to be seen. Horror 
 is a feeling of the mind', for, though we say, "hor- 
 ror was visible on his countenance" we clearly 
 mean, that, the outward signs of horror were visible. 
 We cannot see horror as we can deformity. It 
 should have been " deformity and hideousncss." 
 
SPECIMENS OF FALSE GRAMMAR. [Letter 
 
 " To cull from the mass of mankind those indivi- 
 " duals, upon which the attention ought to be most 
 " employed.'' — R. No. 4. 
 
 The antecedent belongs to rational beings, and, 
 therefore, the which should have been whom. 
 
 " This determination led me to Metissa, the daugh- 
 " ter of Chrysophilus, 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. 
 
 " To persuade them who are entering the world, 
 u that all are equally vicious, is not to awaken judg- 
 « ment."— R. No. 119. 
 
 Those per sons, who are entering the world, and not 
 any particular persons of whom we have already 
 been speaking. We cannot say, them persons ; and, 
 therefore, this sentence is incorrect. 
 
 " Of these pretenders it is fit to distinguish those 
 " who endeavour to deceive from them who are de- 
 " ceived."— R. No. 189. 
 
 " I have, therefore, given a place to what may not 
 " be useless to them whose chief ambition is to 
 " please."— R. No. 34. 
 
 The thems in these two sentences should be those. 
 But, them who are deceived has another sort of error 
 attached to it, for the who, remember, is not, of itself, 
 ^.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. 
 
 u 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. 
 Therefore, it would have been better to say, " Reason 
 
XXI.] SPECIMENS OF FALSE Oil A MM AH. 
 
 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 gene- 
 ral, and the concerns mean, the concerns common to 
 men in general ; and, therefore, the article the should 
 have been used instead of the pronoun his. 
 
 " It gives pain to the mind and memory, and ex- 
 " poses the unskilful hearer to mingle the superior 
 " and inferior particulars together; it leads them into 
 " a thick wood instead of open day-light, 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 
 not quite free from fault. Labyrinth is the opposite 
 of plain path, but open day-light is not the opposite 
 of a thick ivood. Open plain would have been better 
 than open day-light ; for open day-light may exist 
 along with a thick wood. 
 
 VERBS. 
 
 " There are many things which we every day see 
 " others unable to perform, and, perhaps, have even 
 " miscarried ourselves in attempting ; and yet can 
 " hardly alloio to be difficult." — R. No. 122. 
 
 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 calledy will betray him into crimes." — R. 
 No. 8. 
 
 i 
 
SPECIMENS OF FALSE GRAMMAR. [Letter 
 
 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 
 cannot refrain from just remarking upon this sen- 
 tence, that it contains the sum total of passive obe- 
 dience and non-resistance. It condemns all disin- 
 terested zeal and every thing 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 pro- 
 " mise."— R. No. 1. 
 
 " The muses, wh?n they sung before the throne of 
 Jupiter."— R. No. 3. 
 
 In the first of these, the passed time is used where 
 the passive participle ought to have been used ; and 
 in the second, the passive participle is used in place 
 of the passive time. Broken and sang were die pro- 
 per words. 
 
 " My purpose teas, after ten months more spent in 
 " commerce, to have withdrawn my wealth to a safer 
 " country."— R. No. 120. 
 
 The purpose was present, and therefore it was his 
 purpose 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 enjoy- 
 iC ed in praise, he must suffer in reproach. 17 — R. 
 No. 20. 
 
 Here is a complete confounding of times. Instead 
 of should, it should be ought to ; and instead of en- 
 joyed, it should be, may have enjoyed. The sense 
 is bad too ; for, how can a man suffer in reproach 
 what he has enjoyed in praise? 
 
 " He had taught himself to think riches more 
 
XXI.] SPECIMENS OF FALSE GRAMMAR. 
 
 " valuable than nature designed them, and to expect 
 " from them "— R. No. 120. 
 
 " I could prudently adventure an inseparable 
 union. 1 ' — R. No. 119. 
 
 " I propose to endeavour the entertainment of my 
 countrymen." — R. No. I. 
 
 M He may, by attending the remarks, which every 
 paper will produce." — R. No. 1. 
 
 In each of these four sentences, a neuter verb has 
 the powers of an active verb giyen to it. " Designed 
 " them to be ; adventure on - 7 endeavour 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 endeavour can 
 be active verbs ; but, at any rate, they ought not to 
 have assumed the active office here. 
 
 " / ivas not condemned in my youth to solitude, 
 " either by indigence or deformity, nor passed the 
 " earlier part of life without the flattery of court- 
 « ship."—- R. No. 119. 
 
 The verb cannot change from a neuter to an active 
 without a repetition of the nominative. It should have 
 been, nor did I pass ; or, nor passed I. 
 
 " Antiiea was content to call a coach, and cross- 
 ed the brook."— R. No. 34. 
 
 It should be " she crossed the brook." 
 
 u He will be welcomed with ardour, unless h& 
 destroys those recommendations by his faults." — R. 
 No. 160. 
 
 " If. he thinks his own judgment not sufficiently 
 enlightened, he may rectify his opinions." — R. No. 1. 
 
 " If he finds, with all his industry, and all his 
 " artifices, that he cannot deserve regard, or can- 
 " not obtain it, he may let the design fall." — R, 
 No. 1. 
 
 l2 
 
SPECIMENS OF FALSE GRAMMAR, [Letter 
 
 The subjunctive mode ought to be used in all these 
 three sentences. In the first, the meaning is, " un- 
 less 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 hejfind" 
 
 ''Follow solid argument wherever it leads you." — 
 L. Part 3. 
 
 Wherever it may lead you, or 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 
 " descriptions, 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 evident : see that your prim- 
 " ciples 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 Subjunctive, 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 subjunctive form. 
 
 PARTICIPLES. 
 
 t( Or, it is the drawing a conclusion, which was 
 before either unknown, or dark."-— L. Introduction. 
 
 It should be, " the drawing q/a conclusion;" for, 
 in this case, the active participle becomes a noun. 
 " The act of drawing" is meant, and clearly under- 
 stood ; and we cannot say, " the act drawing a con- 
 clusion." When the article comes before,, there must 
 
XXI.] SPECIMENS OF FALSE GRAMMAR. 
 
 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 
 his words mean. He means that u thoughts are 
 " criminal, only ivhen they are first chosen and then 
 " voluntarily 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 i 
 how that is possible : and also, how we can continue 
 a thought, or how we can discontinue a thought a5 
 our iv ill. The science here is so very profound that 
 we cannot see the bottom of it. Swift says, " what- 
 " ever 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 hoiv some criticks have been pacified 
 " with claret and a supper, and others laid asleep 
 " with the soft notes of flattery." — R. No. I. 
 
 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 Criticks 
 were pacified. The how, therefore, should have been 
 that. 
 
SPECIMENS OF FALSE GRAMMAR. [Letter 
 
 " I hope not much to tire those whom I shall not 
 happen to please." — II. No. I. 
 
 He did not mean that he did not much hope, hut 
 that he hoped not to tire much. " I hope I shall not 
 much tire those whom I may not happen to please." 
 This* was what he meant ; but he does not say it. 
 
 " And it is a good judgment alone 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 longi- 
 tudinal space, introduces a rhetorical figure ; for 
 the plain meaning is, that judgment will dictate hoio 
 much to write on it, and not how far to -proceed i?i 
 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, u 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 
 w r atch, 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 number of persons, or multl- 
 " tude of circumstances concurring to bear witness to 
 «■ it."—L. Part 3. 
 
XXL] SPECIMENS OF FALSE GRAMMAR. 
 
 The Adverb, here, is wholly unnecessary, and it 
 does harm. But, what shall we say of the of it and 
 the to it? What is the antecedent of the it? Is 
 matters of fact the antecedent? Then the?n, and not 
 it, should have been the pronoun. Is evidence the 
 antecedent? Then we have circumstances bearing 
 witness to evidence! Is certainty the antecedent? 
 Then we have the truth of certainty I 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 
 " raillery 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. 
 
 " When I was deliberating to what new qualifica- 
 tions I should aspire." — R. No. 123. 
 
 " With regard to, it ought to have been; for, we 
 cannot deliberate a tiling, nor to a thing, 
 
 " If I am not commended for the beauty of my 
 " works, I may hope to be pardoned for their brevity." 
 — R. No. 1. 
 
 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 was 
 what the Doctor meant ; but this would have marred 
 
SPECIMENS OF FALSE GRAMMAR, [Letter 
 
 a little the antithesis: it would have unsettled a 
 little tire balance of that see-saw, in which Dr. 
 Johnson so much delighted, and which, falling into 
 the hands of novel-writers and of Members of Par- 
 liament, has, by moving unencumbered with any of 
 the Doctor's reason or sense, lulled so many thousands 
 asleep ! Doctor 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 speaks, or writes it, has been reading 
 Doctor Johnson or some of his imitators. But, ob- 
 serve, these imitators go no further than the frame 
 of the sentences. They, in general, take special 
 care not to imitate the Doctor in knowledge and rea- 
 soning, 
 
 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 
 tirst is an error of commission, the second, of omission. 
 
 16 W T hen w r e would prove the importance of any 
 i{ scriptural 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 
 4< matter of greater importance than other things 
 " which are but slightly or singly mentioned in the 
 " Bible."— L. Part 3. 
 
 The words repeated and inculcated both apply to 
 upon ; but we cannot repeat a thing upon a reader, 
 and the words, here used, mean this. When several 
 verbs, or participles, are joined together by a copula- 
 tive conjunction, care must be taken that the act 
 described by each verb, or participle, be such as can 
 be performed by the agent, and, performed too, in the 
 
XXL] SPECIMENS OF FALSE GRAMMAR. 
 
 manner, or for the purpose, or on the object, desig- 
 nated by the other words of the sentence. 
 
 The other instance of error in the use of the 
 Preposition occurs on the xery first sentence in the 
 treatise on Logic. 
 
 " Logic is the art of using reason well in our 
 " enquiries 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 enquiries after 
 " truth, and is 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 enquiries after truth, and in the communi- 
 " cation of it to others ;" but, surely, in a case like 
 this, no room for doubt or for hesitation ought to 
 have been left. Nor is " using reason well" a well- 
 chosen phrase. It may mean treating it well : not 
 ill-treating it. " Using reason properly, or ewi- 
 " ploying reason well," would have been better. For, 
 observe, Doctor Watts is here giving 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, every where desirable, was here 
 absolutely necessary. 
 
 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, therefore, thought those writers 
 " friends to human happiness, who endeavour to 
 " excite in either sex a general contempt or suspicion 
 " of the other."— R. No. 149. 
 i 5 
 
SPECIMENS Oi' FALSE GRAMMAR. [Letter 
 
 The as is unnecessary ; or the therefore is un- 
 necessary. 
 
 " But the happy historian has no other labour than 
 11 of gathering what tradition pours down before 
 "him'."— R. No. 122. 
 
 " Some have advanced without due attention to 
 u 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. 
 
 " But, if the power of example is so great as to 
 " take possession 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 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 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 required to 
 go before it. 
 
 " It is, therefore, an useful tiling, when we have 
 " a fundamental truth, we use the synthetick 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 number of misconceptions. All the wwds 
 may be the proper words to be used upon the occasion ; 
 
XXI.] SPECIMENS OF FALSE GRAMMAR, 
 
 and yet, by a misplacing 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 , 
 " on equal terms with a polite assembly, from which, 
 " however uneasy, he could not then escape, by a 
 " kind introduction of the only subject on which I 
 " believed him to be able to speak with propriety.' — 
 R. No. 126. 
 
 This is a very bad sentence altogether. " How- 
 ever uneasy " applies to assembly, and not to gen- 
 tleman. Only observe how easily this might have 
 been avoided. " From which he, however uneasy , 
 u could not then escape/* After this we have " he 
 " could not then escape, by a kind introduction" 
 We know what is meant ; but the Doctor, with all 
 his commas, leaves the sentence confused. Let us 
 see whether we cannot 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, arid one of 
 " the chief eminences whereby we are raised above 
 " our fellow-creatures, the brutes, in this lower 
 " worM." — L. Introduction. 
 
 I 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 mis- 
 placed only : they are wholly unnecessary, and they 
 
SPECIMENS OF FALSE GRAMMAR. [Letter 
 
 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 num- 
 ber 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, afterwards, perceiving that he had revised and 
 corrected the Rambler with 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 con- 
 tains striking instances of the misapplication of Nega- 
 tives and of the Ellipsis. In our language two 
 negatives, applied to the sa?7ie verb, or to the same 
 words of any sort, amount to an affirmative: as, '■ Do 
 not give him none of your money." That is to say, 
 iC give him some of your money;" though the contrary 
 is meant." It should be, " do 7iot 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 required : as, " Neither 
 " Richard nor Peter, as I have been informed, 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 negative effect of each other. " I will 
 
XXI.] SPECIMENS OF FALSE GRAMMAR. 
 
 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 too free an use of the Ellipsis. 
 
 " It is strange, that no author should never have 
 " written fully of the fabrick of ploughs ! Men of 
 M greatest learning have spent their time in contriving 
 " instruments to measure the immense distance of the 
 i( stars, and in finding out the dimensions and even I 
 " weight of the planets. They think it more eligible 
 V to study the art of ploughing the sea with ships, 
 " than of tilling the land with ploughs. 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 invent- 
 " ing an infinite variety of slaughter ; but think it be- 
 " neath men of learning (who only are capable of 
 " doing it) to employ their learned labours in the in- 
 " vention of new, or even improving the old, instru- 
 " ments for increasing of bread." 
 
 You see the never ought to be ever. You see, that the 
 the is left out before the \vqt& greatest, and again before 
 iveight, and in this last-mentioned instance, the leav- 
 ing of it out makes the words mean the " even weight ;" 
 that is to say, not the odd weight ; instead of u even 
 the weight," as the author meant. The conjunction 
 that is left out before f of tilling $" before destruction 
 the article the is again omitted : in is left out before 
 inventing and also before improving ; and, at the 
 
errors and nonsense [Letter 
 
 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 simi- 
 lar 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 
 functions of Statesmen^and Legislators was due the 
 highest respect which could be shown by man to any 
 thing human ; but I, at the same time, observed, that 
 as the degree and quality of our respect rose in pro- 
 portion to the influence which the different branches of 
 knowledge naturally had 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 oppo- 
 site to that of respect, rose in the same proportion ; 
 and, to one of these cases I have now to direct your 
 attention. 
 
 The Speeches of the King are read by him to the 
 Parliament. They are composed by his Ministers, or 
 select Councillors. They are documents of great im- 
 portance, 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 settle upon what shall be the to- 
 picks of these Speeches, and who draw the Speeches 
 up, are a Lord High Chancellor, a First Lord of the 
 Treasury, a Lord President of the Council, three 
 
XXII.] f* a king's speech. 
 
 Secretaries 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 all Members of the King's con- 
 stitutional 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 " a noble, 
 honourable, and reverend assembly.'* So that, in the 
 Ministry, who are selected from the persons who com- 
 pose this assembly, the nation has a right to expect 
 something very near to perfection in point of judg- 
 ment 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 writers. There is some poet, who 
 says: 
 
 " Of all the arts, in which the learn'd 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 perform 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 judg- 
 ment and practical talent are employed. A King's 
 Speech is, too, a very short piece of writing. The 
 topicks are all distinct. Very little is said upon each. 
 
ERRORS AND NONSENSE [Letter 
 
 There is no reasoning. It is all plain matter of fact, 
 or of simple observation. The thing is done with all 
 the advantages of abundant time for examination and 
 re -examination. Each of the Ministers has a copy of 
 the Speech to read, to examine, and to observe upon ; 
 and, when no one has any thing left to suggest in the 
 way of alteration or improvement, the Speech is 
 agreed to, and put into the mouth of the King. 
 
 Surely, therefore, if, in any human effort, perfec- 
 tion can be expected, we have a right to expect it in a 
 King's Speech. You shall now see, then, what pretty 
 stuif is put together, and delivered to the Parliament, 
 ^nder the name of King's Speeches. 
 
 The Speech, which I am about to examine, is, in- 
 deed, a Speech of the Regent ; but I might take any 
 other of these Speeches. I choose 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 confusion. 
 
 V My Lords and Gentlemen, It is with deep regret 
 " that / am again obliged to announce the con- 
 " tinuance of His Majesty's lamented indisposition." 
 
 Even in this short sentence there is something 
 
 o 
 
 equivocal) for, it may be, that the Prince's regret 
 arises from his being obliged to announce, and not 
 from the thing announced. 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 ter- 
 " mination of the war between this country and the 
 lt United States of America." 
 
XXII. ] in a king's speech. 
 
 The double compound times of the verbs, in the 
 first part of the sentence, make the words mean, that 
 it would, before the Prince came to the House, have 
 given him great satisfaction to be enabled to commu- 
 nicate ; whereas, he meant, " it would, now, have given 
 me great satisfaction to be enabled to communicate/' 
 In the latter part of the sentence we have a little non- 
 sense. 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 im~ 
 part to another any thing that we have in our pos- 
 session or within our power. And so, the Prince 
 wished to impart the end to the Noble Lords and 
 Honourable 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 termi- 
 nation of a battle and carried it to Carlton House and 
 communicated it to the Prince ? We should laugh 
 at our informant's ignorance of grammar, though we 
 ' should understand what he meant. And, shall we, 
 then, be so partial and so unjust as to reverence in 
 King's Councillors that which we should laugh at in 
 one of our neighbours? To act thus, would be, my 
 dear Son, a base abandonment of our reason, which 
 is, to use the words of Doctor Watts, the common gift 
 of God to man. 
 
 " Although this war originated in the most un- 
 M provoked 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 independence of all other nations, I 
 " never have ceased to entertain a sincere desire to 
 
ERRORS AND NONSENSE [Letter 
 
 " bring it to a conclusion on just and honourable 
 " 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 the?n; 
 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 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 want- 
 ing to make peace on unjust and dishonourable terms 
 because the enemy had been the aggressor ? He 
 might, indeed, wish to make it on terms dishonour- 
 able, 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 honourable 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 will give me just terms, although 
 " you are the aggressor" To be sure you are, 
 whether I be the aggressor or not I All that you 
 can possibly have the face to ask of me is justice ; 
 and, therefore, why do you connect your wish for 
 
XXIL] IN a king's speech. 
 
 peace with this although ? Either you mean, that 
 my aggression gives 3*011 a right to demand of me 
 more than justice, or you talk nonsense. Nor must 
 we overlook the word " Government," which is in- 
 troduced here. In the sentence before, the Prince 
 wished to communicate the end of the war between 
 11 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 very becoming in men 
 selected from " a noble, honourable and reverend 
 assembly.'' 
 
 " I am still engaged in negotiations for this pur- 
 pose." 
 
 That is the purpose of bringing the war to a con- 
 clusion. A very good purpose; but, why still 7 . He 
 had not told his nobles and his boroughmen that he 
 had been engaged 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 with corresponding sen- 
 " tinumts on the part of the enemy. " 
 
 Now, suppose I were to say, " my waggon was met 
 with Mr. Tredwell's coach." Would you not think, 
 that somebody had met the waggon and coach both 
 going together the same way? To be sure you would. 
 But, if I were to say, my waggon was met by Mr. 
 Tredwell's coach, you would think, that they had ap- 
 proached each other from different spots. And, there- 
 fore, 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 01 the word, means, state, or bent, or temper, of 
 mind] and the word sentiments means, thoughts, or 
 
errors and nonsense [Letter 
 
 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 7 . If the Prince had said, " my disposition being 
 " met by a corresponding disposition on the part of 
 " the enemy/' he would have uttered plain and dig- 
 nified language. 
 
 " 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 the most brilliant and 
 (i successful results." 
 
 Were there only the bad placing of the different 
 members of this sentence, the fault would be sufficient. 
 But, we do not know, whether the Prince means 
 opeiations by sea and land, or forces by sea and 
 land. 
 
 " The flotilla of the enemy in thePatuxent has been 
 u destroyed. The signal defeat of their land forces 
 11 enabled a detachment of his Majesty's army to take 
 u possession of the city of Washington ; and the spi- 
 " rit of enterprise, which has characterized all the 
 " movements in that quarter, has produced on the 
 " inhabitants a deep and sensible impression 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, there- 
 fore, 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 : an impression felt ; a deep im- 
 pression is one more felt. Therefore, it was " & sen- 
 sible and deep impression." But, indeed, sensible 
 had no business there ; for, an impression that is deep 
 must be sensible. What would vou think of a man 
 
XXII. ] IN A KING'S SPEF.Cir. 
 
 who should say: M I have not only been stabbed, but 
 my skin has bean cut V Why you would think, to 
 be sure, that he must be a man selected from the noble, 
 honourable, and reverend assembly at Whitehall. 
 
 " The expedition directed from Halifax to the 
 u Northern coast of the United States, has terminated 
 " in a manner not less satisfactory ." 
 
 Than ivhat ? 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 inhabitants ; but of no termination has he 
 talked; nor has he said a word about satisfaction. 
 We must always take care how we use, in one sen- 
 tence, words which refer to any thing said in former 
 sentences. 
 
 " The successful course of this operation has been 
 "followed by the immediate submission of the exten- 
 " sive and important district east of the Ponobscot 
 " river to his Majesty's arms." 
 
 This sentence is a disgrace even to a Ministry with 
 a Jen kin son at its head. What do they mean by a 
 course being followed by a submission ? And then, 
 " has been followed 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 imme- 
 diate. " 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 sub- 
 mission. " 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 sen- 
 tence exhibits a fine instance of want of skill in the 
 placing of the parts of a sentence. Could these noble 
 
ON PUTTING SENTENCES TOGETHER. [Letter 
 
 and reverend persons find no place but the end for 
 " to his Majesty' s arms ? " There was, hut they 
 could not see it, a place made on purpose, after the 
 word submission. 
 
 It is unnecessary, my dear James, for me to proceed 
 further with an exposure of the bad grammar and the 
 nonsense 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 these persons uttering their own speeches 
 in those places, which, when you were a naughty 
 little boy, you used to call " the Thieves' Houses. 1 * 
 If you should ever hear them there, stammering and 
 repeating and putting forth their nonsense, your won- 
 der 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 ivords in a 
 proper manner. But, though you now, I hope, under- 
 stand 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 subject of add- 
 ing sentence to sentence, and on the subject oi figu- 
 rative 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 
 
XXIII.] ON PUTTING SENTENCES TOGETHER. 
 
 know, is a matter of little difficulty. The second de- 
 mands reasoning. The third, besides reasoning, de- 
 mands all the aid that we can obtain from the use of 
 figures of speech, or, as they are sometimes called, 
 figures of rhetorick, which last word means, the 
 power of persuasion. 
 
 Whatever may be the purpose, for which we use 
 language, 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 ride ; 
 there can be no precise rule, with regard to the man- 
 ner of doing this. When we 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 at- 
 tempt to alter a thought ; for, that which has come 
 of itself into your mind is likely to pass into that of 
 another more readily and with more effect than any 
 thing which you can, by reflection, invent. 
 
 Never stop to make choice of icords. Put down 
 your thought in words just as they come. Follow the 
 order which your thought will point out ; and it will 
 push you on to get it upon the paper as quickly and 
 as clearly as possible. 
 
 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 
 
ON PUTTING SENTENCES TOGETHER. [Letter 
 
 possible order that they can have on paper : yet, if you 
 have several in your mind, rising above each other in 
 point of force, the most forcible will naturally come 
 the last upon paper. 
 
 Mr. Lindley Murray gives rules about long sen- 
 tences and short sentences and about a due mixture 
 of long and short : and, he also gives rules about the 
 letters that sentences 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, 
 w r hen 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 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 I noticed in my last Letter. The adverbs when, 
 then, while, now, there, and some others, are con- 
 necting words, and not used in their strictly literal 
 «ense. 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 yourself 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 
 
XXIII.] AND ON FIGURATIVE LANGUAGE. 
 
 begin, the nature of your thoughts must tell you. 
 The propriety of it will be pointed out to you by the 
 difference between the thoughts which are coming 
 and those which have gone before. It is impossible 
 to frame rules for regulating such divisions. When 
 a man divides his work into Parts, Books, Chapters, 
 and Sections, he makes the division according to 
 that which the matter has taken in his mind ; and, 
 when he comes to write, he has no other guide for 
 the distribution of his matter into sentences and 
 paragraphs. 
 
 Never write about any matter that you do not 
 well understand. If you clearly understand all 
 about your matter, you will never want thoughts, and 
 thoughts instantly become words. 
 
 One of the greatest of all faults in writing and in 
 speaking is this j the using of many words to say 
 little. In order to guard yourself against this fault, 
 inquire w T hat is the substance, 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 mostly 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 for ever 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-edge 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 amidst abun- 
 
 K 
 
ON PUTTING SENTENCES TOGETHER. [Letter 
 
 ff dance, if those cormorants did not devour the 
 " fruit of their labour." 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 ground 
 laid out in a certain shape, and such a walk is tuider 
 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. Beware of them. 
 
 I am now, my dear son, arrived at the last para- 
 graph 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 practise 
 what you have now been taught. At the end of those 
 four months, I shall have prepared a Grammar 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 deprive men of pecuniary 
 possessions, and which, in some cases, make the 
 
XXIV.] SIX LESSONS. 
 
 purse-proud man of yesterday 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 number of our days. Never, therefore, esteem 
 men merely on account of their riches or their station. 
 Respect goodness, find it where you may. Honour 
 talent wherever you beruftd it unassociated with vice ; 
 but, honour it most when accompanied with exertion, 
 and especially when exerted in the cause of truth and 
 justice ; and, above all things, hold it in honour, when 
 it steps forward to protect defenceless innocence 
 against the attacks of powerful guilt. 
 
 LETTER XXIV. 
 
 SIX LESSONS* INTENDED TO PREVENT STATES- 
 MEN FROM USING FALSE GRAMMAR, AND FROM 
 WRITING IN AN AWKWARD MANNER. 
 
 Harpenden, Hertfordshire, 23 June, 1322' 
 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 write well. It happens, however, 
 but too frequently, that that which should be, in this 
 case as well as in others, is not ; sufficient proof of 
 which you will find in the remarks which I am now 
 about to make. The Letter to Tierney, a thing 
 which I foresaw would become of great and lasting 
 K 2 
 
six lessons. [Letter 
 
 importance ; a thing to which I knew I should fre- 
 quently have to recur with satisfaction, I wrote on the 
 anniversary of the day, on which, in the year 1810, 
 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 indig- 
 nation at the flogging of 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 I was certain would, 
 by fulfilling my predictions, bring me a compensation 
 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 your excellent conduct makes me regard as 
 amongst the most blessed in the calendar. Who but 
 myself can imagine what I felt, when I left you behind 
 me at New York ! Let this tell my persecutors, that 
 you have made me more than amends for all the 
 losses, all the fatigues, all the dangers, 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 pre- 
 sent public calamities, or of any part of them ; but, it 
 is a proof of a deficiency in that sort of talent, 
 which appears to me to be necessary in men intrusted 
 with great affairs. He who writes badly thinks badly. 
 Confusedness in words can proceed from nothing but 
 confusedness in the thoughts which 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 import- 
 ance not easily to be described. 
 
XXIV.] INTRODUCTION. 
 
 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 gram* 
 matical error in it. The best writing is that which is 
 best calculated to secure the object of the writer ; and 
 the worst, that which 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 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 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 im- 
 portance. The first is the Speech of the Speaker of the 
 House of Commons to the Regent, at the close of the 
 first Session of 1819, 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 second that of the Ministry. 
 
 In Letter XII. I gave the reasons why we had 
 a right to expect perfection in writings of this de- 
 scription. I there described the persons to whom the 
 business of writing Kings' 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 England." 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 their Speaker at 
 their head, gorgeously attired, with the mace held 
 beside him ; figure this scene to yourself, and you will 
 almost think it sedition and blasphemy to suppose it 
 
six lessons. [Letter 
 
 possible, that the Speech made to the King, or that 
 his Majesty's Answer, both prepared and written down 
 long beforehand, should be any thing short of perfec- 
 tion. Follow me, then, my dear Son, through this 
 Letter ; and you will see, that we are not to judge of 
 men's talents by the dresses they wear, by the offices 
 they fill, or by the power they possess. 
 
 After these two Papers I shall take some Papers 
 written by Lord Castlereagh,by the Duke of Welling- 
 ton, and by the Marquis Wellesley. These are three of 
 those persons who have, of late years, made the 
 greatest figure in our affairs with foreign nations. 
 The transactions, which 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 con- 
 sequences. How much more fit than other men they 
 were to be thus confided in ; how much more fit to have 
 the interest and honour 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 
 several papers, a paragraph, pr 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 Commons to the Prince Regent, which Speech 
 was made at the close of the first Session of 1819, 
 during ivhich Session Peel's Bill was passed. 
 
 " May it please your Royal Highness, 
 1. " We his Majesty's faithful Commons of the United 
 ," Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland in Parliament 
 
XXIV.] speaker's speech. 
 
 cc assembled, attend your Royal Highness with our con* 
 " eluding Bill of Supply. 
 
 2. " The subjects which have occupied our attention 
 <c have beeu more numerous, more various and more impor- 
 " tant than are usually submitted to the consideration of 
 M Parliament in the same Session." 
 
 It is difficult to say what is meant, in Paragraph 
 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, 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 
 variegated in themselves, which would be only one 
 degree above sheer nonsense. 
 
 Next come the " than are " without a nominative 
 case. Chambermaids, indeed, w r rite 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 are usually submitted." 
 
 And what does the Speaker mean by " in the same 
 Session ? " He may mean " in one and the s^'rn^ 
 Session ; " but, what business had the word so;; /te there 
 at all ? Could he not have said, " dtrj^jjg ne Session 
 or during a single Session ? " 
 
 « • V Upon manv of Voese subjects we have been engaged 
 c( ia lon S and V-Ti wearied examinations ; but such has been 
 ^ the prepare of other business, and particularly of that 
 ^.uich ordinarily belongs to a first Session of Parliament 
 ** — and such the magnitude and intricacy of many of those 
 u 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 exa- 
 minations in one part of the sentence, and the word 
 inquiries in the other part, especially as the pronoun 
 those was used in the latter case. The verb " has" 
 
six lessons. [Letter 
 
 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 have been the 
 magnitude and intricacy." 
 
 4. " But, Sir, of those measures which we have completed, 
 (l the most prominent, the most important, and as we trust, 
 "* in their consequences, the most beneficial to the public, 
 (t are the measures which have grown out of the considera- 
 " tioji of the present state of the country —both in its cur- 
 st rency and its finances." 
 
 There is not here any positive error in grammar ; 
 but, there is something a great deal worse ; namely, 
 unintelligible words. The epithet " prominent" was 
 wholly unnecessary, and only served to inflate the sen- 
 tence. It would have been prudent not to anticipate, 
 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 consideration 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 hoih to do there at all ? The Speaker meaned, 
 that the measured had grown out of, or, which would 
 have been much more dignified, had been the result of 
 a consideration of the present st^e of the country, 
 with regard to its currency as well as wiiS regard to 
 its finances. 
 
 5. " Early, Sir, in the present Session, we instituted an 
 < c inquiry into the effects produced on the exchanges with 
 *' foreign countries, and the state of the circulating medium, 
 *' by the restriction on payments in cash by the Bank. This 
 *'* inquiry was most anxiously and most deliberately con- 
 <f ducted, and in its result led to the conclusion, that it was 
 " most desirable, quickly, but with due precautions, to re- 
 
XXIV.] speaker's speech. 
 
 t( turn to our ancient and healthful state of currency : — 
 tl That, whatever might have been the expediency of the 
 u Acts for the suspension of payments of cash at the differ- 
 " ent periods at which they were enacted, (and doubtless 
 t( they were expedient), whilst the country was involved 
 u in the most expensive contest that ever weighed down 
 " the finances of any country — still that, the necessity for 
 u the continuance of these Acts having ceased, it became 
 €C us with as little delay as possible (avoiding carefully the 
 " convulsion of too rapid a transition) to return to our an- 
 u - cient system; and that, if at any period, and under any 
 *' circumstances, this return could be effected without 
 " national inconvenience, it was at the present, when 
 " this mighty nation, with a proud retrospept of the past, 
 M after having made the greatest efforts, and achieved the 
 <{ noblest objects, was noiv reposing in a confident, aud, as 
 u we fondly hope, a well-founded expectation of a sound 
 •f and lasting peace/' 
 
 Here, at the beginning of this long and most con- 
 fused 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 esta- 
 blish ; 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 father, be almost 
 warranted in calling me an egregious coxcomb. 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 medium by the cash suspension ? I 
 defy any man living to say which of the two is meaned 
 by his words. And, then we come to, " by the Bank ;" 
 and here the only possible meaning of the words is, that 
 the restriction was imposed by the Bank ; whereas 
 the Speaker means, the restriction on payments made 
 at the Bank. If at, instead of by, had happened to 
 K 5 
 
six lessors. [Letter 
 
 drop out of the wig, this part of the sentence would 
 have been free from error. 
 
 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 in* 
 quietude, and deliberately means coolly, slowly, 
 warily, and the like. The first implies a disturbed, 
 the latter a tranquil, state of the mind ; and a mix- 
 ture of these it was, it appears, that produced Peel's 
 Bill ; this mixture it was, which, " 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 favourite 
 with this son of the Archbishop of Canterbury, more 
 proofs of which you have yet to witness. And, 
 why must the king be compelled to hear the phrase 
 €t healthful state of 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 pur- 
 pose ? 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 
 Low to begin upon it. The " That" after the colon 
 and the dash, seems to connect it with what has gone 
 before ; and yet, what connexion is there ? Imme- 
 diately after this " That," begins a 'parenthetical 
 phrase, which is interrupted by a parenthesis, 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, u it became us" Then 
 
XXIV.] speaker's speech. 
 
 comes more parenthetical matter and another paren- 
 thesis: and, then comes, " to return to our ancient 
 system! 1 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 ancient system." 
 
 But only think of saying " whatever might have 
 been the expediency of the acts," and then to make a 
 parenthesis directly afterwards for the express purpose 
 of positively asserting that they " were expedient' 7 1 
 Only think of the necessity for the continuance of the 
 acts having ceased, and of its being becoming in the 
 parliament to return to cash payments as soon as pos- 
 sible, and yet that a convulsion was to be apprehend- 
 ed from a too rapid transition ; 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 inconve- 
 " nience, it was at the present." And then follows 
 that piece of sublime nonsense about the nation's re- 
 posing 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. <c In considering, Sir, the state of our finances, and in 
 ** minutely comparing- our income with our expenditure, it 
 ■* appeared to us, that the excess of our income was not 
 n fairly adequate for 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 
 f s at least five millions ought to be set apart for that object- 
 
six lessons. [Letter 
 
 8. " This, Sir, has been effected by the additional imposi* 
 u tion of three millions of taxes." 
 
 The word "fairly" in Paragraph No. 6, is a re- 
 dundancy ; it is mere slang. " Adequate for" ought 
 to be " adequate to ;" and " applicable" is inappli- 
 cable to the case ; for the money was applicable to 
 any 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 over- 
 quantity ; but this is not enough for the Speaker, who 
 must have it clear also ; and not only clear, but avail- 
 able ; and, then he must have it set apart into the 
 bargain ! Leave out all the words in italicks, 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 thir- 
 teen 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 for- 
 mer 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 
 €t Commons did not conceal from themselves, that they were 
 " calling upon the nation for a great exertion ; but well 
 *' knowing that honour, 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 
 £i difficulty that the country would not encounter, and no 
 *f pressure to which she would not willingly and cheerfully 
 
XXIV.] speaker's sfeecii. 
 
 u submit, to enable her to maintain, pure, and unimpaired, 
 " that which has never yet been shaken or sullied — her 
 " public credit and her national g-ood-faith." 
 
 This is a sentence which might challenge the 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 
 " honour" but national " character" 7 . In what do 
 theydiifer? And what had " independence" to do 
 in a case where the subject was the means of paying a 
 debt? Here are three things named as the "first" 
 objects of Englishmen's hearts. Which was the 
 " first " of the three ? Or were they the^rs^ 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 rhetorick, which are the great beauties here. First 
 it is Englishmen, who have such a high sense of 
 honour 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 any body but the sons of Archbishops 
 ever talk about maintaining purity, most people think* 
 ing that, in such a case, preserving is better. Here, 
 however, w T e have pure and unimpaired. Now, pure 
 applies to things liable to receive stains and adultera- 
 tions ; unimpaired, to things liable to be undermined, 
 dilapidated, demolished, or worn out. So the 
 Speaker, in order to make sure of his mark, takes them 
 both, and says that the thing which 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* 
 
six lessons. [Letter 
 
 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, required the verb have instead of 
 has. 
 
 10. " Thus, Sir, 1 have endeavoured, shortly, and I am 
 " aware how imperfectly ', to notice the various duties which 
 ** have devolved upon us, in one of the longest and most 
 <( arduous Sessions in the Records of Parliament. 
 
 11. "The Bill, Sir, which it is my duty to present to 
 your Royal Highness, is entitled, c An Act for applying 
 
 <e * certain monies therein mentioned for the Service of the 
 « < year 1819, and for further appropriating the supplies 
 l( * granted in this Session of Parliament." To which, with 
 i{ all humility, we pray his Majesty's Royal Assent." 
 
 Even here, in these common-place sentences, there 
 must be something stupidly illiterate. The Speaker 
 does not mean that his M endeavour" 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 ; but, surely, phraseology less grovelling 
 might have been used on such an occasion. " In 
 the longest session/' and " in the records of Par- 
 liament," are colloquial, low, and incorrect into th£ 
 bargain ; and, as for " monies" 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 imper- 
 fectness of the manner in which he has performed his 
 task) which 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 
 
XXIV.] king's speech. 
 
 us that the confession is one of those clumsy traps so 
 often used with the hope of catching unmerited ap- 
 plause. 
 
 LESSON II. 
 
 Remarks on the Speech, which the Prince Regent 
 made to the Parliament, on the occasion when 
 the above Speech of the Speaker was made. 
 
 €e My Lords and Gentlemen, 
 
 12. " It is with great regret that I am again obliged to 
 " announce to you the continuance of his Majesty's la- 
 " mented indisposition. 
 
 33. " 1 cannot close this Session of Parliament without 
 Ci expressing the satisfaction that I have derived from the 
 (t zeal and assiduity with which you have applied yourselves 
 " to the several important objects which nave come under 
 " your consideration. 
 
 14. " Your patient and laborious investigation of the state 
 <c of the circulation and currency of the kingdom demands 
 " my warmest acknowledgments ; and I entertain a con- 
 " fident expectation that the measures adovted, as the result 
 " of this inquiry, will be productive of the most beneficial 
 " consequences." 
 
 The phrase pointed out by italics in the 12th Para- 
 graph 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 tivo of the " circulation and cur- 
 rency " ? 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 to each 
 other in meaning; but, when the word " this" which 
 
. six lessons. [Letter 
 
 had a direct application to what had gone before, was 
 used, the word investigation ought to have followed 
 it, and not the word inquiry ; it being always a mark 
 of great affectation and of false taste, when pains are 
 taken to seek for synonymous words in order to avoid 
 a repetition of sound. The device is seen through, 
 and the littleness of mind exposed. 
 
 The fine word " adopted" is not nearly so good as 
 the plain word taken would have been. The parlia- 
 ment 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 the king entertained of the " most 
 beneficial consequeyices" of those measures, which 
 were certainly the most foolish and mischievous ever 
 taken by any parliament, or by any legislative assem- 
 bly in the world. 
 
 a Gentlemen of the House of Commons, 
 
 15. " I thank you for the supplies which you have grant- 
 " ed 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 1 anticipate the most important permanent 
 " advantages from the effort which you have thus made for 
 " meeting at once all the financial difficulties of the coun- 
 " try; and I derive much satisfaction from the belief, that 
 " the means which you have devised for this purpose are 
 <e calculated to press as lightly on all classes of the com- 
 " munity as could be expected when so great an effort was 
 " to be made." 
 
 Nobody, I presume, but kings say an " effort for 
 meeting." Others say, that they make an effort to 
 meet. And, nobody that I ever heard of before, ex- 
 cept bill-brokers, talk about meeting money demands. 
 One cannot help admiring the satisfaction, nay the 
 
XXIV.] king's speech. 
 
 " 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 writ- 
 ten by the Ministers, it is spoken by the king. But, 
 what is it ? The additional load must fall upon 
 somebody ; upon some class or classes : and, where, 
 then, was the sense of expressing " much satisfac- 
 tion" 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 aud Gentlemen, " 
 
 17. '* I continue to receive from Foreign Powers the 
 " strongest assurances of their friendly disposition towards 
 <( this country. 
 
 IS. " I have observed with great concern the attempts 
 ** which have recently been made in some of the manu- 
 " facturing districts, to take advantage of circumstances 
 " of local distress, to excite a spirit of disaffection to the 
 t( institutions and Government of the Country. No object 
 ** can be nearer my heart than to promote the welfare and 
 tl prosperity of all classes of his Majesty's Subjects; but 
 " this cannot be effected without the maintenance of pub- 
 " lie order and tranquillity. 
 
 19. " You may rely, therefore, upon my firm determi- 
 f< nation to employ, for this purpose, the powers entrusted 
 94 to me by law ; and 1 have no doubt that, on your return 
 f? to your several counties, you will use your utmost en- 
 fC deavours, in co-operating with the Magistracy, to de- 
 *"* feat the machinations of those whose projects, if success- 
 " ful, could only aggravate the evils which it professed to 
 "remedy; and who, under the pretence of Reform, have 
 *' really "no other object but the subversion of our happy 
 J* Constitution." 
 
 Weak minds, feeble writers and speakers, delight 
 in superlatives. They have big sound in them, 
 and give the appearance of force ; but, they very often 
 betray those who use them, into absurdities. The 
 king, as in Paragraph No. 17, might continue tore- 
 
six lessons. [Letter 
 
 ceive strong assurances ; but, bow could be receive 
 " the strongest" more tban once ? 
 
 In tbe 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 government, reason to believe 
 that one is really sought for, I shall care little about 
 the other. 
 
 I am, however, I must confess, not greatly encou- 
 raged to hope for this, when I immediately afterwards 
 hear of a " firm determination" to employ " powers" 
 the nature of which is but too well understood. " De- 
 termination" can, in grammar, receive no additional 
 force from having "firm" placed before it ; but, in 
 political interpretation, the use of this word cannot 
 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 ad- 
 verbs, generally go, like crows and ravens, in pairs. 
 Hence we have, in the 18th Paragraph, " the insti- 
 tutions and government" of the country. Now, 
 though there may be institutions of the country, which 
 do not form a part of its government ; the govern- 
 ment is, at any rate, amongst the country's institu- 
 tions. 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 pro- 
 fess is in the past instead of the present time, one 
 
XXIV.] LORD CASTLEREAGIi's STOTE. 
 
 can account for only on the supposition, that the idea 
 of Reform had scared all the powers 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" in- 
 stead of no other object than ; and , the word " really " 
 put into the mouth of a king, and on such an occa- 
 sion, is something so very low that we can hardly 
 credit our eyes when w T e behold it. 
 
 INTRODUCTION 
 
 To the Four Lessons on the productions of Lord 
 Castlereagh, the Duke of Wellington, the Mar'* 
 quis Wellesley, and the Bishop of Winchester. 
 
 From the literary productions of Speakers and Mi- 
 nistries, I come to those of Ambassadors, Secretaries 
 of State, Viceroys and Bishops. In these persons, 
 even more fully, perhaps, than in the former, we are 
 entitled to expect proofs of great capacity as writers. 
 I shall give you specimens from the writings of four 
 persons of this description, and these four, men who 
 have been entrusted with the management of affairs 
 as important as any that the king of this country ever 
 had to commit to the hands of his servants ; I mean 
 Lord Castlereagh, the Duke of Wellington, the 
 Marquis Wellesley, and the Bishop of Winchester y 
 the first of whom has been called the greatest States- 
 man, the second, the greatest Captain, the- third, 
 the greatest Viceroy, the fourth, the greatest Tutor, 
 of the age. 
 
 The passages which I shall first select from the 
 writings of these persons, are contained in State Papers, 
 relating to the Museums at Paris. 
 
 And here, in order that you may be better able to 
 
six lessons. [Letter 
 
 judge of the writings themselves, I ought to explain to 
 you the nature of the matters to which they relate, and 
 the circumstances under which they were written. The 
 Museums 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 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, belonged to the Allies respectively. The French 
 contended that this was unjust, and that it was an act 
 of pillage. They said, that, in 181.4, 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 precedent of 1814, 
 but that it was to assume the character of enemies 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 vio- 
 lation 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 
 entered France under the name of Allies of the king 
 and of the great body of his people, and who took pos- 
 session of Paris in virtue of a convention which stipu- 
 lated for the security of all public property ; to cha- 
 racterize such an act is unnecessary ; but we cannot 
 
XXIV.] lord castlereagh's note. 
 
 help lamenting that the Ministers of England were 
 open abettors if not original instigators in this memo- 
 rable transaction, which, of all the transactions of 
 that time, seems to have created the greatest portion 
 of rancour in the minds of the people of France. 
 
 That the English Ministers were the instigators ap- 
 pears pretty clearly 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 11th Septem- 
 ber, 1815, and from which Paper I am now about to 
 give you a specimen of the writing of this Secretary 
 of State. 
 
 LESSON III. 
 
 Remarks on Lord Castlereagh' 's Note, of the 11th 
 September 1815, on the subject of the Museums 
 at Paris. 
 
 Tins Note sets 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 follows. After some further matter, amongst 
 which we find this " greatest Statesman" talking of 
 " the indulgencies (instead of indulgences) to which 
 the French had a right " to aspire," (instead of to 
 hope for) ; after saying that the purity of the friend- 
 ship of the Allies had been " proved beyond a ques- 
 tion" 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 " substantial inte- 
 
six lessons. [Letter 
 
 grity" of France, and thereby meaning, that 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 satisfy what the Allies oive to the security of 
 their own subjects ;" after all this, and a great deal 
 more of the same description, we come to the para- 
 graphs that I am now going to remark on. Observe; 
 I continue the numbering 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 she held before the Revolution, and 
 u desire, at the same time, to retain the ornamental spoils 
 fe 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 
 <c effectuate Avhat justice and policy require ? if not, upon 
 <e what principle deprive France of her late territorial ac- 
 * e quisitions, and preserve to her the spoliations appertaining 
 €t 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 
 t( atone for to Europe, in consequence of the course pur- 
 te sued 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 ?nass of plunder, as to sanction it 
 i{ by any stipulation in their Treaties ; such a recognition 
 ** has been on their part uniformly refused ; but they cer- 
 ** tainly did use their influence to repress at that moment, 
 " any agitation of their claims, in the hope that France, 
 (i not less subdued by their generosity than by their arms, 
 <c might be disposed to preserve inviolate a peace which had 
 <( been studiously framed to serve as a bond of recon- 
 cc ciliation between the Nation and the King. They had 
 (i also reason to expect that His Majesty would be advised 
 " voluntarily to restore a considerable proportion at least of 
 i( these spoils, to their lawful owners. 
 
 22. "But the question is a very different one now, 
 <c and to pursue the same course under circumstances so 
 u essentially altered, would be, in the judgment of the 
 t( Prince Regent, equally unwise towards France, and unjust 
 " towards our Allies, who have a direct interest in this 
 i( question. 
 
XXIV.] LORD CASTLEUEAGlfs NOTE. 
 
 23. " His Royal Highness, in stating this opinion, feels 
 " it necessary to guard against the possibility of misrepre- 
 " sentation. 
 
 24. Whilst he deems it to be the duty of the Allied 
 a Sovereigns not only not to obstruct, but to facilitate, 
 " upon the present occasion, the return of these objects to 
 4< the places from whence they were torn, it seems not less 
 " consistent with their delicacy, wot to suffer the position of 
 t( their armies in France, or the removal of these works from 
 tf the Louvre, to become the means, either directly or in- 
 " directly, of bringing within their own dominions a single 
 <l article which did not of right, at the period of their con- 
 u quest, belong either to their respective family collections, 
 " or to the countries over which they now actually reign. 
 
 25. " Whatever value the Prince Regent might attach to 
 c< 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 
 u which they of right belong, more especially by following up 
 u a principle in war which He considers as a reproach 
 f 1 to the nation by which it has been adopted, and so far 
 fC from wishing to take advantage of the occasion to pur- 
 " chase from the rightful owners any articles they might, 
 <l from pecuniary considerations, be disposed to part with, 
 " His Royal Highness would on the contrary be disposed 
 " rather to afford the means of replacing them in those 
 se very temples and galleries, of which they were so long 
 ** the ornaments. 
 
 26. " Were it possible that His Royal Highness's senti- 
 ci ments towards the person and cause of Louis XVIIL 
 <c could be brought into doubt, or that the position of His 
 t€ Most Christian Majesty was likely to be injured in the 
 u eyes of His own people, the Prince Regent would not 
 (( come to this conclusion without the most painful reluc- 
 " tanc'e ; but, on the contrary, His Royal Highness believes 
 " that His Majesty will rise in the love and respect of his 
 u own subjects, in proportion as He separates Himself from 
 iC these remembrances of revolutionary warfare. These 
 ** spoils, which impede a moral reconciliation between 
 " France and the countries she has invaded, are not neces- 
 '* sary to record the exploits of her armies, which, not- 
 <c withstanding the cause in which they were achieved, 
 <{ must ever make the arms of the nation respected abroad. 
 te But whilst these objects remain at Paris, constituting, as 
 (i it were, the title deeds of the countries which 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 it- 
 st self with the more limited existence assigned to the nation 
 €< under the Bourbons." 
 
six lessors. [Letter 
 
 I shall say nothing of the logic of this passage ; 
 and I would fain pass over the real and poorly dis- 
 guised motive of the proceeding ; but this must strike 
 every observer. 
 
 It is the mere writing, which, at present, is to be 
 the principal object of our attention. To be sure, the 
 sentiments, 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 sus- 
 picions in the former of these paragraphs, and the 
 protestations in the latter, which present to the na- 
 tions of Europe, and especially to the French nation, 
 such a captivating picture of English frankness and 
 sincerity ! 
 
 But, let us come to the writing : and here, in Pa- 
 ragraph 20, we have " spoliations appertaining ta 
 territories, though spoliation means the act of de- 
 spoiling, 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 sub- 
 sequent part of the sentence tells us, that spoliations 
 have invariably been respected. 
 
 In the 2 1st Paragraph, does the it relate to crimi- 
 nality or to mass of plunder ; and, what is meaned by 
 a sanction given to either? Could the writer suppose 
 it possible 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 1814, that possession as they found it. 
 
XXIV.] LOKD dASTLEREAGH's NOTE. 
 
 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 talkfne; but one 
 that, surely, ought to be absent from the most stately 
 of the productions of a Secretary of State. 
 
 " Unwise towards France and unjust towards the 
 Allies," and " equally" too, is as pretty a specimen 
 of what is called twattle, as you shall find ; while " the 
 return" of these "objects," the not purloining of a 
 " single article" the not wishing to " take advan- 
 tage" and to " purchase any of the articles that the 
 " owners might wish to part ivith," form as fine an 
 instance of the powers of the plume de crasse, or, pen 
 of mud, as you will be ableto 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 Me "objects" 7 . 
 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 asser- 
 tions about plunder and spoliation : for, that which is 
 conquered 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 by "fol- 
 lowing up a principle in war " ? The phrase, " fol- 
 low 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 pictures, be said to follow up a princi- 
 ple " in war"1 The meaning, doubtless, was, that 
 the Regent had no wish to become possessed of these 
 I 
 
six lessons. [Letter 
 
 Captain, but a great Ambassador also; that he was 
 Ambassador at the Congress of Vienna just before the 
 time we are speaking of; and that he was formerly 
 Secretary of State for Ireland. 
 
 The paper, from which I am about to make a quo- 
 tation, is a " dispatch'' 7 from the " greatest Cap- 
 tain" to Lord Castlereag h, dated at Paris, 23rd Sep- 
 tember, 1815, soon after the Museums had been rifled. 
 
 I shall not take up much of your time with the per- 
 formance of this gentleman : a short specimen will 
 suffice ; and tbat shall consist of the three first para- 
 graphs of his " dispatch, 1 * 
 " My dear Lord, 
 
 27. " There has been a good deal of discussion here lately 
 " respecting the measures which I have been under the 
 * ( necessity of adopting, in order to get for the King of 
 *' the Netherlands his Pictures, &c. from the Museums; 
 *$ and lest these reports should reach the Prince Regent, I 
 *.* wish to. trouble you, for His Royal Highness's informa- 
 " Hon, with the following statement of what has passed. 
 
 28. •' Shortly after the arrival of the Sovereigns at Paris, 
 c< the Minister of the King of the Netherlands claimed the 
 " Pictures, &c. belonging to his Sovereign, equally with 
 " those of other powers ; and, as far as I could learn, never 
 46 could get any satisfactory reply from the French Govern- 
 *' ment. After several conversations with me, he address- 
 t( ed your Lordship an official Note, which was laid before 
 (i the Ministers of the Allied Sovereigns, assembled in con- 
 ** ference ; and the subject was taken into consideration 
 " repeatedly, with a view to discover a mode of doing 
 " justice to the Claimants of the specimens of the arts in 
 *f the Museums, without injuring the feelings of the King 
 " of France. In the mean time, the Prussians had ob- 
 " tained from His Majesty not only all the really Prussian 
 " Pictures, but those belonging to the Prussian territories 
 (< on the left of the Rhine, and the Pictures, &c. belonging* 
 " to all the allies of His Prussian Majesty ; and the subject 
 iC pressed for an early decision ; and your Lordship wrote 
 ce your Note of the 11th inst. in which it was fully dis- 
 " cussed. 
 
 29. " The Ministers of the King of the Netherlands, 
 " still having no satisfactory answer from the French Go- 
 'i vernment, appealed to me as the General in Chief of the 
 " army of the King of the Netherlands, to know whether I 
 
XXIV.] duke of Wellington's dispatch. 
 
 et had any objection to employ His Majesty's Troops to ob- 
 " tain possession of what was His undoubted property. I 
 " referred this application again to the Ministers of the 
 u Allied Courts, and no objection having bedn stated, I con- 
 u sidered it my duty to take the necessary measures to ob- 
 ." tain 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 discussion 7 (that is to say, 
 talk) u 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 
 of all the nations of Europe " as the writer calls hnn- 
 jself in another part of this famous " dispatch." 
 
 But, what are " these reports/' of which the great 
 Captain speaks in the latter part of this paragraph ? 
 He had spoken of no reports before. He had men- 
 tioned " discussion/' and a <l 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 
 FalstafTs narrative to the Prince. 
 
 The Captain's u wishing to trouble*' Lord Castle- 
 reagh, " 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 
 
six lessons. [Letter 
 
 English of it. The Dutch Minister * claimed the 
 Pictures belonging to his sovereign, equally with those 
 of other -powers" What ! did this Dutchman claim 
 the whole; those belonging to the Dutch sovereign 
 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 Mi- 
 nister " never could get any satisfactory 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 11th of September," was so 
 necessary, lest the latter should imagine, that some- 
 body else had written the Note ! Nor are the four 
 ands in this paragraph to be overlooked ; for never 
 was this poor conjunction so w T orked before, except, 
 perhaps, in some narrative of a little girl to her 
 mother. 
 
 The narrative is, in the last quoted paragraph, 
 continued with unrelaxed spirit. The Dutch Minis- 
 ter can still obtain no satisfactory answer ; he asks 
 the Duke whether he have any objection to use force, 
 and asserts, at the same time, that the goods in ques- 
 tion are his master's " undoubted property" Upon 
 this the Duke applies to the other ministers, 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. 
 
 Never was there surely a parcel of words be- 
 fore put together by any body in so clumsy a man- 
 ner. In a subsequent part of the " dispatch" we 
 have this : " I added, that I had no instructions re- 
 
XXIV.] LORD CASTLEUEAGlfs SECOND XOTE. 
 
 garding the Museum, nor no grounds on which to 
 form a judgment." In another place we have " tha 
 King of the Netherlands Pictures." In another 
 place we have " that the propjrty should be return- 
 ed 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 genera! 
 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 has, on many 
 occasions, had some of the most important of the na- 
 tion's affairs committed to his management. There* 
 is in the nonsense of Castlereagh, a frivolity and a 
 foppery that give it a sort of liveliness, and that now- 
 and-then elicit a smile ; but, in the productions of hi* 
 correspondent, there is nothing to relieve; all is vul- 
 gar, all clumsy, all dull, all torpid inanity. 
 
 lesson v: 
 
 Reynarks on a Note prcszntcd by Lord Castle* 
 reagh to the Ambassadors of the Allies, at 
 Paris, in July, 1815, relative to the Slave 
 Trade. 
 
 30. " Viscount Castlereagh, his Britannick Majesty's 
 U Principal Secretary of State, &c, in reference to the 
 " communication he has made to the conference, of the 
 <l orders addressed to the Admiralty to suspend all hos- 
 €C tilities against the coast of France, observes, that there 
 *' is reason to foresee that French ship-owners might he 
 W induced to renew the Slave Trade, under the supposition 
 (t of the peremptory and total abolition decreed by Na- 
 " poleon Bonaparte having ceased with his power; that, 
 «* nevertheless, great and powerful considerations, arising 
 " from motives of humanity and even regard for the King's 
 
six lessons. [Letter 
 
 €< authority, require, that no time should be lost to main- 
 *' tain in France, the entire and immediate abolition of the 
 * c Traftick in Slaves ; that if, at the time of the Treaty of 
 <c Paris, the King's administration could wish a final but 
 €t 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 interests of the French Proprietors in the Colonies, 
 *' now, that the absolute prohibition has been ordained, the 
 4S question assumes entirely a different shape, for if the 
 *' King were to revoke the said prohibition, he would 
 <c give Himself the disadvantage of authorizing, in the 
 " interior of France, the reproach which more than once 
 *' has been thrown out against his former Government, of 
 " countenancing re-actiong, and, at the same time, justi- 
 <l fying, out of France, and particularly in England, the 
 " belief of a systematic opposition to liberal ideas; that 
 gt accordingly the time seems to have arrived when the 
 tc Allies cannot hesitate formally to give weight in France 
 " to the immediate and entire prohibition of the Slave 
 Ki Trade, a prohibition, the necessity of which has been 
 " acknowledged, in principle, in the transactions of the 
 li Congress at Vienna." 
 
 Now, I put this question to you : do you under" 
 stand what this great Statesman means 9 . Read 
 the Note three times over ; and then say, whether 
 you understand what he wants. 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. Oneway of proving the badness of 
 this writing, is, to express the meaning of the writer 
 in a clear manner ; thus : 
 
 " Lord Castlereagh observes, that there is reason 
 " to apprehend that the French ship-owners may be 
 u induced to renew the slave trade, from a supposi- 
 46 tion 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 
 <c king's authority, suggest that no time should be 
 
XXIV.] LORD CASTLEREAGIl's SECOND NOTE. 
 
 " lost in taking efficient measures to maintain the 
 " decree of abolition; that, at the time of the treaty 
 " of Paris, the king's 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 object 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 en- 
 " tirely different shape, seeing that it is not now an 
 " abolition, but the refraining from revoking an aboli- 
 " tion, that is proposed to be suggested to the king : 
 u that, if the king were to do this, he would warrant, 
 " amongst his own people, the injurious imputation, 
 " more than once brought against his former govern- 
 Ci ment, of countenancing the work of undoing and 
 u overturning, and would, at the same time, confirm 
 u foreign nations, and particularly the English, in the 
 " belief, that he had adopted a systematic opposition 
 " «o 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 fa- 
 " vour, as far as relates to France, of an entire and 
 " immediate abolition of the Slave Trade, an abolition, 
 " the necessity of which has, in principle, at least, 
 " been acknowledged in the transactions of the Con- 
 ■" gress of Vienna/' 
 
 Now, as to the several faulty expressions in the 
 Note of Castlereagh, though I have made great use 
 of italicks, I have not pointed out one half of the 
 faults. Who ever before heard of a reason to foresee 
 a thing? He meaned 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 ; be- 
 t5 
 
six lessons. [Letter 
 
 cause to apprehend means to think of with some de- 
 gree 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 ?night 
 is clearly wrong. If the abolition w r ere total, what 
 had peremptory to 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 any body, why it should not. To 
 lose no time to maintain ; and then th5 in France, 
 and then the immediate ; altogether here is such a 
 mess of confusion that one cannot 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 assume entirely a different shape is very different 
 from to assume an entirely different shape. The 
 latter is meaned 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 foretel the evils which wiJl fall on 
 the king of France if he revoke Napoleon's decree. 
 And, here, Goddess of Grub-street, do hear him talk- 
 ing of the king of France giving himself the disad- 
 vantage 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 
 
XXIV.] LORD CASTLEREAGIl's SECOND NOTE. 
 
 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 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 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, li was false in pro- 
 fessions ; and it was, as towards 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 offensive 
 manner; and, at any rate, he might have been spared 
 the brutal taunt that we meet with towards 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 parties to say, that the abolition, which was 
 thus extorted, had effect but for a very short time ; 
 that the French nation never acknowledged it as 
 binding ; that, at this moment {June 1822) complaints 
 are made in the House of Commons of the breach of 
 agreement on the part of the French ; that the French 
 have revived and do carry on the traffick in African 
 slaves ; that our Ministers promise to make remon- 
 strances ; but that, they dare not talk of war ; and 
 that, without declaring their readiness for war, their 
 remonstrances can have no effect. 
 
six lessons. [Letter 
 
 LESSON VI. 
 
 Remarks on passages in Dispatches, from the Mar- 
 quis Wellesley, Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, 
 to Viscount Sidmouth and to Mr. Peel, Secreta- 
 ries of State, dated Dublin Castle, from 3d Jan. 
 to 12th June, 1822; and also on the Charge 
 of the Bishop of Winchester, delivered in 
 July, 1822. 
 
 31. " Concluding that your Lordship had been apprized, 
 €t before my arrival in Dublin, of every important circum- 
 <c stance respecting: the unhappy disturbances which have 
 ** prevailed in this country, I proceed to submit to you, for 
 *' his Majesty's consideration, such information as I have 
 *' received on that subject during" the few days which have 
 ** passed since my succession to this Government. 
 
 32. " I propose to arrange this information with refer- 
 €< ence to each county respectively , for the purpose of facili- 
 <( tating a comparison with such statements as may already 
 Si be in your Lordship's possession, and of enabling you to 
 " form a judgment of the relative state of each particular 
 * c district at the different periods of time specified in each 
 " document." 
 
 The Marquis's style is not, in general, low and 
 clumsy : 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 cannot condescend to talk in 
 the language and manner of common mortals. 
 
 " Had been apprized before of disturbances which 
 have prevailed" presents great confusion as to times. 
 We can hardly come at the precise meaning. It 
 should have been : " concluding, that, before my 
 " arrival, your Lordship were apprized of every im- 
 u portant circumstance respecting the unhappy dis- 
 '* turbances, prevailing in this country." For, the 
 
XXIV.] MARQ. WELLESLEY's DISPATCHES. 
 
 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, wad the proper 
 word ; for, it is the king to whom the information is 
 submitted. The Marquis sent the information to 
 Lord Sid mouth that he might submit it to the king. 
 
 " Succession to this government" is a strangely 
 pompous phrase at best But, it is not correct ; for, 
 his succession (if it were one) took place at his ap- 
 pointment; 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, see- 
 ing that the Marquis was here explaining the plan of 
 his dispatch. With reference to means in relation 
 to, as appertaining to, having a view towards. The 
 first is the best for the Marquis ; and that is little short 
 of nonsense; for, what is arranging information in re- 
 lation 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 coun- 
 ties, and that the information relating to each county 
 he meaned to place under a separate head. This 
 was what he meaned ; 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 to 
 say, that he proposed to place the information relating 
 to each county 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 
 
six lessons. [Letter 
 
 heads, each head confining itself to the information 
 relating to one county, was a very good way of facili- 
 tating a comparison of this information with that 
 which was already in Lord Sidmouth's possession; 
 but, it was not enough to say "facilitating a com- 
 parison with such statements ;" and, there appears, 
 besides, to be no reason to conclude, that the inform- 
 ation before possessed was arranged according to 
 counties : on the contrary, the Marquis's laying down 
 of his plan would induce us to suppose that the ar- 
 rangement 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 judgment of the state of each district now, com- 
 pared 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 period 
 compared with its state at another period ; 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 relative state of a district at the different 
 periods of time specified 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, obscurity 
 arising from affectation. What he meaned was this: 
 << I propose to place the information relating to each 
 
XXIV.] MARQ. WELLESLEy's DISPATCHES. 
 
 " county under a distinct head, for the purpose of 
 u facilitating a comparison of this information with 
 " that which your Lordship may already possess, and 
 u also for the purpose of enabling you to form a judg- 
 " ment of the present state of each county, compared 
 " with the state in which it was at the date of former 
 u 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 hun- 
 dred times over, must still remain a matter of uncer- 
 tainty ? 4 
 
 But, there is another fault here ; and that is, all 
 the latter part of the sentence is a mere redundancy ; 
 for of what was Lord Sidmouth to " form a judg- 
 ment ? " A judgment of the comparative state of the 
 country at the two periods? What could this be 
 more than the making of the comparison? Judgment \ 
 In this case, means opinion ; and, if the Marquis had 
 said, that his object was to enable Lord Sidmouth 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 
 extent indeed. Some few passages I cannot, however, 
 refrain from just pointing out to you. 
 
 33. " The commanding Officer at Bantry reports a daring 
 cc attach made a few nights previously, on several very re- 
 f* spectable houses in the immediate vicinity of that town* 
 fc by a numerous banditti, who succeeded in obtaining 
 *' arms from many : and the officer stationed at Skibbereea 
 g states his opinion^ that the spirit of disaffection, which 
 
six lessons. [Letter 
 
 " had been confined to the northern Baronies of the county, 
 " had spread in an alarming measure through the whole of 
 <( West Carbery ; that nightly meetings are held at various 
 " places on the coast, and that bands of offenders assent* 
 " Me, 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 raoun- 
 " tains, and that they have in some places made demonstra- 
 Ci tions of attack, and in others, have committed outrages by 
 " day, with increased forces and boldness.'* 
 
 " Reports an attack" is of the slang military, and 
 should not have forced its way into this Dispatcli. 
 u States his opinion, that" is little better. But, it is 
 to the strange confusion 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 neighbourhood ; that nocturnal meetings have 
 "frequently been held; that in the adjoining parishes, 
 ** notices of an inflammatory description have been posted ; 
 " and in one parish, arms have been taken from the peace- 
 " able inhabitants." 
 
 36. " The Rector of reports, on the 10th, that 
 
 " six houses of his parishioners had been attacked on the 
 <c preceding night, and some arms obtained from them, 
 " and then an attempt had been made to assassinate Captain 
 ** Bernard, an active yeomanry 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 
 * r shot the assailant." 
 
 We do not know, from the words, " have for a long 
 time been administered," whether the oaths were ad- 
 ministered a long time ago, or are now, and long 
 have been, administering. The that should have 
 been repeated between the and and the in towards 
 the close of Paragraph 35 ; for the w r ant of it takes 
 the last fact out of the report of the Magistrates, 
 and makes it an assertion of the Marquis. The same 
 
XXIV.] MARQ. WELLESLEY's DISPATCHES. 
 
 remark applies to the 36th Paragraph, where, for the 
 want of the that between the and and the then, it is 
 the Marquis and not the Rector, who 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 ^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! But assassinate is become a 
 fashionable word in such cases. 
 
 37. t( On the evening of the same day a detachment of 
 cc the 11th regiment was attacked, on its march from 
 t€ Mackroom to Bandon, by a party of GO men, who followed 
 w it for three miles, and took advantage of the in- 
 " closures to fire, and to retard the march of the King's 
 f* troops," 
 
 The meaning is, that the party of 60 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 Kings troops 
 be the same body of men ; and this doubt is, indeed, 
 countenanced by the almost incredibJe circumstance, 
 that a regular regiment should be followed for three 
 miles and actually have its march retarded by sixty 
 men I 
 
 38. " A countryman's house is also stated to have been: 
 " attacked hy forty men, well mounted and armed, who 
 Ci severely beat and wounded him and took his horse. 
 
 tc reports an attack on the house of Mr. Sweet, 
 
 " near Macroom, who, having received previous intimation 
 " of the attack, and having prepared for defence, sue- 
 ?' ceeded in repulsing the assailants, about two hundred 
 •* in number, with a loss of two hilled, who were carried off by 
 Si their associates, although their horses were secured. 
 
 Here we have reports an attack again ; but, your 
 attention is called to the latter part of the paragraph, 
 where it would appear that Mr. Sweet sustained a 
 
six lessons. [Letter 
 
 loss of two killed ; and yet these two dead men were 
 carried off by their assailarits. If the Marquis had 
 stopped at the word killed, it would have been im- 
 possible not to understand him to mean, that Mr. 
 Sweet had two of his men killed. 
 
 39. ft A magistrate communicates, that information had 
 * ( been received by him of several intended attacks upon 
 *' houses in that neighbourhood, but that they had been 
 ** prevented by the judicious employment' of the police , 
 " stationed at Sallans, under the Peace Preservation Act.'* 
 
 By employing the Police in a judicious manner 
 the Marquis 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 u the setting of fire ;" and, it should 
 be were, and not was ; for the deuce is in it, if out- 
 houses, together with the cattle in them, do not make 
 up a plural. 
 
 41. " The residt of the facts stated in this dispatch, and 
 €i its inclosures, seems to justify an opinion, that although 
 ** no material change has occurred in any other part of 
 " Ireland, the disturbances in the vicinity of Macroom 
 *' have assumed a more decided aspect of general disorder, 
 " and accordingly 1 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 seem to 
 justify the opinion : it is the facts themselv&s 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 prominent and 
 gross errors. 
 
 42. " Another Magistrate reports several robberies of 
 " arms in the Parishes of Skull and Kilmoe, and the 
 i( burning of a corn store at Crookhaven ; and another, in 
 << representing the alarming state of the county, adds, that 
 
XXIV.] MARQ. WELLESLEY's DISPATCHES. 
 
 s< 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 which something is violently and unlawfully taken- 
 Men rob a man of his money, or a house of its goods ; 
 but, it is 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 hun- 
 dred and seventy-six fire-arms" and the like, leaves 
 us clearly to understand, that lie is at liberty to use 
 this noun in the singular, and, of course, to say afire- 
 arm whenever he may choose ; a liberty, however, 
 which I w r ould, 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 lowering 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 
 <c nor augmentation of the police, would now be effectual 
 <e without the aid of the Insurrection Act ; with that aid, 
 ** it appears to be rational to expect that tranquillity 
 <c maybe maintained, confirmed, and extended throughout 
 t( Ireland. It is therefore my duty, in every view, ta 
 " 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 any thing like this ? Suppose I were 
 to say, " the writings of which the inaccuracies 
 form the subject of these remarks," what would the 
 world think and say of me ? This is indeed i( prose 
 Ximmad" 
 
six lessons. [Letter 
 
 44. "With respect to Westmeath, the Chief Magistrate 
 te of Police has stated the revival of those party feuds and 
 
 •** personal conflicts in the neighbourhood of Mullingar, 
 " which are considered in this country to be indications of 
 " the return of public tranquillity, and from which the 
 " Magistrate expects the detection of past offences against 
 " thelState." 
 
 One loses sight of all about language here, in 
 contemplating the shocking, the horrible fact ! For, 
 what is so horrible as the fact here officially stated, 
 that party feuds and personal conflicts are deemed 
 indications favourable to the government, and that 
 they are expected by the magistrate to lead to the 
 detection of past offences against the state ! As to 
 the grammar: to u state the revival" is just as good 
 English as it would be to say, that the magistrate has 
 stated the flne weather. The " The return" ought 
 to be " a return" 
 
 45. f* The early expiration of the Act would, at least, 
 " hazard the revival of that tyranny ; the restraints im- 
 t( posed on violence have not yet been of sufficient dura- 
 «' tion to form any solid foundation of a better and more 
 *' disciplined disposition in the minds of the people. Even 
 <e now it is believed that arms are retained in the hope of the 
 " expiration of the law on the 1st of August : and although 
 i( a more auspicious sentiment may exist in the hearts of 
 f( some, even of the guilty, it would be contrary to all 
 " prudent policy and provident wisdom, by a premature re- 
 " taxation of the law, to afford facility to the accomplish- 
 li ment of the worst designs, and to weaken the protec- 
 (< tions and safeguards, which now secure the lives and 
 '* properties of the loyal and obedient, before the spirit of 
 *' outrage had been effectually extinguished/' 
 
 " 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 ty- 
 ranny was a thing that ought not to be 'put in dan- 
 ger. The word hazard had no business there. 
 Another mode of expression ought to have been used ; 
 
XXIV.] MARQ. WELLESLEY's DISPATCHES. 
 
 such as, " exposed the country to the danger of a 
 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 sen- 
 tence ; the placing of the several parts of it, which 
 is most worthy of your attention, and which ought to 
 be a warning to every one who takes pen in hand. 
 " Prudent policy and provident wisdom" would 
 seem to say, that there are such things as imprudent 
 policy and improvident wisdom ; but, still, all the 
 rest is inferior, in point of importance, to the con- 
 fusion which follows, and which leaves you wholly 
 in doubt as to the meaning of the writer. Now, ob- 
 serve with what facility this mass of confusion is re- 
 duced to order, and, that, too, without adding to, or 
 taking from the Marquis one single word. I begin 
 after the word wisdom : " to afford, by a premature 
 " relaxation 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 now secure the lives and 
 " properties of the loyal and obedient." 
 
 How clear is this ! -And, and how much more har- 
 monious and more elegant, too, than the sentence of 
 the Marquis ; and, yet the words are all the same 
 identical words ! Towards the close of Letter XXI, 
 I gave you, from Dr. Johnson and Dr. Watts, 
 some striking instances of the wrong placing of 
 words in sentences : and, lest these should be insuffi- 
 cient to keep so great a man as the Marquis in coun- 
 tenance, 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 pri- 
 
six lessons. [Letter 
 
 " mary visitatiwi of that diocese, by George Tom- 
 ■* line, JD.D. F.R.S. Lord Bishop of Winchester^ 
 " Prelate of the Most Noble Order of the Garter : y 
 We will not stop here to inquire what a " prelate's " 
 office may require of him relative to an Order which 
 history tells us arose out of & favourite lady drop- 
 ping her garter at a dance; but, I must observe^ 
 that, as the titles here stand, it would appear, that 
 the last is deemed the most honourable, and of most 
 importance to the Clergy ! This Bishop, whose 
 name was Prettyman, was the tutor of that William 
 Pitt, who 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 Di- 
 vinity, a Fellow of the Royal Society, a Prelate of 
 the Most Noble Order of the Garter, and a Bishop 
 of one of the richest sees in the luhole world, who, 
 besides, is an Historian, and was Tutor to a heaven- 
 born Minister. Let us, then, see what sort of turiting 
 comes from such a source. I could take an incorrect 
 sentence, I could even take a specimen of downright 
 nonsense, 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 pre- 
 " side over this distinguished Diocese at a late period 
 " of life, I have thought it incumbent upon me not to 
 u delay the opportunity of becoming personally ac- 
 " quainted with my Clergy longer than circumstances 
 <( rendered absolutely necessary." 
 
 There are two double meanings in this short sen- 
 tence. Was he called at some former time, to pre- 
 side over the diocese when he should, become old? 
 or, was he, when he had become old, called to pre- 
 side over the diocese? But what follows is still 
 
XXIV.] bishop of Winchester's charge. 
 
 worse. Does he mean, that he thought it incumbent 
 on him to become acquainted with his Clergy as 
 soo?i as possible, or, as short a time as possible ? 
 To delay an opportunity is not very good ; and, 
 that which is of a man's own appointment and which 
 proceeds purely from his own will, cannot strictly be 
 called an opportunity. But, it is the double mean- 
 ing, occasioned by the ivrong -placing of the words, 
 that I wish you to attend to. 
 
 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 dis- 
 !! tinguished Diocese, I have thought it incumbent on 
 " me not to delay, longer than circumstances rendered 
 " absolutely necessary, the opportunity of becoming 
 44 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 re-corrected 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 w T ho are called 
 Doctors on account of their literary acquirements, 
 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 ensure, to those who have assumed them, 
 power, ease, luxury, and splendour, at the expense of 
 those who have been foolish or base enough to ac- 
 quiesce, or to seem to acquiesce, in the fitness of the 
 assumption. 
 
 Such acquiescence is not, however, so general now- 
 a-days as it formerly was ; and the chagrin which 
 the " Doctors' 7 feel at the change is not more evident 
 
SIX LESSONS. 
 
 than it is amusing. In the very Charge, which I 
 have just quoted, the Tutor of the heaven-born Mi- 
 nister says, " A spirit is still manifest amongst us, pro- 
 ducing an impatience of controul, 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 offence 
 against God, to be reluctant to " acknowledge su- 
 periority" in a Bishop who cannot write so well as 
 ourselves! Oh, no ! We are not to be censured, be- 
 cause we doubt of the expediency of those establish- 
 ments, those Colleges and Universities, which cause 
 immense revenues, arising from public property, to be 
 expended on the education of men, who, after all, 
 can produce, in the literary way, nothing better than 
 writings such as those on which we have now been 
 remarking. 
 
 END. 
 
 London : 
 
 Printed by Mills, Jowett and Mills, 
 
 Bolt Court, fleet Street. 
 
PfjO 
 Cq3 
 
*^^ y * 
 
 -s* 
 
 ■BS 
 
 x-:^ 
 
 I ^ 
 
 Jm< 
 
 "Sfk 
 
 
 >^%' 
 
 -jfe; 
 
 fe i ,*<■