)alifori 
 gional 
 cility 
 
 .-jj
 
 THE GIFT OF 
 
 MAY TREAT MORRISON 
 
 IN MEMORY OF 
 
 ALEXANDER F MORRISON
 
 THE 
 
 English Grammar 
 
 WILLIAM COBBETT 
 
 IN A SERIES OF LETTERS ADDRESSED TO HIS SON 
 
 WITH NOTES 
 
 BY 
 
 ROBERT WATERS 
 
 AUTHOK or A " LIFE OF WILLIAM COBBKTT," " 8HAKESPEARB AS PORTBAYED BY 
 HIMSELF," AND "GENIUS AND CULTUBB." 
 
 TENTH EDITION. 
 
 NEW YORK. 
 PETER ECKLER, PUBLISHER, 
 
 lOOI. , -J-
 
 COPYRIGHT. 
 
 Tliti ETCKLER PrEJJ 
 >3o rui TON JT. 
 
 New York.^
 
 // // 
 
 EDITOR'S PREFACE. 
 
 UB. RIOHAKD GRANT WHITe's VIEWS; AND SOME OTHER VTEWS. 
 
 Among I'ecent writers on language, there is perhaps 
 1 not one who has written more wisely, or exhibited a finer 
 ^ perception of the true means of acquii-ing the power of 
 f* expression, than Mr. Richard Grant White. His two 
 works, " Words and their Uses " and " Every-day English," 
 J are marvelously interesting and full of sound, wholesome 
 0^ instruction. These books will, by any one xminf ormed of 
 his novel vievrs, be read with sm-prise and even with in- 
 credulity; but they cannot fail to impress the reader with 
 the conviction, that they possess a measvu'e of truth which 
 is confirmed by experience. Mr. White condemns as alto- 
 gether useless, nay, as worse than useless, the grammar 
 studies of our public schools, and recommends the study 
 of authors instead of grammars. 
 
 Now, although I agree in the main with Mr. White's 
 \^ views concerning the character of oui* tongue, and the 
 
 * unprofitableness of grammar studies ia general ; although 
 \S I f^y agree with him that our language must be learned, 
 
 • chiefly, from hearing good speakers and reading good 
 T writers ; still I maintain that this is not enough ; that in 
 
 ^ order to be able to write correctly, and to be sure that one 
 
 ^ does write correctly, a fair knowledge of well-defined prin- 
 
 Vi dples is necessary; that the study of these principles, 
 
 *^ rightly pursued, is not only necessary to enable one to 
 
 ^ speak and write correctly, but is useful as a disciphne of 
 
 ^N^ t£e mind and as a means of general culture. Theory 
 
 ^ MUST be combined with practice. For although one may, 
 
 by a large acquaintance with good writers and speakers, 
 
 acquiie a good ear and a discriminating sense of con-ect 
 
 language, these are not infallible guides ; a person with 
 
 t>4 
 
 ^Jtir-tsS i -'ji:<^ 
 
 1
 
 iv Editor''s Preface. 
 
 the finest cultvu'e of this Idn J may commit the most egre- 
 gious blunders. It is precisely this which is so forcibly 
 displayed by Cobbett in his "Six Lessons"; where he 
 shows that persons of the highest rank, the finest taste, 
 the gentlest training, and the most extensive learning 
 have committed errors of the coarsest kind. 
 
 IMr. White says: "In speaking or writing English, we 
 have only to choose the right words and put them in the 
 right places, respecting no laws but those of reason, con- 
 forming to no order but that which we call logical." But 
 most people must be taught what are " the laws of reason, 
 and the order which we call logical." Without some in- 
 struction in these matters, common people will hardly 
 ever write half-a-dozen lines without a blunder. Take the 
 mechanics and shopkeepers, for instance, and you will 
 find that most of them ai'e unable to announce even then- 
 names and business correctly. Not to mention the ludi- 
 crous and amusing eiTorS of which Mr. White himself 
 gives specimens — the " inaugxu-ation of a sample-room," 
 the "home-made hotel," etc. — we have only to look at any 
 common sisfn to be convinced of the truth of this state- 
 ment. " John Smith, Iron Foundry," " John Jones, Cigar- 
 Store." John Smith is not an u-on foundry, nor John 
 Jones a cigar-store. We know that they mean, "John 
 Smith, Ii-on Founder," or "John Smith's Iron Foundry," 
 "John Jones, Cigar-maker," or "John Jones's Cigar- 
 Store " ; but they must be taught to say what they mean, 
 and the only way to do this is to instruct them in the 
 piinciples of grammai'; or, if you please, in "the laws of 
 reason and the order which we call logical." 
 
 Boys and gu-ls must be taught to write theu- thoughts 
 as well as to speak them. It is vain to say otherwise. 
 And the only question is, what is the best way of teaching 
 them. ]\Ii-. White will not hsten to the teaching of gram- 
 mar in any shape or form whatever. Well, as far as the 
 text-book method, the rule-and-word-cramming method
 
 Editor's Preface. v 
 
 of the public schools, is concerned, he is j^erfectly right ; 
 there is very little profit to be derived from it. But there 
 is a right and a wrong way of doing everything. !Mt. 
 White has nevei", I imagine, been a teacher; he knows 
 nothing of the actual work of teaching young people how 
 to write correctly; he knows nothing of teaching, I im- 
 agine, except by writing, which is an easy, pleasant, and 
 convenient way of teaching — I say not a word against its 
 effectiveness — for no questions are asked, except such as 
 may be again answered in writing, at one's leisure, and 
 without interruption or interpellation. If he were a 
 teacher, he would find it impossible to teach boys and 
 girls anything of correct speech without giving them some 
 knowledge of the laws of speech — as impossible as it 
 would be to teach them any science or art without men- 
 tioning the name or explaining the meaning of any one of 
 its paits. I do not say that this knowledge must be com- 
 municated by means of a book ; it may be communicated 
 without a book; indeed, much better without a book. 
 But taught it must be. For when you have shown boys 
 and gii'ls how to write a composition, and they have writ- 
 ten it, how ai'e you going to show them or explain to them 
 its errors, or how to improve theii" language, without ever 
 mentioning anything of the principles of grammai"? Can 
 there be any better way of showing a boy that " He writes 
 beautiful " is wrong, than by exjjlaining to him the differ- 
 ence between the adjective and the adverb? Can there be 
 any better way of showing him that "The book lays on 
 the table " is wrong, than by explaining to him the differ- 
 ence between a transitive and an intransitive verb ? Can 
 there be any better way of showing that "I am taller 
 than him " is wTong, than by explaining to hirn the differ- 
 ence between the nominative and the objective case? 
 That " The color of the leaves ai-e green " is wrong, than 
 by showing him the nature of subject and predicate, and 
 that the one must agree with the other"? These explana-
 
 vi Editor* s Preface. 
 
 tions, properly done, will be like taking him out of a thick 
 fog, and putting him in broad sunlight ; taking him out 
 of a perplexing, bewildering maze, and putting him on 
 a plain high-road, with a chart or compass by which he 
 may walk right on to his goal, with perfect ease, and in 
 perfect confidence. 
 
 I have heard of a lawyer who, at a banquet of gentle- 
 men of his cloth, brought out a toast " To the man who 
 writes his own will." Why? Because he is likely to 
 make use of language that will admit of question as to 
 its meaning ; and thus give work to the lawyers. Now I 
 maintain that the man who acquu-es a clear comprehension 
 of the principles of our language may write in such a 
 manner as to defy the astutest lawyer to make his 
 words mean anything else than what he intends them 
 to mean ; which is something that cannot be said of the 
 man who learns only by talking and reading. Such a man 
 lives in the land of oincertainty, and never knows whither 
 he is going or whence he has come. 
 
 Grammar, properly considered and properly taught, is 
 nothing but an unfolding of general principles, which 
 must be applied, more or less, in all languages ; every one 
 of which principles has a reason for its existence, and the 
 majority of which may be made as plain and evident as a 
 statement in mathematics. IVIr. White says that nobody 
 that thinks of his grammar while wiiting will ever write 
 a sentence worth reading. Of course, no boy or girl 
 ought for a moment to think of his grammar vv^hile veiiting 
 a composition; in fact, nobody ever does think of his 
 grammar while intent on putting down his thoughts. 
 But when the work is done, when he has wi'itten it, then 
 he ought to be able to review it understandingly, and see 
 that it conforms to "the laws of reason and the order 
 which we call logical"; otherwise he will, in nine cases 
 out- of ten, write incoiTectly. 
 
 I fully agree with Mr. White, that all the grammars of
 
 Editor's Preface. vii 
 
 Brown, Green, Wbite, and Black, may be thrown into the 
 fire, and the world will be none the worse off; for, ia my 
 opinion, boys and girls ought to be taught the principles 
 of English grammar without placing any text-book what- 
 ever in their hands. Never did the Board of Education 
 of New York adopt a wiser resolution than that recently 
 adopted, abolishing grammar text-books from the public 
 schools, in all but the two higher grades. Any person, 
 that requires a book in the hands of his scholars in order 
 to teach them the principles of English grammar, is no 
 teacher; he is simply a orammer-down of other people's 
 teaching, which he has himself been unable to master. 
 A genuine teacher requii-es, in order to teach grammar, 
 nothing but the blackboard and a piece of chalk ; all the 
 rest must come out of his head or out of the heads of his 
 scholars. He may make use of what books he pleases in 
 building up his own knowledge ; but no book should ever 
 be placed in the hands of his scholai's. To children, 
 books on the subject of giammar ai'e generally in a dead 
 language; it is all Greek to them; the living speech of 
 the teacher is the only language they can understand. 
 Away, therefore, with all grammar text-books; for they 
 are the dead- weights of progress, fatal to all true teaching. 
 
 Nor is this book of Cobbett's intended for boys and 
 gu'ls at school; it is for those who are studying out of 
 school; for those who are trying to acquire that real, 
 practical, profitable knowledge which is acquired by 
 self-exertion, or self-help; for those who have no teacher, 
 and are striving to teach themselves; for those who 
 wish to learn in order to teach; for those who have 
 failed to make any proper progress by means of other 
 grammars, and now wish to understand and master the 
 subject for themselves. 
 
 I do not deny that this book, being so entirely different 
 from all other grammai's; so conversational, easy, and 
 plain in its character; I do not deny that it may be ad-
 
 viii Editor's Preface. 
 
 vantageously used by school-boys under a competent 
 teacher; nay, even under an incompetent teacher; — in 
 fact, if the teacher must use a text-book, he cannot select 
 a better one than Cobbett's ; — ^but what I maintain is, that 
 it is the only grammar that can be profitably used with- 
 out a teacher ; the only book that can teach grammar by 
 ITSELF to those who are learning for themselves. As 
 long as principles last, and as long as men learn by using 
 their reason, grammar in some shape inust be taught; 
 and this being granted, I contend that there is no better 
 WAY of teaching it than this way of Cobbett's. Of 
 course, no child ought ever to be taught a word about 
 grammar until he has learned to read fluently, and even 
 write tolerably well, the words of his native language; 
 not untn he has attained his twelfth or fourteenth year; 
 for grammar is a matter which cannot be rightly under- 
 stood and assimilated before that age. This is another 
 reason why the action of the New York Board of Educa- 
 tion is a wise one. 
 
 Some of IMr. White's readers — feeUng, no doubt, as I 
 did, that even if all ordinary grammars are worthless, 
 sortxe grammar of some sort is necessary, and being de- 
 lighted by his clear and sensible manner of writing — 
 requested hirtx to write a grammar ; one of them declaring 
 that if he did so, a future generation would rise up and 
 call him blessed. Whereupon Mr. White makes the fol- 
 lowing amusing and significant reply: "I would gladly 
 act on this suggestion if it were probable that any re- 
 sponsible and competent publisher would make it prudent 
 for me to do so. It woxild be dehghtful to believe that 
 the next generation would rise up and call me blessed ; 
 but I am of necessity much more interested in the ques- 
 tion whether the present generation would rise up and 
 put its hand into its pocket to pay me for my labor. Any 
 one who is acquainted with the manner in which school- 
 books are ' introduced ' in this coimtry, knows that the
 
 Editor's Preface. ix 
 
 opinions of competent persons upon the merits of a book 
 have the least possible influence upon its coming suf- 
 ficiently into vogue to make its publication profitable; 
 and pubhshers, like other men of business, work for 
 money. One of the trade made, I know — although not 
 to me — an answer like this to a proposition to publish a 
 short series of school-books: 'I believe yovir books ai'e 
 excellent ; but supposing that they ai'e all that you be- 
 lieve them to be, I should, after stereotyping them, be 
 obliged to spend $100,000 in introducing them. I am 
 not prepared to do this, and therefore I must say No, at 
 once. The merit of a book has nothing to do with its 
 value in trade.' And the speaker was a man of experi- 
 ence."* 
 
 Now, I am strongly inclined to think that these ad 
 mirers of Mr. "WTiite's, and all those disgusted with the 
 ordinary grammars and the ordinary methods of teaching 
 grammar, will, if made acquainted with Cobbett's little 
 grammar, which has long been out of print in this coun- 
 try, find what they want, or nearly what they want ; for 
 there does not exist in our language a clearer exposition 
 of the natxu-e of English grammar than this by Cobbett. 
 The very language of the grammar itself is a capital illus- 
 tration of how one ought to write ; and if the scholai'"s^ 
 understanding the subject is a true test of the proper 
 learning of it, then no other grammar can, in the attain- 
 ment of this end, be compai'ed with this ; for thousands, 
 who have failed to understand the subject by other gram- 
 mars, have succeeded by this, and have, no doubt, risen 
 up and called Cobbett blessed for Avriting it. Even Mr. 
 White himself, who looks upon most other grammai's as 
 worse than useless, declares of Cobbett's grammar, that 
 he has "read it with great admiration, both for the 
 soundness of its teaching and the excellence of its sys- 
 
 ♦ " Words and their Uses," p. 427.
 
 3C Editor's Preface. 
 
 tern."* And he also declares, I think (I quote from 
 memory), that if gi-ammar is to be taught at all, it can- 
 not be taught better than by this method of Cobbett's. 
 
 At a meeting of school superintendents held recently 
 in Iowa, one of the superintendents read a j^aper on text- 
 books, in which he says: "Men of letters and men of 
 science have sought to veil their thoughts with the ob- 
 scurity of strange and foreign terms rather than to make 
 the road following them in their investigation easy. They 
 have sought the vain-glory of stultification in their selec- 
 tion of a medium for the communication of their thoughts, 
 rather than the lasting praise consequent upon a simple 
 style. Hence the difficulty in following them in their 
 text-books, and the unprofitableness of being taught how 
 to read thought from printed characters." If there is 
 one writer in the whole range of English Hteratiu'e who 
 deserves more praise than another for avoiding this very 
 style, so common among ordinary writers ; if there is one 
 author who is more conspicuous than any other for cloth- 
 ing his thovights in plain, intelligible language, it is "Wil- 
 ham Cobbett. In all that goes to the making up of good 
 EngHsh speech, he has no superior. He was the first to 
 show how one ought to wiite for young people, the first 
 to write in a manner that plain jjeople could understand; 
 the first to instruct in a truly edifying manner. It is his 
 great glory that he uses simple, plain language, and he 
 makes every .subject he touches, whether it be the defini- 
 tion of a verb or the explanation of the natm-e of the 
 national debt, perfectly clear and intelligible. 
 
 The Editor has endeavored to write the notes in some- 
 thing of the same j)lain and easy style as that in which 
 Cobbett has written the grammar, keeping constantly in 
 mind that he is addi-essing a youth of fourteen or fifteen 
 years of age. Of coui'se, he has never for a moment 
 thought of imitating Cobbett; but simply and only of 
 making the matter plain. 
 
 * " Everv-flav English, " Lettei-s to the New York Timea.
 
 Contents of the Grammar. 
 
 Letter Pag« 
 
 I. — ^Introduction 1 
 
 n. — Definition of Grammar and of its Different 
 
 Branches or Parts 8 
 
 m. — Etymology: the Different Parts of Speech, 
 
 or Sorts of Words 15 
 
 IV. — Etymology of Articles^ 24 
 
 V. — Etymology of Nouns 27 
 
 VI. — Etymology of Pronouns 38 
 
 VII. — Etymology of Adjectives 47 
 
 Vin.— Etymology of Verbs 50 
 
 IX. — Etymology of Adverbs 83 
 
 X. — Etymology of Prepositions 86 
 
 XI. — Etymology of Conjunctions .... 89 
 
 XII. — Cautionary Remarks 89 
 
 XIII. — Syntax Generally Considered 92 
 
 XIV. — Syntax : the Points and Marks made use of 
 
 in Writing 93 
 
 XV. — Syntax, as relating to Articles 106 
 
 XVI. — Syntax, as relating to Nouns 109 
 
 XVII. — Syntax, as relating to Pronouns 115 
 
 XVIII. — Syntax, as relating to Adjectives 139 
 
 XIX. — Syntax, as relating to Verbs 142
 
 xii Contents of the Grammar. 
 
 Letter Page 
 
 XX. — Syntax, as lelating to Adverbs, Preposi- 
 tions, and Conjunctions 184 
 
 XXI. — Specimens of False Grammar, taken from 
 the Writings of Dr. Johnson, and from 
 
 those of Dr. Watts 187 
 
 XXII. — En-ors and Nonsense in a King's Speech . . 209 
 XXTEI. — On Putting Sentences together, and on 
 
 Figtirative Language 223 
 
 THE SIX LESSONS. 
 
 XXTV. — Six Lessons, intended to prevent States- 
 men from using False Grammai", and 
 from Ma-iting in an Awkward Manner. . . 230 
 Lesson 
 
 I. — On the Speech of the Eight Honorable 
 Manners Sutton, Speaker of the House 
 
 of Commons 288 
 
 II. — On His Majesty's Speech at the Close of 
 
 the Session in 1819 240 
 
 III. — On the Note of Lord Castlereagh relative 
 
 to the Museums at Pai'is 246 
 
 lY. — On the Dispatch of the Duke of Wellington 
 
 relative to the Same Subject 252 
 
 V. — On a Note to Lord Castlereagh relative to 
 
 the French Slave Trade 256 
 
 Yl. — On Dispatches of the Mai-quis Wellesley 
 relative to the State of Ireland in 1822 . 
 — Charge of the Bishop of Winchester. . . 260
 
 DEDICATION. 
 
 TO HER MaST GRA.CIQU<i MAJKSTY, 
 
 QQEEN CAROLINE. 
 
 May it please your Majesty, 
 
 A work, having for its objects, to lay the solid fovinda- 
 tion of literary knowledge amongst the laboring classes 
 of the community ; to give practical effect to the natui'al 
 genius fovmd in the soldier, the sailor, the apprentice, and 
 the plough-boy ; and to make that genius a perennial 
 source "oFwealth, strength, and safety to the kingdom; 
 such a work natm-ally seeks the approbation of your 
 majesty, who, amongst all the royal personages of the 
 present age, is the only one that appeal's to have justly 
 estimated the value of the people. 
 
 ! The nobles and the hierarchy have long had the aiTO- 
 gance to style themselves the pillars that support the 
 throne. But, as youi* majesty has now clearly ascertained, 
 royalty has, in the hour of need, no efficient supporters 
 but the people. 
 
 During your majesty's long, ai'duous, magnanimous, 
 and gallant struggle against matchless fraud and bound-
 
 xiv Dedication. 
 
 less power, it must have inspii'ed you with great confi- 
 dence to perceive the wonderful intelligence and talent of 
 your milHons of friends ; while your majesty cannot have 
 failed to observe, that the haughty and insolent few who 
 have been your enemies, have, upon all occasions, ex- 
 hibited an absence of knowledge, a poverty of genius, a 
 feebleness of intellect, which nothing but a constant asso- 
 ciation with malevolence and perfidy could prevent from 
 being ascribed to dotage or idiocy. 
 
 That to her, whose great example is so well calculated 
 to inspu'e us with a love of useful knowledge, 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 honor 
 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 enduie all the suffer- 
 ings that mahce could invent and tyi'anny execute ; that 
 to her, God may grant, to know no more of sorrow, but 
 long to live in health, prosperity, and glory, surrovmded 
 and supported by a grateful and admiring people, is the 
 humble prayer of 
 
 Your majesty's most dutiful 
 
 And most devoted servant, 
 
 WILLIAM COBBETT. 
 London, Nov. 25th, 1820.
 
 Mr. James Paul Cobbett. 
 
 LETTER I. 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 North Hempstead^ Long Island, Dec. 6, 1817. 
 
 My dear Little James : 
 
 You have now ai'rived at the age of fourteen years with- 
 out 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 hved unpersecuted by such importunities, you 
 have had the very great advantage of being bred up under 
 a roof beneath which no cards, no dice, no gamiug, no 
 senseless pastime of any description, ever found a place. 
 Li the absence of these, books naturally became your com- 
 panions dui"ing some part of yoiu* 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 gai'den, to trim the flowers 
 and to prune the trees. The healthfvil exercise, and the 
 pleasiu-es, unmixed with fear, which you have derived 
 from these sources, have given you " a sound mind in a 
 sound body," and this, says an English writer, whose 
 works you wiU by-and-by read, " is the greatest blessir.^ 
 that God can give to man." 
 
 It is true that this is a very great blebeing , hxit FAcn 
 1 '
 
 2 Introduction. 
 
 soundness of mind, without any mental acquirements, is 
 possessed by millions ; it is an ordinary possession ; and 
 it gives a man no fair pretensions to merit, because lie 
 owes it to accident, and not to any thing done by himself. 
 But knowledge, in any art or science, being always the 
 fiTiit of obsen^ation, study, or practice, gives, in proportion 
 to its extent and usefulness, the possessor a just claim to 
 respect. We do, indeed, often see all the outward marks 
 of respect bestowed upon persons merely because they 
 are rich or powerful ; but these, while they ai"e bestowed 
 wdth pain, ai'e received without pleasui-e. They di'op fi'om 
 the tongue or beam from the featvu-es, but have no com- 
 munication with the heart. They are not the voluntary 
 offeiings of admiration, or of gratitude ; but ai'e extorted 
 from the hopes, the feai's, the anxieties, of poverty, of 
 meanness, or of guilt. ' Nor is respect due to honesty, 
 fidehty, or any such qualities; because 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. 
 
 Therefore, being extremely desu'ous 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 knowl- 
 edge which is inseparable fi'om an acquaintance with 
 books ; for, though knowledge in every art and science is, 
 if properly aj^plied, worthy of praise in proportion to its 
 extent and usefulness, there are some kinds of knowledge 
 which ai'e justly considered as of a superior order, not 
 only because the jDossession of them is a proof of more 
 than ordinaiy industry and talent, but because the appli- 
 cation of them has naturally a more powerful influence in 
 the affairs and on the condition of om* friends, acquaint- 
 ances, neighbors, and coiinfry. Blake, the Titchfield 
 thatcher, who broke his leg into splinters in falling from 
 a wheat-rick, was, on account of the knowledge which he 
 possessed, beyond that of laborers in general, an object
 
 Introduction. 3 
 
 of respect; but, in its degi-ee, and iu the feelings from 
 which it arose, how different was that respect fi'om the 
 respect due to oiu- excellent neighbor, Mr. Blundell, who 
 restored the leg to j)erfect use, after six garrison and 
 army surgeons had declai'ed that it was impossible to 
 preserve it, and that, if the leg were not cut off, the man 
 must die withm twenty-four horns ! It is probable that 
 the time of IVIi-. Bkmdell was not, on this occasion, occu- 
 pied more, altogether, than foui* days and four nights; 
 yet, the effect was a great benefit to be enjoyed by Blake 
 for probably thu'ty 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 cui'e would 
 natru'ally produce amongst friends, acquaintances, and 
 neighbors. 
 
 The respect due to the profession of the sm-geon or 
 physician is, however, of an order inferior to that which 
 is due to the profession of the law ; for whether in the 
 character of counsellor or of judge, here are required, not 
 only uncommon industry, labor, and talent, in the acquire- 
 ment of knowledge ; but the application of this knowledge 
 in defending the property 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 pow- 
 erfvd influence than can possibly arise from the appli- 
 cation of sui-gical or medical knowledge. 
 
 To the functions of statesmen and legislators is due the 
 highest respect which can be shown by man to anything 
 human ; for, not only are the industry, labor, 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
 
 4 Introduction. 
 
 beyond all tlie bounds of comparison. Here it is not in- 
 dividual persons with their families, friends, and neigh- 
 bors that are affected ; but whole countries and communi- 
 ties. Here the matters to be discussed and decided on 
 are peace or wai', 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 
 millions of men, and entail that calamity on a long series 
 of futui'e generations. 
 
 This is true enough ; but it is a remarkable fact that nearly all 
 the efforts of legislators, political as well as ecclesiastical, have 
 been of such a nature as to cause anything but respect for them. 
 The historian Buckle shows that the great bulk of the enactments 
 of legislators, since the beginning of history, have been conducive 
 of results directly opposite to those for which they were intended; 
 that is, evil results; and that the only beneficial legislation of mod- 
 ern times has consisted in the undoing of what previous legislators 
 have done. So that, of all the personages in history, none, unhap- 
 pily, are deserving of more profound contempt, or, at least, of less 
 esteem, than precisely those very men who ought to have secured 
 the greatest esteem, legislators. And all this, not because they 
 were bad men, but because they were lacking in knowledge. 
 
 And if this is the case with law-makers of honest intentions, 
 what shall we say of those execrable wretches, those deadly can- 
 cers on the body politic, who, on becoming members of a legisla- 
 ture, sell themselves, body and soul, to wealthy corporations? 
 What shall we think of their influence on the progress and welfare 
 of the people, whose interests they were elected to protect and to 
 promote ? Such creatures lose not only the esteem of all honest 
 men, but their own esteem, their self-esteem ; they become con- 
 temptible, not only in the eyes of those who buy tliem, but in their 
 own eyes ; and as to the future, the hottest, deepest gulfs in hell 
 are yawning for them ! 
 
 As a contrast to Buckle's judgment of the great crowd of igno- 
 rant and consequently pernicious legislators, consider this remark- 
 able statement which the same writer makes of the power and 
 influence of one man of real knowledge : "Well may it be said of 
 Adam Smith (author of ' The Wealth of Nations '), and said too 
 without fear of contradiction, that this solitary Scotchman has, by 
 the publication of one single work, contributed more towards the
 
 Introduction. 5 
 
 happiness of man, than has been effected by the united abilities of 
 all the statesmen and legislators of whom histoiy has preserved an 
 authentic account." — Hist, of Civilization, Vol I., p. 155. 
 
 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 bi'anches of knowledge 
 naturally have in the aflfau'S and on the condition of men, 
 so, in the cases of an imperfection in knowledge, or of 
 neglect in its application, or of its perversion to bad pur- 
 poses, all the feelings which ai'e opposite to that of respect 
 rise in the same proportion. To ignorant pretenders to 
 sui'gery and medicine we awai'd oxir contempt and scorn; 
 on time-serving or treacherous counsellors, and on cruel 
 or paitial judges, we inflict oui* detestation and abhor- 
 rence; while, on rapacious, corrupt, perfidious, or tyran- 
 nical statesmen and legislators, the voice of human 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 con- 
 nected with books, there is a step to be taken before you 
 can fah-ly enter upon any path. In the immense field of 
 this kind of knowledge, innumerable ai'e the paths, and 
 Grammak is the gate of entrance to them all. And if 
 grammar is so useful in the attaining of knowledge, it is 
 absolutely necessary in order to enable the possessor to 
 communicate, by writing, that knowledge to others, with- 
 out which communication the possession must be com- 
 paratively 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 cooperation, the concuiTence, or the 
 consent, of others, we must communicate our thoughts to 
 them. The means of this communication are words; and 
 gprammar teaches us how to make use of words. There- 
 fore, in all the ranks, degrees, and situations of hfe, a 
 knowledge of the principles and rules of grammar must
 
 6 Introduction. 
 
 be usefiil; in some situations it must be necessary to 
 the avoiding of really injuiious errors; and in no sit- 
 uation, wliicli calls on man to place his thoughts upon 
 paper, can the possession of it fail to be a source of self- 
 gratulation, or the want of it a cause of mortification and 
 sorrow. 
 
 But, to the acquuiug 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 : I mean that de- 
 su'e 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 secui-ed, and by which the happi- 
 ness and power and glory of oui' famed and beloved coun- 
 try have been so greatly promoted ; when you come to 
 read the histpry of the struggles of our forefathers, by 
 which those sacred laws have, from time to time, been 
 defended against despotic ambition ; by which they have 
 been restored to vigor 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 exulta- 
 tion the long-imprisoned, the heavily-fined, the banished 
 "Wilham Prynne, retiu'ning to liberty, borne by the j^eople 
 from Southampton 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 un- 
 justly and cruelly suffered; while youi- heart and the 
 heai-t of every young man in the kingdom will bovmd with 
 joy at the sj)ectacle, you ought all to bear in mind that, 
 without a knowledge of grammar, Mi*. Pryime could never 
 have perfoi-med any of those acts by which his name has
 
 Introduction. 7 
 
 fceen thus preserved, and which have caused his memory 
 to be held in honor. 
 
 Though I have now said what, I am sure, will be more 
 than sufficient to make you entertain a strong desii'e to 
 take this first step in the road to hterary knowledge. I 
 cannot conclude this introductory letter without observ- 
 ing, that you ought to proceed in jo\xr study, not only 
 with dihgence, but with patience; that, if you meet with 
 difficulties, you should bear in mind that, to enjoy the 
 noble prospect from Port's-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 recollection 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 have put my work into the form of Letters, in order 
 that I might be continually reminded that I was address- 
 ing 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 pai'ts of the work. And here I will just 
 add, that a sentence, 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 ^ii\e fu7'ther iti than the 
 lines in general ; and, of coui'se, all this part, which I have 
 just now wi'itten, beginning with " I have put my work 
 into theform^'' is 9, paragraph. 
 
 In a confident reliance on youi* attentiveness, industry, 
 and patience, I have a hope not less confident of seeing 
 you a man of real leai-ning, employing your time and 
 talents in aiding the cause of truth and justice, in afford-
 
 8 Definition of 
 
 ing protection to defenceless innocence, and in drawing 
 down vengeance on lawless oppression ; and, in that hope, 
 I am your happy, as well as affectionate, father, 
 
 WILLIAM COBBETT. 
 
 LETTER II. 
 
 DEFINITION OF GRAMMAR, AND OF ITS DIFFERENT 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 JBranches^ or Parts. 
 
 2. Grammar, as I observed to you before, teaches us 
 how to make use of loords; 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 thrown about seeds and stuck in 
 plants of some sort or other, in some way or other, without 
 any teaching of mine ; and so can anybody, without rules 
 or instructions, put masses of words upon paper ; but to 
 be able to choose the words Avhich 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 jDiinciples and rules constitute what is called 
 Grammar. 
 
 3. Nor must you suppose, by-and-by, when you come 
 to read about Houns 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
 
 Gnv)imair and its branches. 9 
 
 sure that they put upon paper what they mean to put 
 upon paper. I shall, before the close of these Letters, show 
 you that even very learned men have frequently written, 
 and caused to be pubHshed, 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 com- 
 mitted 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! 
 Grammai", 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 
 oui* 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 Grammar, 
 they are ybw77 and they are thus named: Orthography, 
 Prosody, Etymology, and Syntax. 
 
 5. There are two of these branches on which we have 
 very httle to say, and the names of which have been kept 
 in use fi"om an unwillingness to give up the practice of 
 former times ; but, as it is usual to give them a place in 
 books of this kind, I will explain to you the natui'e of all 
 the iova' branches. 
 
 6. ORTHOGRAPHY is a word made up of two Greek 
 words, which mean spelling. The use of foreign words, 
 in this manner, was introduced at the tima when the 
 English language was in a very barbarous ^'tate; and, 
 though this use has been continued, it ought to be a rule 
 with you, always, when you either vnite or speak, to avoid 
 the use of any foreign or uncommon word, if you can ex- 
 press your meaning as fully and clearly by an EngHsh 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 loords. 
 This is so very childish a concern that I will not appear to 
 
 1*
 
 10 Definition of 
 
 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 Voicels 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 l^'o^oels. Y, in certain 
 cases, is also a Voicel. All the rest of the letters of the 
 alphabet are Consonants. 
 
 This "very humble business" of spelling, however, must not bo 
 passed over so lightly ; for it is a subject of very great difficulty to 
 many persons. It is notorious that many of our ablest EnglisJi 
 authors were never able to spell or punctuate correctly, and that 
 the correctness of their printed books, in this respect, is entirely 
 owing to the skill of the compositor. Some of their manuscripts 
 might, indeed, be very aptly compared to the communication of 
 Tom Hood's witty but illiterate correspondent, who, on writing 
 him a long letter without any points whatever, jotted them all 
 down in a row at the end of his letter, and told him to "pepper 
 and salt" as he pleased. It is the compositor that does the " pep- 
 pering and salting," and much more, for many a writer of large 
 pretensions. 
 
 The orthography of our English words, from their various deri- 
 vation and the variety of sounds given to the letters of the alpha- 
 bet, is perhaps more difficult than that of the words of any other 
 modern tongue; and I wish to indicate here the very best and 
 simplest way of learning it, together with the punctuation of the 
 sentences — I mean by dictations. It is not necessary to have a 
 teacher for this purpose ; anybody who can read correctly can dic- 
 tate to you. All you have to do is to write down the words and 
 points that are slowly read to you from a book, and when you 
 have written about a page, take the printed book and compare 
 your words and points with those in the book, and correct accord- 
 ingly. This is the cure for all spelling-reform nonsense. Write 
 page after page to dictation, and you will soon find it all come very 
 natural— you will wonder how anybody could ever think of spell- 
 ing the words otherwise than the way they are spelled, or how 
 they cmild be spelled otherwise. 
 
 The old method — still practiced in our public schools — of giving 
 out columns of single and separate words to be spelled, verbally 
 and in writing, many of them such as may never be seen twice 
 again in a lifetime, is of very little value ; for it is disjointed, dry, 
 and pointless ; whereas, by dictating sentences from a book, the
 
 Grammar and its Braixc.hea. 11 
 
 scholar learns: 1st. to spell the words in common use; 3d, to 
 spell words according to their meaning (there, their ; hair, hare ; 
 pear, pair); 3d, to associate words with ideas, thus instinctively 
 and imperceptibly learning their proper meaning and right use ; 
 and, 4th, he acquires vl feeling or taste for correct language ; words 
 and sentences are impressed forcibly on his mind by hearing, 
 seeing, and writing them. Besides, he learns in this way, better 
 than in any other, a knowledge of punctuation, which in English 
 is different with different writers ; in fact, every English writer 
 has his own style of punctuating, for this is generally a matter of 
 taste and feeling. In writing to dictation, the work done by the 
 scholar is nearly the same as that done by the compositor, who is 
 the best speller and punctuator in the world. Therefore, get 
 somebody to dictate to j^ou every day a page, or half a page, from 
 a book, and you will, in a few months, acquire a better knowledge 
 of orthograpliy and punctuation than if you had spelled your way 
 through a dozen spelling-books. 
 
 7. PROSODY is a word taken from the Greek lan- 
 guage, 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 utteiing of syllables and 
 words. This is a matter, however, which ought not to 
 occupy much of your attention, because pronunciation, is 
 learned as bu'ds learn to chirp and sing. In some counties 
 of England many words are pronounced in a manner dif- 
 ferent from that in which they ai'e pronounced in other 
 counties ; and between the pronunciation of Scotland and 
 that of Hampshu-e the difference is very great indeed. 
 But, while all inquiiies into the causes of these differences 
 are useless, and all attempts to remove them are vain, the 
 differences are of very Httle real consequence. For in- 
 stance, though the Scotch say coorn, the Londoners cavm^ 
 and the Hampshh-e folks cam, we know they all mean to 
 say corn. Childi'en will pronounce as then* 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
 
 12 Definition of 
 
 words well chosen and properly placed, hearers whose 
 approbation is worth having will pay very little attention 
 to the accent. In short, it is sense, and not sound, which 
 is the object of your pursuit ; and, therefore, I have said 
 enough about Prosody. 
 
 Here is a circumstance that suggests a by no means unfavorable 
 commentary on the difference between the pronunciation of Eng- 
 lish in tliis country and in England : Mr. James Paul Cobbett, son 
 of William Cobbett, lias added to a late edition of this grammar, a 
 sixteen-page chapter on pronunciation, pointing out the various 
 classes of words commonly mispronounced by classes and counties 
 of people in England. After carefully noting them all, I have come 
 to the conclusion that the whole batch is utterly useless for our 
 people, as I do not know of a single class of people in this country 
 who make any one of the same mispronunciations. Many of the 
 mistakes are, it is true, made here, too; as, bood for bud; doon 
 for done ; aboove for above ; fayther for father ; awch for arch ; 
 glawss for glass ; but they are not made by classes of people ; they 
 are, in fact, made by none but a few illiterate and pretentious 
 people. 
 
 The most common mistake made by people in this country con- 
 sists in misplacing the accent of words ; as, in-dus'-try for in'-dus- 
 try ; in-ter-est'-ing for in'-ter-est-ing. All these may be corrected 
 by reference to the dictionary, in which the pronunciation of every 
 word is properly marked. The stress of the voice always falls on 
 that sj'Uable having the accent-mark (') ; thus, per'-emp-to-rj^, not 
 per-emp'to-ry. I have read somewhere that, on one occasion, 
 when Mr. Sumner's colleague in the Senate said he hoped that the 
 honorable gentlemen would make an inquiry into some matter, 
 Mr. Sumner whispered to him : "inquiry." 
 
 By-the-bye, there is one other mistake in pronunciation, which 
 is very common among Americans, in the Eastern States at least, 
 and that is pronouncing such words as new, dew, stew, as if they 
 were written noo, doo, stoo. They must be pronounced like few 
 and view. The same error is made in such words as duty, grati- 
 tude, where the u must be long, as in useful. 
 
 There is something else that usually comes under this heading. 
 The Greek word prosodia means, literally, "belonging to song 
 or hymn," and is usually employed to signify that part of gram- 
 mar which treats of the rules of rhythm in metrical composi- 
 tions. Cobbett, it is well knov/n, had very little admiration for
 
 Crrainmar and its Branches. 13 
 
 poetry, and no doubt considered it a waste of time to say anything 
 about its laws ; but, though perhaps not one in a liundred of those 
 who study this book will ever attempt to write poetry, every intel- 
 ligent person ought to know something of its laws ; and I shall, 
 therefore, at the end of the book, after more necessary mat- 
 ters have been mastered, attempt to show what a simple matter 
 this is, as far as English is concerned. 
 
 8. ETYMOLOGY is a very different matter ; and, undei 
 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 relathtishij? qfzoords, or, the man- 
 ner in which one word grows out of, or comes from, 
 another word. For instance, the word ioalk expresses an 
 action, or movement, of our legs ; but, in some cases we 
 say walks, in others vmlked, in others walking. These 
 three latter words are all different from each other, and 
 they all differ from the original word, toalk; but the 
 action or movement, expressed by each of the foui', is 
 precisely the same sort of action or movement, and the 
 thi'ee latter words grow out of, or come from, the first. 
 The words here mentioned differ from each other with 
 regard to the letters of which they are composed. The 
 difference is made in order to express differences as to the 
 J^ersons who walk, as to the Number of persons, as to the 
 Time of walking. You will come, by-and-by, to the prin- 
 ciples 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 consti- 
 tute 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 grammarians, it means those 
 piinciples and rules which teach us how to put words 
 together so as to form sentences. It means, in short, seti- 
 tence-making. Having been taught by the rules of Ety- 
 tnology what are the relationships of words, how words 
 grow out of each other, how they are varied in then-
 
 14 Definition of Grannndr^ etc. 
 
 letters in order to correspond with the A-ariation in the 
 circumstances to which they apply, Syntax will teach you 
 how to give all youi* words their proper situations or 
 places, when you come to put them together into sen- 
 tences. And here you will have to do with pohtts 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 
 m,ark 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 Grammar, 
 and of its separate Branches or Parts. I have shown you 
 that the first two of these Branches may be dismissed 
 without any further notice ; but very different indeed is 
 the case with regard to the latter two. Each of these 
 will require several Letters ; and these Letters will contain 
 matter which it will be impossible to understand without 
 the greatest attention. You must read soberly and slowly,. 
 and you must think as you read. You must not hurry 
 on fi'om one Letter to another, as if you were reading a 
 history ; but you must have patience to get, if possible, at 
 a clear comprehension of one part of the subject 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, thi-ee times, a 
 lesson, or other division of my Grammai", I wrote the 
 lesson down upon a loose sheet of paper. Then I read it 
 again several times in my own hand-wi'iting. Then I 
 copied it, in a very plain hand, and without a blot, into a 
 book, which I had made for the pm-pose. But if, in writ- 
 ing my lesson down on a loose sheet of paper, I commit- 
 ted one single error, however trifling, I used to tear the 
 paper, and wi'ite the whole down again ; and, frequently, 
 this occurred three or four times in the writing down of 
 one lesson. I, at first, found this labor veiy irksome;
 
 J*arts of i^eech. 15 
 
 but, haAdng- imposed it on myself as a duty, I faithfully 
 discharged that duty ; and, long before I had proceeded 
 half way thi'ough my Grammar, I experienced all the 
 benefits of my industry and perseverance. 
 
 This was, no doubt, how Cobbett, iu his soldier days, learned to 
 spell and punctuate ; for what he did was as good as writing so 
 many dictations. If any scholar feels like following his example, 
 he may lighten the labor and seciu'e nearly equal benefit l)y writ- 
 ing the lessons down as dictations. 
 
 LETTEK III. 
 
 ETYMOLOGY. 
 
 The different Parts of Speech, or Sorts of Words. 
 My dear James: 
 
 11. In the second Letter I have given you a description 
 of Etymology, and shown you that it treats of the pedi- 
 gree, or relationship, of words, of the nature of which re- 
 lationship 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 emplojing of words 
 ai'e vai-ied in order to express the vaiious circumstances 
 attending this relationshij). But, before I enter on this 
 pai't 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 necessai-y for you 
 to be able, before you proceed further, to distinguish the 
 words belonging to each of these Pai'ts of Speech from 
 those belonging to the other parts. Thex-e ai'e Nine 
 Parts of Speech, and they are named thus : 
 
 ARTICLES, NOUNS, 
 
 PRONOUNS, ADJECTrV^S, 
 
 VERBS, ADVERBS, 
 
 PREPOSITIONS, CONJUNCTIONS. 
 INTKRJECTIONS.
 
 16 Etymology. 
 
 12. Before the sergeant begins to teach young soldiers 
 their exercise of the musket, he explains to them the dif- 
 ferent pai-ts 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 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 are each and every 
 pai't of the shijD. Apprentices are taught the names of all 
 the tools used in their trade ; and ploughboys 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 than it is for you 
 to leai'n, before you go any fmther, how to know the sorts 
 oj^ words one from another. To teach you this, therefore, 
 is the object of the present letter. 
 
 13. AKTICLES. There aie but three in our language ; 
 and these are, the, an, and a. Indeed, there are but two, 
 because a7i 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 to know one sort of words fiom another sort of 
 words. 
 
 14. NOUNS. The word Noun means name, and 
 nothing more ; and JSfouns 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 JVbims/ 
 but there are many Nouns which express what we can 
 neither see, nor heai", nor touch. For exami^le: Con- 
 science, Vanity, Vice, Sobriety, Steadiness, Valour; and 
 a great number of others. Grammarians, 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»
 
 Parts of Speech. 17 
 
 if the three words make sense, the last word is a Noun. 
 This is frequently the case; as, the g;ood 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 pui'pose. You must employ your mind in 
 order to arrive at the knowledge here desued. 
 
 15. Every word which stands for a person or any ani- 
 mal, or for any thing of substance, dead or alive, is a 
 Noun. So far the matter is very easy. Thus, ')na7i, cat, 
 tree, log, aie Nouns. But when we come to the words 
 which ai'e 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, i^ 
 a Noun. 
 
 16. The only siu-e rrde is this : that a word which stands 
 for any thing that has an existence is a Noun. For ex- 
 ample: Pride, Polly, Thought, Misery, Truth, False- 
 hood, Opinion, Sentiment. None of these have any sub- 
 stance. 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 diffi- 
 culty disappear in a short time, if you exert your powers 
 of thinking. Ask yourself what existence means. Yua 
 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 ex- 
 press things which have a being, or existence. 
 
 17. PEONOUNS. Words of this sort stand in the 
 place of Nouns. Theu* name is fiom the Latm, and it 
 means For-nouns, or For-names; that is to say, these 
 words, called Pronouns, are used/b/-, or instead of. Nouns. 
 Me, She, Her, Him, Who, for example, are Pronouns. 
 The use of them is to prevent the repetition of Nouns, 
 and to make speakmg and WTiting more rapid and less
 
 18 Etytyiology. 
 
 encumbered witli words. An example 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 jjreparatious for attacking him. lie 
 thanked her for her kindness, and, as ^e was unable to de- 
 fend himself, he left his house and went to a neighbor's. 
 
 19. Now, if there were no Pronouns, this sentence must 
 be wi'itten as follows : — A woman went to a man, and told 
 the m,an, that the man was in great danger of being miu'- 
 dered by a gang of robbers ; as a gang of robbers had 
 made preparations for attacking the man. The man 
 thanked the xcoman for the woman^s kindness; and as the 
 man was unable to defend the man''s self, the man left 
 the man?s house and went to a neighbor'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 differ- 
 ence in the sorts of words, or Parts of Speech. 
 
 21. ADJECTIVES. The word Adjective, in its full, 
 hteral sense, means something added to something else. 
 Therefore, this teiin is used in Grammar as the name of 
 that Part of Sj^eech which consists of words which are 
 added, or put, to Nouns, in order to express something 
 relating to the Nouns, which something could not be ex- 
 jjressed without the help of Adjectives. 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 tiu-key, but a large turkey. There- 
 fore, I add, or 2)ut to the Noun, the words white and large, 
 which, therefore, ai"e called Adjectives. 
 
 22. Adjectives sometimes express the qualities of the 
 Nouns, to wliich they are put ; and this being very fi-e-
 
 i"(»^.'(,5 oj speech. 19 
 
 quently their use, some grammaa-iaus iiave thrown aside 
 the word Adjectives, and have called words of this sort, 
 Qualities. But this name is not sufficiently comprehen- 
 , sive ; for there are many words which are Adjectives 
 which have nothing to do with the qualifi of the Nouns 
 to which they are put. Good and bad express qualities. 
 but long and short meroly express dimension, or duratioa, 
 p/ithout giving- any intimation as to ^he quality of the 
 things expressed by the Nouns to /hich they are put; 
 and yet lo7iff and short are 4djectiyes You must r3»d 
 very attentively here, and consider soberly. You .must 
 I oep in mind the above axplanp.tioa of the meanincj of ihs 
 Yord Adjective; and if yov also bear in mind that words 
 1 i' this sort always express; ^oms quplity, some property, 
 j:ome app9?r«nc3. or some distin^ri^s circumstance, be- 
 longing tc the Nouns to which +hej jxe put, you will very 
 easily, r.nd in a very short .^pace of time, be able to dis- 
 tinguish an Adjective froiT; vords belonging to any other 
 Part of Speech. 
 
 23. VERBS. 'Grrammr.rip.nR .,p'^::r to have been at a 
 loss to discover a suitable appellation for this important 
 sort of words, or Pr.rt of Speech.; for the word T^erb 
 means nothing more than Wo7 J^ In the Latin it is 
 verbum, in the French it is 'oer-hsj and the French, ixi 
 tbeir Bible, say Le Verhe, where we say Th3 Word, The 
 truth is that there are so many properties and circuiD- 
 stances, so many and such different powers and functions, 
 belonging to this Part of Speech, that the mine?, of maa is 
 imable to bring the whols of them into any short ?.nd pre- 
 cise description. Thi3 5rst gi-amm^.r that I ever looked 
 into told me that "e. Verb is a word which signifies to do. 
 to be, or to suffer.'''' Whst was J to understand fi-om this 
 laconic account? 
 
 24. Verbs express all the diflf rsn'*^ ct'itiom and 'move- 
 fiients of all creatures and of all things, whether alive or 
 dead. As, for instance, to speak, to bark, to grow.^ to
 
 20 Etymology. 
 
 moulder., to crack, to crumble, and the like. In aH these 
 cases there is movement clearly vinderstood. But in the 
 cases of, to think, to reflect, to remember, to like, to detest^ 
 and in an infinite number of cases, the movem,ent is not so 
 easily perceived. Yet these ai'e all Verbs, and they do 
 indeed express tnovsments which we attribute to the tnind, 
 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, whether ani- 
 mate or inanimate. In speaking with reference to a man, 
 to Jijht is an action; to reflect is a movement; to sit is a 
 state of being. 
 
 2G. Of the manner of using Verbs you will hear a g^eat 
 deal by-aud-by; but wliat I have nere &-aid will, if you 
 read attentively, and take time to consider, be sufficient 
 to enable you to distiaguish Verbs from the words which 
 belong to the other Parts of Si^eech. 
 
 27. ADVERBS are so called because the words which 
 belong to this Part of Speech ai'e added to verbs. But 
 this is an inadequate descrij)tiou ; for, as you will pi es- 
 ently see, they aie sometimes otherwise employed. You 
 have seen that Verbs express actions, m,ovem,ents, and 
 states of being/ and it is very frequently the use of Ad- 
 verbs to express the manner of actions, movements, and 
 states of being. Thus : the man fights bravely/ he refiects 
 profoundly/ he sits quietly. In these instances the Ad- 
 verbs pei'form an office, and aie 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 lute, been di.y weather, take care to 
 press the earth extremely hard upon the seeds." Here
 
 Parts of Speech. 21 
 
 are four Adverbs, but only the last of the four expresses 
 any thing connecteJ 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 content; 
 but you must bear in mind that there are Adverbs of 
 time, of place, and of degree, as well as of manner ; and 
 that their business is to expi'ess, or describe, some circum- 
 stances in addition to all that is expressed by the Nouns, 
 Adjectives, and Verbs. In the above sentence, for ex- 
 ample, the words when, very, of late, and extremely, add 
 greatly to the precept, which, without them, would lose 
 much of its force. 
 
 29. PREPOSITIONS. The Prepositions ai'e, in, to, 
 for, from, of, by, with, into, against, at, and several others. 
 They are called Prepositions from two Latin words, mean- 
 ing before and place; and this name is given them be- 
 cause they ai'e iu most cases placed before Nouns and 
 Pronouns ; as, " Indian corn is sown in May. I)i 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 liill to hLl with baskets, into which they put 
 the eai's. 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 making of sheds to 
 protect a-iimals against the inclemency of the weather." 
 
 30. Prepositions ai'e not very numerous, and, though 
 you WL.1 be taught to be very careful in using them, tae 
 above sentence will be quite sulHcient to enable yoa to 
 know the words belonging to this Part of Speech from 
 the words belonging to aay other Part of Speech. 
 
 Notice that the word is from "prae," before, and "positio,** 
 a placing. Now take aay article of farulLu/e ucar you — the 
 desk, for instance — and think of all t.u rela!,u)ns of position with 
 regard to it and somethin^; else. Tno book \i in the desk, on the 
 desk, over the desk, above, under, beneaih or below the desk, near
 
 22 Etymology. 
 
 the desk, against the desk, hedde the desk, within or without the 
 desk, and so on. Still, other relations are sometimes expressed 
 by prepositions as well as that of position; as, by the desk, of the 
 desk, to the desk, for the desk ; but the majority of them show 
 some relation of position between things and actions, or between 
 persons and actions, or between things and states. This word 
 between, for instance, is a preposition. Like other words used in 
 grammar, its name, preposition, does not express completely the true 
 nature of it. 
 
 31. CONJUNCTIONS are so called because they con- 
 join, or join together, words, or parts of sentences ; as, 
 "Peas awf? beans maybe severed from the groand before 
 they be quite dry ; but they must not be put into sacks or 
 barns until perfectly dry, /or, if they be, they will mould." 
 The word a7id joins together the words peas and beans, 
 and, by the means of this junction, makes all the remain- 
 ing part of the sentence apply to both. The word hut 
 connects the fii'st with the Bccond member of the sen- 
 tence. The wordybr, which is sometimes a Conjunction, 
 performs, in this case, the same office as the word hut : it 
 continues the connection ; and thus does every part of the 
 sentence apply to each of the two nouns which are the 
 subject of it. 
 
 What a deal of useless learning we find in the ordinary gram- 
 mars about this simple matter of conjunctions! They speak of 
 conjunctions which are mere connectives, of co-ordinate and sub- 
 ordinate connectives, of copulative, adversative, and alternative 
 conjunctions ; then of subordinate connectives which join hetero- 
 geneous elements, and these subordinate connectives again divided 
 into those which unite substantive clauses, those which unite 
 ^adjective clauses, and those which unite adverbial clauses ! What 
 ,are children to make of all these hard words? Or, supposing they 
 are made to understand the words, will it enable them to use the 
 word and, for instance, more correctly by informing them that it 
 Is a copulative conjunction? 
 
 32. INTERJECTIONS. This name comes from two 
 Latin words : inter, which means hetv^eeti, axid jectio, which 
 means somethitig throwii. So that the full, literal mean-
 
 Parts of Speech. 23 
 
 ing of the word is somethmg thrown hetmeen. The Inter- 
 jections ai'e Ah! Oh! Alas! and such like, which, in- 
 deed, are not words, because they have no definite meaning. 
 They are mere sou?ids, and they have been mentioned by 
 me merely because other grammarians have considered 
 them as being a Part of Sf)eech. But this one notice of 
 them will be quite sufl&cient. 
 
 Here Cobbett's defective knowledge of Latin crops out, for jectia 
 does not mean something throion, but merely the aft of thromng. 
 But be is quite right in setting down interjections as forming no 
 part of grammar. A writer in Chambers's Encyclopedia hits the 
 mark still more elTectively when he says tbat"they are, in fact, 
 more akin to the sounds emitted by the lower animals than to artic- 
 ulate speech." Yet most grammarians take the trouble to set them 
 down in classes, those that express surprise, those that express 
 fear, and so on ; as if the veriest boor that ever hopped over a clod 
 would not know how to utter an exclamation expressing fear or 
 surprise when he felt it ! It is something like the Irishman's 
 " teaching ducks to swim." 
 
 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 observa- 
 tion. I shall now proceed to the Etymology of each of 
 these Pai-ts of Speech. As we have done with the Inter- 
 jections, there will remain only eight Parts to treat of, 
 and this I shall do in eight Letters, allotting one Leiter 
 to each Part of Speech. 
 
 Here it seems proper to say to the thoughtful scholar that a word 
 may (as remarked by Mr. White) belong to almost any part of 
 speech, according to its use. We say dog is a noun ; and so it is 
 when it means an animal of the dog species; but it may be a verb 
 or an adjective ; as, he will dog me to my home ; here is a dog cart. 
 In this very phrase, "dog species," it is an adjective. Take, 
 again, the word but. I will give it to you of four different parts 
 of speech in four different senses. "I will go, b^ut 1 will return. 
 He is but five years old. The goat will but his head against you. 
 He always has a but in his sayings." And the word could no 
 doubt be used in still other parts of speecli. If you cannot make 
 these out now, wait a little ; you will be able to do so by ;vud-by.
 
 24: Etymology 
 
 Spelled with two t's, there are three different hiUs, with three 
 different meanings ; the butt of ri Jicule, the butt of a segar, the 
 butt of wine. Then, again, a word may be of two different parts 
 of speech with a different accent, as, I re-cord' the deed ; this is the 
 rec'-ord. You see, therefore, every thing depends on the sense or 
 the use made of a word ; and you see, too, the utter uselessness of 
 learning by heart instead of by reason. la learning any art or 
 ecieuce, aa ounce of understanding is worth a ton of memory. 
 
 LETTER IV. 
 
 ettmologt of articles. 
 
 My dear James: 
 
 34. In Letter III., paragraph 13, you have seen what 
 sort of words Articles are ; thj,t is oo say, you have there 
 .earned how to distinguish the words belonging to this 
 Pai't of Speech from words belonging to other Parts of 
 Speech. You must nov/ turn to Letter II., paragraph 8. 
 Having read what you find there under the head of J^iy- 
 mology, you will see at once, that my business, in this 
 present Letter, is to teach you those principles and rules 
 according to which Articles are varied in order to make 
 them suit the different circumstances which they are used 
 to express. 
 
 35. You have seen that there are but three Articles, 
 namely, A or AN, and THE. The two foi'mer are, in fact, 
 the same word, but of this I shall say more presently. 
 They are called indefinite Articles, because they do not 
 
 ' define, or determine, what pai'ticular object is spoken of. 
 
 -^ The Nouns, to which they ai'e prefixed, only serve to point 
 out the sort of person or thing spoken of, without defin- 
 ing what person or what thing ; as, a tree is hlowed doion. 
 From this we learn that some tree is bio wed down, bat 
 2jo\, what tree. But the definite Article THE determines 
 the particular object of which we speak ; as, the tree which
 
 Of Articres^ 25 
 
 stood close beside the barn is blowed down. In this last 
 instance, we ai'e 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 
 aa well as before nouns in the singular 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 species, 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 Ai'ticle comes 
 immediately before wty word w^hich begins with a voioel 
 This is for the sake of the sound, as aji adder, an elephant^ 
 an hiK h, an oily seed, an ugly hat. The word an is also 
 used before words which begin with an h which is mute j 
 that is to say, which, though used in writing, is n<A 
 sounded in speaking ; as, a7i 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 ele- 
 phant, a inch, a oily seed, a ugly hat, a hour, and the 
 like. But a is used in the usual way before words which 
 begin w^ith an h which is sounded in speaking ; as, a horse, 
 a hair, and the like. The mdefinite Article can be used 
 before nouns in the singular number only. There is a 
 seeming exception to this rule in cases where the words 
 few and m.any come before the noun; as, Q,few horses; a 
 (jreat many horses ; but, in reality, this is not an excep- 
 tion, because the words feto and many mean number ; 
 thus, a small number of horses, a great number of horses; 
 and the indefinite Article agrees with this word number^ 
 which is understood, and which is in the singular. 
 
 It is remarkable that a man of Cobbett's discernment did not see 
 
 through a certain inconsistency in the strict or literal application 
 
 of this rule, the more especially as he explicitly declares that the 
 
 change is made tor the sake of tlie sound. He, like a thousaod 
 
 2
 
 26 IStymology 
 
 o&ers to tlie present d&y, folhxTed out the letter of the rule and 
 violated its spirit. 5'or a word may begin with a vowel and yet 
 have a oonsonani sciyid; and in 'his case the article must not be 
 changed. Does li not sound mii.^h better to say, "a useful book," 
 than "an useful book?" "such a one," than "such an one?" And 
 is will be 3eer' 'hat when we say a useful book, a one, a union, a 
 ewe, a European, and the like, we really conform to the spii-it cf 
 the rule ; foi in all these cases the words begin with the SOUND 
 of a consonant ; as> 3 yuseful book, a wone, a yunion, a yewe, a 
 yeuropean. 
 
 And this also clearly illr otrates something else that has been left 
 mysteriously Indefinite in many grammars : "The vowels are a, e, 
 i, 0, u, and sometimes u and ?/." Wh?/: a puzzle this used to be to 
 me in my grammar-studying dttys! There was the rule, plain 
 enough; but iclien w and y were cor.Gonants, I knew no more 
 than the man in the iKOon! I suppose tliat these writers of gram- 
 mars repeat this rule, one s^ter another, without knowing anything 
 about it them.selves. Now tlie reason here given why tlie indefinite 
 article must remain unchanged before words beginning with a 
 vowel and having a y or V3 sound, explains the whole matter; 
 namely^ that y and vi at the ibginning of a syllable are consonants 
 but in the middle or at the snd of a syllable are vowels. In the 
 word sympathy, for instance, both y's are vowels, because they are 
 equal to ?''«/ in the word ye&terday, the first is a consonant, and the 
 second a vowel. It is precisely the same with the w; in the words 
 new., few, pew, the w'c are vowels, being equal to u's; in the 
 word window, the first is a consonfint :-.nd the second a vowel. 
 
 J3ut vhere is another rule concerning words beginning with h, a 
 rule of which Cobbett and many othe: ^J^riters of his day seem to 
 have been unaware — although I have ao lioubt they unconsciously 
 obeyed it — which is also formed for the .-/;.-.'. of the sound. In these 
 four words, for instance, Imtory, historical, hero, heroic,, the h is uni- 
 formly sounded; or aspirated. Yet we say an liistcHcol fact, an 
 heroic poein, a Imtory , ■:. hero, How does this come? It is because 
 we must say an before words beginning with ,1 jspirate> when the 
 accent of such zoordsf- 'Is on the second syllable, 'That is the rule. 
 Say, therefore, an hotel, an hereditary prin's and not. as r?:^auy do, 
 a Iwtel, a hereditary prince; for the forme* ■junds . letter. 
 
 I may here add that the tendency now-a-days is to sound tlie /* 
 in some words in which it was formerly silent : a humble man, 
 a hospital, a hostler. I suppose Dickens's Uriah Heep has made 
 most people disgusted with "an 'umble man." And it is perhaps
 
 Of Nouns. ^11 
 
 •worth remarking here that many Americans make u serious 
 mistake when they believe that all Englishmen drop their aitches, 
 and put them iu where they ought uot to do so. Tlie latter is 
 never done by anybody in England but illiterate Londoners, and 
 the former seldom by Englishmen of any culture. 
 
 I notice that recent grammarians follow Noah Webster in setting 
 down articles as adjectives. It is true that these words always 
 modify nouns in some way; but I see no advantage in setting them 
 down among a class of words which generally signify the kind or 
 quality of things, thus rendering the adjective itself all the more 
 difficult to define. Besides, the articles have characteristics en- 
 tirely their own, which can be remembered the better by keeping 
 tiiem apart. We shall see this mojte clearly by-and-by. 
 
 LETTER V. 
 
 ETYMOLOGY V>1> K0UN3. 
 
 37. This, my dear James, is a Letter of great impo3 1- 
 rjice, and, therefore, it will requiie great attcBtion from 
 jou. Before you proceed further, you will again look 
 well at Letter II., paragraph 8, and Letter III., pai-a- 
 ^^raphs 14, 15, and 16, and there read carefully everything 
 imder the head of Nouns. 
 
 38. Now, then, as Letter HI. has taught you how to 
 flistinguish Nouns from the words which 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 vaiied in the letters of which they are composed, ac- 
 cording 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. 
 
 39. In a Noun there arc to be considered the braixches^ 
 the iiuinbers, the geiiders, and the cases; and all these, 
 must be attended to very carefully. 
 
 40. THE BRANCHES. There are two ; for Nouns are
 
 28 Etymology 
 
 Bome of tliem proper and some common. A Noun is called 
 proper when it is used to distinguish one particular indi- 
 vidual from the rest of the individuals of the same species 
 or kind; as James, JBotley, Hampshire. The Noun is 
 called com.tnon 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 Ilam^p- 
 shire in America as well as in England; but, still, these 
 are proper names, because 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 fig- 
 urative language, of which you will know more by-and-by, 
 we sometimes, however, use the article ; as, " Goldsmith 
 is a very pretty poet, but not to be compai'ed to the Popes, 
 the Drydens, or the Otways." And again; "I wish I had 
 the wit of a Swift.'''' We also use the definite article be- 
 fore proper Nouns when a common Noun is understood 
 to be left out ; as, l^he Delaware, meaning the Hiver Del- 
 aware. Also when we speak of more than one person of 
 the same name ; as, the Henries, the Edwards. 
 
 A very importaut difference in the use of proper and 
 common nouns is, that the former are written with a capital 
 letter, and the latter are not. This is the general rule, and it is 
 generally observed ; but some writers begin every word they think 
 important with a capital letter, and nobody is more peculiar in 
 this respect than Cobbett himself. He writes noun, you see, with 
 a capital, although it is a common noun. Formerly every noun 
 u«ed to be written with a capital letter, as is done in German till 
 this day. Thomas Carlyle is another singular punctuator and 
 capitalizer ; but he is singular in all things. 
 
 41. THE NUMBERS. These ai-e the Singular and 
 the Plural. The Singular is the original word ; and, in 
 general, the Plxiral id formed by adding an s to the singu-
 
 Of Nouns. 29 
 
 lar, as dog^ dogs. But though the greater pai't of our 
 Nouns form their plui'als from the singular in this simple 
 manner, there are many which do not ; while there are 
 some Nouns which have no plui'al number at all, and some 
 which have no singulai". Therefore, considering the above 
 to be the First Kule, I shall add other rides with regard 
 to the Norms which do not follow that Rule. — The Second 
 Rule. Nouns, the singular numbers of which end in chy 
 s, sh, or X, requii-e es to be added in order to form their 
 plural number; as, church, churches; brush, brushes/ 
 lass, lasses ; fox, foxes. — The Thikd Rule is that Nouns 
 which end in y, when the y has a consonant coming im- 
 mediately before it, change the y into ies in forming their 
 plui'als; as, quantity, quantities. But you must mind 
 that if the y be not immediately preceded by a consonant, 
 the words follow the First Mule, and take only an s in 
 addition to theii* singular ; as, day, days. I am the more 
 anxious to guai'd yoa against error as to this matter, be- 
 cause it is very common to see men of high rank and pro- 
 fession writing vallies, vollies, attornies, 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 Novms which end in. a single /, or ia fe, form their 
 plurals by changing the/, orfe, into ves; as, loaf, loaves/ 
 wife, wives. But this rule has exceptions, in the following 
 words, which follow the First Mule : Dwarf, scarf, mis- 
 chief, handkerchief, chief, relief, grief and others. The 
 two last ai-e seldom used in the plural number ; but, as 
 they sometimes are, I have included them. — The Fifth 
 Rule is, that the following Nouns have then- plui'al in en/ 
 man, tnen/ woma?i, women/ ox, oxen; child, children. 
 And brethren is sometimes used as the plural of brother. — 
 The SncTH Rule is, that all which nature, or art, or habit, 
 has made plural, have no singular ; as, ashes, annals, bel- 
 lows, bowels, thanks, breeches, entrails, lungs, scissors.
 
 30 Etymology 
 
 snuffers, tongs, wages, and some others. There are also 
 some Nouns which have no plurals, such as those which 
 express the qualities, or propensities, or feelings, of the 
 mind or Ii&art; as, honesty, meekness, compassion. 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 soi"ts of 
 grain. Thsre are exceptions here; for while icheat has 
 no plural, oats has seldom any singular. But all these 
 words, and others ^yhich are in-cgular, in a similai' ^■:t:j- 
 are of such very common use that you will hardly ever 
 make a mistaLo in applying them ; for I vdll not suppose 
 it possible for my dear James to fall into either the com- 
 pany or the language of those who talk, and even write, 
 about larleys, wheats, clovers, flours,, grasses, and malts. 
 There remain to be noticed, however, p.ome words which are 
 too iiTegular in the forming of the:r plui-als to be brought 
 under any distinct head even of irregularity. I will, 
 therefore, insert these as they are used in both numbers 
 
 6ISGDLAR. 
 
 PLUK.^.L. 
 
 sn-:uvr.AB. 
 
 I'LUKAL. 
 
 J3ie, 
 
 Dice, 
 
 Goose, 
 
 Geese. 
 
 Mouse, 
 
 Kice, 
 
 Penny, 
 
 Pence, 
 
 Louse, 
 
 Lice, 
 
 Tooth, 
 
 Teeth, 
 
 Deer, 
 
 Deer, 
 
 Foot, 
 
 Feet. 
 
 Die, dhe. Tlaic is the little cubic implement of the gamester ; 
 but the more worthy implement of the die-sinker is regular; die, ; 
 dies. You must not confound this with the dtjs and dyes of the ' 
 dyer. It is customary to change penny to pence when speaking of _■ 
 a sum of money ; but, in speaking of penny-pieces, the word is ■ 
 regular; as, I have a pocketful of pennies. By-the-bye, all such 
 words as this word pocketful &tc also regular; three pocketfuls, four ; 
 spoonfuU, live aliovelfuls. Tluee pocketsful would be quite another 
 thing. Then again, we must, from the nature of the words, say 
 mothers-in-law, coiisins-german, courts-martial; for the words i/i-tow, 
 german, and martial, are adjectives or qualifying words, and 
 adjectives, in English, never make any change to express number. 
 EngUshm.an and Frenchman become Englishmen and Frenchmen -
 
 Of Nouns. 31 
 
 but not all the nationalities ending in man become r,-,an; there are 
 the Romans, the Normans, and the Ge7inans, brave manly races, 
 no doubt, but who will say 'that the Mu8sv,lmzns, Tvjrlcomam 
 and Ottomans deserve to be called men? 
 
 Most of the nouns ending in o, add es to form the plural ; as, 
 negro, negroes. There are only a few exceptions; as, folio, 
 quarto, duodecimo, piano, nuncio, cameo, which follow the general 
 rule. I think it useless to mention eveij one of the excep- 
 tions ; for, in the fi"3t place, usage is gradually changing the form 
 of some of these words (motto, portico); and, in the eecond place, 
 the reader can always, when necessary, find the desired informa- 
 tion by reference to the dictionary. " I always did admire that 
 speech!" were the carcastic \7crds of Mr. Butler in reply to one 
 of Mr. Bingham's speeches. I may say the same thing, unsarcasti- 
 cally, of the reply of a young candidate for the bar, who, on using 
 asked some isolated, unimportant question, said, "I could find 
 that out in two minutea by reference to an encyclopedia." 
 
 There are some nouns, with a plural form but a singular mean- 
 ing, that nre always used in the singular. "The molassea is 
 sticky. The mea^sles is spreading. What is the neic^f He has 
 made a r.nries of blunders. The pains he has taken to repr.ir them 
 is remarkable. Mathematics (physics, optics, &c.) is an interesting 
 science." Look, therefore, to the meaning and not ihcforvi of the 
 word. 
 
 Deer, sheep, swine, vei'min, are the came in both singular and 
 plural ; but snipe, trout, salmon, fish, and the like, become plural 
 when number is signified, and singular when quantity is signified. 
 ' ' Here are two snipes ; I have shot a quantity of snipe. Here are 
 three fishes, three salmons ; I have caught a lot of fish, of salmon." 
 Dozen s.nd. pair are used like hundred and thousand; that is, singu- 
 lar with any other number, but plural without any other number. 
 "I saw d<}zens of those creatures; they walked in prnrs; IshcL five 
 dozen partridges and bought six pair of pigeons. Five hundred 
 men; there were hundreds of men." 
 
 In some compound nouns, both parts are nirids plural: man- 
 servant, men-servants; woman-servant, women-servants; knight- 
 templar, knights-templars. To prevent a confusion of things, we 
 must add 's to figures and letters to indicate th? plural: "I want 
 three 5's and four 6's. Mind your p's and q>, t.nd dot your i'a." 
 There are a number of names of persons and things in war affairs 
 that do not make any change for the plural ; as, 
 300 foot (meaning foot-soldiers, or inf-ir-t'-"^
 
 32 Etymology 
 
 400 horse (meaning horse-soldiers, or cavalry). 
 
 100 cannon ; although we also say, many cannons ; a number 
 of cannons. 
 
 500 head (of cattle). 
 
 40 yoke of oxen. 
 
 50 sail (meaning ships). 
 Tliis is a practice that seems to come from the German language, 
 in which words of measure or quantity do not, generally, change 
 to indicate plurality. Drel Pfund, zeha Fuss, vier Zoll. 
 
 Among proper nouns, the only peculiarity is one concerning 
 the young ladies ; for in speaking of them, you may give their 
 title or their name the sign of the plural ; you may say, the Misses 
 Campbell or the Miss Campbells, just as you please. The latter is, 
 I think, the more common usage, and the one that is likely to 
 prevail ; for it is more natural than the former, and prevents con- 
 founding the young ladies with their mamma, Mrs. Campbell. 
 (How is it, by -the- way, that most of the children in this country 
 say mam'ma and pap'a instead of mam-ma' and pa-pa', which is the 
 proper pronunciation ?) In addressing people, in conversation, we 
 say sir to one person, and gentleman to several ; miss (or Miss So- 
 and-So) to one, and ladies to several. Good morning, sir. Good 
 morning, gentlemen. Good morning, miss (or Miss Jennie). 
 Good morning, ladies. And here let me throw in, without any 
 extra charge, a bit of information for my young reader, which has 
 something to do with politeness as well as with grammar; namely, 
 that when you meet two persons in the street, only one of whom 
 you know, it is proper for you to address both while saluting 
 them : Good morning, gentlemen. 
 
 Just as the girls get Miss, the boys ought to get Master. This, 
 however, is more common in England than in this country. There 
 the school-boy gets sounder floggings than he does here ; but they 
 don't rob him of his title; he is still Master Charles or Master 
 Willie, even if he be flogged eveiy day. 
 
 42. THE GENDERS. In the French language, and 
 many other languages, every Noun is of the masculine or 
 of the feminine gender. Jla^id, for instance, is of the 
 feminine, and arm of the masculine ; ps7i of the feminine, 
 auidpaper of the masculine. This is not the case with our 
 language, which, in this respect, has followed the order 
 of nature. Tne names of ail males are of the mascuhue
 
 Of Nouns. 33 
 
 gender; the names of viSS. females are of the feminine gen- 
 der; an J all other Nouns aie of the neuter gender. And 
 you must observe that, even in speaking of living crea- 
 tures, of which 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 desti- 
 tute of all sexual properties ; but, as it is applied with 
 perfect propriety in the case of males and females, and as 
 the application in the case of inanimate or vegetable mat- 
 ter can lead to no grammatical error, I have thought it 
 best to follow, in this respect, the example of other gram- 
 maiians. It may be said that the rule which I have here 
 laid down as being without any exception, has many ex- 
 ceptions ; for that, in speaking of a ship, we say she and 
 her. And you know our country folks in Hampshire call 
 almost everything 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 admiration in which our country 
 holds the species of skill and of valor to which it owes 
 much of its greatness and renown. It is curious t j ob- 
 serve that country laborers give the feminine appellations 
 to those things only which ai'e more closely identified 
 ■with themselves, 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 
 shovel, or a harrow, which passes promiscuously fi*om 
 hand to hand, and which is appropriated to no particular 
 laborer, is called a he. It was, doubtless, from this sort 
 of habitual attachment that our famous mai'itime solecism 
 arose. The deeds of laborers in the fields and of ai'tizans 
 in their shops ai'e not of pub-ic interest sufficiently com- 
 manding to enable them to break in upon tlie principles 
 of language ; if they were, we should soon have aj many hes 
 and shes as the Fx'ench, or any other nation in the world.
 
 34 Slymology 
 
 43. "While, however, I lay down this rule as required 
 hy strict grammatical correctness, I must not omit to 
 observe that the hcense allowed to figurative langviage 
 enables us to give the masculine or feminine gender to 
 inanimate objects. This has justly been regarded as a 
 great advantage in our language. V/e can, whenever 
 our subject will justify it, transform into mascvdine, or 
 into feminine, nouns which ai'e, strictly speaking, neuter; 
 and thus, by giving the fiinctions of life to inanimate 
 objects, enliven and elevate our style, and give to our 
 -expressions great additional dignity and force. 
 
 This 13 the figure called personification, which may be illustrated 
 by such examples as these : ' ' Grim-viaaged War hath smoothed 
 Jds wrinkled front." '^^ Peace hath her victories no less renowned 
 than War." "I care not, Fortune, what you me deny; you can- 
 not rob me of free Nature^ s grace; you cannot shut the win- 
 dows of the sky, through which Aurora shows her brightening 
 face." Notice that a noun personified is always spelled with a 
 capital letter ; and that the noun is made masculine or feminine 
 according to its nature. 
 
 Some grammarians speak of a fourth gender, the convmcn 
 gender. Nouns that are common to both genders, they call such ; 
 as, friend, parent, cook, slave. But there is really no necessity for 
 such a distinction. When I speak of a friend, I ccrtainl}-^ know 
 whether that friend is man or woman, and it is very easy to let my 
 hearer or reader know, too, if necessary. K I do not indicate It 
 by the pronoun, my hearer or reader may assume that the friend is 
 man or woman, as he thinks fit ; but he cannot think of him or 
 her as both at once. Indeed the gender is usually indicated by the 
 context ; that is, by the partes of the discourse preceding and suc- 
 ceeding the word in question. I can hardly speak of a person 
 without using Jie or slie. The Germans generally add in to the 
 masculine noun to make it feminine, as, Freund, Frenndin ; the 
 French generally add e to the masculine form; ks, servant, 
 servante ; and the only form in English that is regular is adding 
 «ss to the masculine, or changing its ending into ess; as, mayor, 
 mayoress; hunter, huntress; actor, actress; count, countess; 
 duke, duchess. As this, however, can be applied to but compar- 
 atively few words in our language, we are obliged to make use 
 cf various expedients to indicate gender ; as, dog-fox, bitch-fox ;
 
 Of JVbuns. 35 
 
 cock-sparrow, hen-sparrow ; he-goat, she-goat ; male cook, female 
 cook. Generally, however, in speaking of animals, and also of 
 infants, the distinction of sex is not observed ; that is to say, these 
 are usually spoken of in the neuter gender. "What a handsome 
 bird it is 1 Look at that dog ! What a noble creature it is ! Did 
 you see the baby? What an interesting child it is!" When we 
 speak of any bird or animal distinguished for its boldness, size, or 
 other quality peculiar to the male, we usually give it the masculine 
 gender, even if its sex be not known. Such are, for instance, the 
 horse or steed, the eagle, the condor, the mastiff, the St. Bernard 
 or Newfoundland dog, and the like. Of course, all animals are 
 personified in fables. 
 
 As the words male and female carry a rather animalish significance 
 with them, we sometimes say a lady-friend, a gentleman-riikr, a 
 boy-singer. Somebody has observed that the words over the 
 public-school entrances, "Entrance for males," "Entrance for 
 females," sound as if they were entrances for go many little he- 
 bears and she-bears, and therefore prefers "Entrance for boys," 
 "Entrance for girls." It is fur better to speak, for instance, of a 
 country being governed by a woman than by a female. 
 
 44. THE CASES. The word case, as appHed to the 
 concerns of hfe, 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 t?iat 
 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 f' 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 different states, or situa- 
 tions, as to other Noxms, or other words. For instance, 
 a Noun may be the name of a person who strikes a horse, 
 or of a person viho possesses a horse, or of a person whom 
 a horse kicks. And these different situations, or states, 
 are, therefore, called cases. 
 
 45. Tou vdll not fully comprehend the use of these 
 distinctions till you come to the Letter on Verbs ; but it
 
 36 Etymology 
 
 is necessary to explain here the nature of these cases, in 
 order that you may be prepai-ed well for the use of the 
 terms, "when I come to speak of the Verbs. In the Latin 
 language each No^on 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. 
 
 46. There are thiee Cases: the Nominative, the /'os- 
 sessive, and the Objective. A Noun is in the JSToniinative 
 case when it denotes a person, or thing, which does some- 
 thing or is something ; as, Richard strikes ; Richard is 
 good. 
 
 47. 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 be- 
 longing to the other; as, Richard'' s hat ; the vnountaiyts 
 top ; the nation's fleet. Here Richard, mountain, and 
 nation, are in the vossessive case, because they denote 
 persons or things vfhich. 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 cotnina, placed above the 
 line, between 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 the purpose in 
 all cases where the plural of the Noun would end in an 
 «/ though there are different opinions as to the ox'igin of 
 its use. In Nouns which do not end their plural in s, the 
 mark of elision would not appear to be absolutely neces- 
 sary. We might write mans mind, womans heart, bat it 
 is best to use the mark of elision. When plui-al Nouns 
 end with s, you must not add an s to form the possessive 
 ease, but put the elision mai-k only after the s which ends
 
 Of Nouns. 37 
 
 the Noiin; as, mountains' tops; nations' fleets; lasses' 
 chaxms. Observe, however, that, ia every instance, the 
 possessive case may be expresseJ by a turn of the words; 
 as, the hat of Richard j the top of the mountain / 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 person or 
 thing that it names or denotes is the object or end of 
 Bomo act or of some movement, of some kind or other; 
 Richaid strikes Peter; Richard gave a blow to Peter; 
 Richard goes after Peter ; Richard hates Peter ; Richard 
 wants arms ; Richard seeks a/6<3r/ame/ falsehood leads 
 to m,ischief; oppression produces resistance. Here you 
 see that all these Nouns in the objective case ax'e the 
 object, the end, or the effect, of something done or felt by 
 some person or thing, and which other person or thing is 
 in the nominative case. 
 
 That is to say, a noun is always the object of one of two things, 
 a transitive verb or a preposition. I doa't think there is anything 
 that enables one to understand tliis matter of case so well as a proper 
 comprehension of the difference between the transitive and the in- 
 transitive verb. I know I never understood it until I learned what 
 a transitive verb was. — We have seen that verbs are words express- 
 ing action or a state of being. Now watch. " I walk in the field ; 
 1 run every daj' ; I dream very often ; I line in Hoboken." Here the 
 verba xoalk, run, dream, live, express an action which does not pass 
 from the actor or subject; it is confined to him; docs not pass 
 ever to any thing; it is therefore intransitive. "I walk a horse; 
 I run ^grist-mill; I dream bad dreams; I live the lie down." Hera 
 the action passes from the actor to something else; Mgoes over to some- 
 thing ; the verb is, therefore, transitive. Now wherever this ia the 
 case, wherever the action passes to some object, that object or thing 
 or noun is in the objective case. Again : " The boy is choking" — 
 "the boy is choking tlie cat." In the first instance, the verb is 
 iotransitive ; in the second, it is transitive, and "cat" is conse- 
 
 4 

 
 38 Mtyrnology 
 
 quently in the objective case. Besides the transitive verb, there 
 is, as I have said, only one other thing tliat can jmt a noun in the 
 objective case, and that is the preposition, which always governs tlie 
 objective case, or puts whatever thing follows it in the objective 
 case. You notice this in the above examples of Cobbett's ; the 
 noun each time comes after a transitive verb or a preposition. In 
 the examples I gave you with tlie desk (Letter III, par. 29), that 
 word is invariably in the objective case. As to the nominative 
 case (the subject), the name of the person or thing that docs, is, or 
 suffers something is in that case. Notice tliat a noun following 
 the verb to be is always in the nominative case. Tlie Germans, in 
 their expressive language, call these three cases the who-case, tlie 
 wJiose-case, and the whom-case. Just try this, and you will see that 
 the nominative answers to Wlwf the possessive to Whose? and the 
 objective to Whom? 
 
 LETTER VI. 
 
 etymology of pbonoun8. 
 
 My dear James : 
 
 49. Tou will now refer to paiagraphs 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 JRelative ; third, the Demonstrative; and, fourth, the 
 Indefinite. 
 
 50. In PERSONAL PRONOUNS there are four 
 things to be considered: the person, the number, the 
 gender, and the case. 
 
 61 There aie three persons. The Pronoun which 
 represents, or stands in the place of, the name of the per- 
 son who speaks, is called the fi,rst 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
 
 Of Pronouns. 39 
 
 in the place of the name of the person who is spoken of, 
 is called the ^AiVf^^^erso^i. For example: "JT am asking 
 yoxL about him.'''' This circumstance of person you will 
 by-and by find to be of great moment ; because, as you 
 will see, the verbs vaiy their endings sometimes to corre- 
 spond with the person of the Pronoun ; and, therefore 
 you ought to pay strict attention to it at the outset. 
 
 52. The 7iuniber is either singular or plm-al, and the 
 Pronouns vary their spelling to express a difference of 
 nnmber; as in this table, which shows, at once, all the 
 persons and all the numbers. 
 
 
 SINGULAR. 
 
 PLURAL 
 
 Fu-st person 
 
 I, 
 
 We. 
 
 Second person 
 
 Thou. 
 
 You. 
 
 Third person 
 
 He, 
 
 They. 
 
 63. The next thing is the gender. The Pronouns of 
 the first and second person have no changes to expresa 
 gender; but the thud person singular has changes for 
 that pui'pose: 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 in per- 
 sonal Pronouns. The meaning of the word case, as used 
 in the rules of Grammar, I have fully explained to you in 
 Letter V, paragraph 44. In pai-agraphs 45, 46, 47, and 
 48, in the same Letter, I have treated of the distinction 
 between the cases. Kead all those paragraj^hs again 
 before you proceed further : for now you will find their 
 meining moi-e cleai-ly explained to you ; because the per- 
 sonal Pronouns, and also some of the other Pronouns, 
 have different endings, or are composed of different let- 
 ters, in order to point out the different cases in which 
 they aie : as, he, his, him. 
 
 65. The personal Pronouns have, like the nouns, three 
 cases : the Nominative, the Possessive, and the Objective.
 
 40 
 
 Etymology 
 
 The following' table exhibits the whole of them at one 
 view, with all the cu'cumstanoea of person, number, 
 gender, and case. 
 
 First Person 
 
 SINGUIiAR NUMBEE. 
 
 Nominative. Possessive. 
 
 r J My, 
 
 Second Person Thou, 
 Masc. Gen. He, 
 
 Third 
 Pers. 
 
 Femin. " 
 Neuter " 
 
 She, 
 It, 
 
 PLURAL NUMBER. 
 
 First Person 
 
 Nominative. Possessive. 
 " Our, 
 Ours, 
 
 We, 
 
 Second Person You, 
 
 Masc. Gen. They, 
 
 Your, 
 Yours, 
 
 Third 
 Pers. 
 
 Thei 
 
 -J, 
 They, 
 
 Their, 
 Theirs, 
 
 Objective. 
 Me. 
 
 Thee. 
 Him. 
 Her. 
 It. 
 
 Objective. 
 Ua. 
 
 You. 
 Them. 
 
 Femin. " 
 ^ Neuter " 
 
 56. Upon this table there ai-e some remarks to ba 
 attended to. lu the possessive cases of I, T'hou, She, 
 We, You, and They, there are two different words : as, 
 My, or Mine; bat you know that the former is used 
 when followed bj the name of the person or thing pos- 
 sessed ; and that the latter is used when not so followed ; 
 as, " This is Twy /)e?i / this pen is mlneP And it is the 
 same with regard to the possessive cases of Thou^ She, 
 We, You, and They.
 
 Of Pronouns. 41 
 
 The same grammarians that wish to call every word that stands 
 before a noun an adjective, call these words, my, thy, his, your^ 
 their, possessive adjectives ; they call them such when coming di- 
 rectly before a noun, and pronouns when standing alone. I know 
 no change more utterly useless and confusing. Do they not always 
 stand ia the p'ace of nouns in the possessive case? *'I met Tom 
 Jones, and gave him a message from his father." Docs this his 
 not stand for Tom^s, a noun ia the possessive case ? When Billy 
 Clutterbuck says, "This is my dog," does it not mean, This is 
 Billy Clutterbuck's dog? 
 
 57. TTioii is here given a3 tlie second person singular; 
 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. According to ancient rule 
 and custom this is not coiTCct ; but what a whole people 
 adopts and universally practises must, in such cases, be 
 deemed correct, and to be a superseding of ancient rule 
 and custom. 
 
 53. Instead of you the ancient practice was to put ys 
 in the nominative case of the second person plui'al ; 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." 
 
 There is nothing that more strikingly displays the spirit of caste 
 in Germany than the fact that there are f<jur different ways in 
 German of saying you, according to the rank or social position of 
 the person addressed (Sie, du, ihr. er). In English, we say you 
 to the President, and you to a beggar; yov. to a king, and you to an 
 assemblage of kings ; and this is characteristic of the sturdy love of 
 fair play among the English race. In the Prussian army, the oflBcer 
 addresses the common soldier in the third person ; he shall do so 
 and so. Amonor German students, there are only two classes worthy 
 of respect ; those that are students, and those that have been stu- 
 dents ; all the rest are cattle. — Te is never used now except in the 
 solemn style, uomiiuitive plural : O ye boys of America, beware ot
 
 42 Etymology. 
 
 the cheap story-papers, and the cheap and nasty story-bookB, for 
 they carry the seeds of a disease that kill soul and body. 
 
 It is a remarkable fact that many of our obsolete expressions are 
 retained for the solemn style. Thou, thy, thee are now used in 
 prayer, and in solemn compositions, such as Coleridge's Hymn to! 
 Mont Blanc, or Milton's Paradise Lost. 
 
 59. The words self &nd selves are sometimes added tc 
 the personal Pronouns; as nii/self, thyself^ himself; but, 
 as these compounded words ai-e liable to no variation^ 
 that can possibly lead to error, it vrill 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 hai'd = 
 Not the frost ; because the frost is the effect, and not the 
 cause of freezing. We cannot say that it was the toeather 
 that freezed ; because the freezing constituted in pai"t 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 
 fotmd great difficulty in keeping on their jomney." Let 
 us take another example or two : " It is a frost this morn- 
 ing. 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 Uving in uninterrupted love to the end of theu* 
 days." That is to say, " The state of things which ex- 
 hibits brothers and sisters living in unintemipted love to 
 the end of theii- days is delightful to see." The Pronoun
 
 Of Pronouns. 45 
 
 it is, in this its impersonal capacity, used in a great 
 vaiiety of instances ; but I forbear to extend my remarks 
 on the subject here; because those remai'ks will find a 
 more suitable place when I come to another pai't of my 
 instructions. I have said enough here to prevent the 
 puzzling that might have aiisen from your perceiving that 
 the Pronoun it was sometimes used without yoiu* being 
 able to trace its connection with any noun either expressed 
 or understood 
 
 61. In order, however, fui'ther to illustrate this matter 
 in this place, I will make a remai'k 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 wi'ite six sentences in English coiTectly," Now, 
 you know, the word there., in its usual sense, has reference 
 to place / yet it has no such reference here. The mean- 
 ing is that " Many men are in existence who have been at 
 Latin schools." Again : " There never teas any thing so 
 beautiful as that flower."' That is to say, "Any thing so 
 beautiful as that flower never existed, or never loas in 
 being. '^ 
 
 It may, perhaps, be useful for you to know (especially if you 
 intend to pass an examination) that the word there in the sentences 
 here given is called an expletive, which means a word used merely 
 to fill up a vacancy. You can always leave it out without altering 
 the sense. "There is a tree in the garden " is nothing but " a tree 
 ifi in the garden." And you will now, perhaps, be better able to 
 understand Pope's satirical lines on the works of poor authors : 
 
 "While expletives their feeble aid do join. 
 And ten slow words oft creep in one dull line." 
 
 62. We now come to the KELATIYE PRONOUNS, of 
 which class there ai'e only three; namely. Who, Which, 
 and That. The two latter always remain the same, 
 through all numbers, genders, and cases ; but the Pro- 
 noun who changes its endings in order to express the 
 possessive and objective cases; as, who, whose, whom.
 
 44 Etymology 
 
 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 
 going before. Thus : " The soldier who was killed at the 
 siege." Soldier is the antecedent. Again : " The men, if 
 £ am rightly informed, who came hither last night, who 
 went away this morning, whose money you have received, 
 and to whom you gave a receipt, are natives of South 
 America." 3fen is here the ayitecedent ; and in this 
 sentence there are all the variations to which this Pro- 
 noun is liable. 
 
 64. Who, whose, and whom cannot be used correctly 
 as relatives to any Nouns or Pronouns which do not re- 
 present tne^i, women, or children. It is not con'ect to 
 say, the horse, or the dog, or the ti'ee, who was so and so ; 
 or to whom was done this or that ; or whose color, 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 hoy that ran ; the horse that galloped ; the tree 
 that was blowed down. 
 
 The real reason for this use of the word that, however, is be- 
 cause we must sometimes find a pronoun that will stand for both 
 men and animals together : "The horses and the riders that we saw 
 are tlie favorites." And concerning the pronoun who, a change 
 Las taken place since Cobbett's time : we can now use it in the 
 possessive case (whose) with reference to things as well as per- 
 sons. " The mountain whose top is covered with snow," is con- 
 sidered easier and more elegant tha,n "The mountain the top of 
 which is covered with snow." The poets began to use this form, 
 and prose-writers now use it too. By-the-way, you will notice that 
 Cobbett is a little peculiar in using some irregular verbs in the 
 regular form ; as, Mowed and freezed for blown and froze. More of 
 this farther on. 
 
 65. Which, as a relative Pronoun, is confined to irra- 
 tional creatures, and here it may be used as a relative in- 
 differently with that ; as, the horse which galloped ; the
 
 Of Pronouns. 45 
 
 tree which was blowed down. Tliia application of tlio 
 relative which solely to irrational creatures is, however, 
 of modem date ; for, in the Lord's Prayer, in the Enghsh 
 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 relative 
 Pronouns without observing to you that they are words 
 of vast importance, and that more errors, and errors of 
 greater consequence, arise from a misapphcation of them 
 than from the misapplication of almost all the other 
 classes of words put together. The reason is this, they 
 are relatives, and they frequently stand as the repre- 
 sentatives of that which has gone before, and which 
 stands in a distant part of the sentence. This will b© 
 more fully explained when I come to the S^jntax 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 demonstrate the 
 nouns before which they are placed, or for which they 
 sometimes stand. They are, 2'his, These, That, T'hose^ 
 and What. The use of them is so well known, and is 
 hable to so Httle error, that my chief object in giving 
 them this separate place is to show you the difference be- 
 tween That, when a relative, and when not a relative. 
 Take an example : " 2'hat 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 Lim 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 discover, that came 
 hither last night, and that was so ill that he could hardly 
 walk." The relative is repeated in the third That; but
 
 46 Etymology 
 
 the fourth That is merely a conjunction serving to con- 
 nect the effect of the illness with the cause. 
 
 "I say that that that that that author uses is false." Try and 
 discover tlie four different parts of speech represented by the word 
 that in this sentence. — This, that, and tlieir plural, th£se, tliose, are. 
 like tlie articles, called limiting adjectives when used directly be- 
 fore nouns, this hat, these hats. When used with reference tc 
 things pointed at, tJiese refers to things nearer at hand than those. 
 
 68. Perhaps a profound examination of the matter 
 ■would lead to a proof of That being always a Pronoun; 
 but, as such examination would be more curious than use- 
 fid, I shall content myself with having clearly shown you 
 the difference in its offices, as a relative, as a detnonstra- 
 tive, and as a co7iJunctlon. 
 
 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 unnecessaay ; but here is 
 an observation of importance to attend to; for which, 
 though as a relative it cannot be applied to the intellectual 
 species, is, as an interrogative, properly apjjhed to that 
 species; as, " Which man was it who spoke to you?" 
 
 70. What sometimes stands for both noun and relative 
 Pronoun ; as, " What I want is well known." That is to 
 say, " The thing which I want is well known." Indeed, 
 what has, in ail cases, this extended signification; for 
 •when, in the way of inquiry as to words which we have 
 not cleai'ly understood, we say, What ? our full meaning 
 is, "Repeat to us that which you have said," or, "the 
 words which you have spoken." 
 
 In this sentence, "I gave him what (that which) he wanted." 
 what is a relative pronoun ; but in this sentence, "I gave him w}iat 
 funds he wanted," it is an adjective. Notice that we always say 
 that, never wJiat, after ecery thing, any thing, nothing, something, 
 all things. 
 
 71. The INDETERMINATE PRONOUNS aie so called
 
 Of Adjectives. 47 
 
 because they express their objects in a general and inde- 
 termiBate manner. Several of them ai"e also adjectives. 
 It is only where they ai'e employed alone, that is to say, 
 without nouns, that they ought to be regarded as Pro- 
 noiins. For instance : " One is always heai'ing of the un- 
 happiness of one person or another. ^^ The first of these 
 ones is a Pronoim ; 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 orthography, and all of very 
 common use. 
 
 LETTER VII. 
 etymology of adjectives. 
 My dear James: 
 
 72. In Letter lU, paragraph 21, I have described what 
 an Adjective is. You will, therefore, now read that para- 
 graph carefully over, before we 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 com- 
 parison. As Adjectives describe the qualities and proper- 
 ties of nouns, and as these may be possessed in a degree 
 higher in one case than in another case, such words have 
 degrees of comparison; that is to say, changes in their 
 endings, to sviit these varying cu'cvunstances. A tree may 
 be high, but another may be higher, and a thii"d may be 
 the highest. Adjectives have, then, these three degrees: 
 the first degree, or rather, the primitive word, called 
 the Positive; the second, the Comparative; the third, 
 the Superlative. For the forming of these degrees I shall
 
 48 Etymology 
 
 give you four rules ; aad if you pay strict attention to 
 these rules, you mil need to 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 adding er to 
 tiie positive, and form their superlative degree by adding 
 est to the positive ; as, 
 
 POSITIVE. COMPARATIVE. 6UPERLATIVB. 
 
 Bich, Bicher, Bichest. 
 
 75. Second Mule. Adjectives, which end in e, add, in 
 forming their comparative, only an r, and in forming their 
 superlative, st/ as, 
 
 POSITIVE. OOMPABATIVE. SUPERLATIVE. 
 
 Wise, "Wiser, "Wisest. 
 
 76. Third Rule. "When the positive ends in <?, </, or ty 
 and when these consonants are, at the same time, preceded 
 "bj a single vowel, the consonant is doubled in forming 
 the comparative and superlative ; as, 
 
 POSITIVE. 
 
 Bed, 
 
 COMPARATIVE. 
 
 Bedder, 
 
 SUPERLATIVE. 
 
 Beddest. 
 
 Big, 
 Hot, 
 
 Bigger, 
 Hotter, 
 
 Biggest. 
 Hottest. 
 
 But, if the d, g, or t, be preceded by another consonant, 
 or by more than one vowel, the final consonant 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, pre- 
 ceded by a consonant, the y changes into ie in the other 
 degrees. 
 
 POSITIVE. OOMPABATIVE. SUPERLATIVE. 
 
 Lovely, Love'aer, Loveliest. 
 
 Pretty, Prettier, Prettiest.
 
 Of Adjectives. 49 
 
 78. There are some Aijectives which can be reduced to 
 no rule, and whish must be considered as irregular ; as, 
 
 POSITIVE. 
 
 OOMPARATIVJC 
 
 BUPEBLATIVB. 
 
 Good, 
 
 Bjtter, 
 
 Bast. 
 
 Bad, 
 
 Worse, 
 
 Worst 
 
 little. 
 
 Less, 
 
 Least. 
 
 Much, 
 
 More, 
 
 Most. 
 
 79. Some Adjectives can have no degrees of comparison, 
 because their signification admits of no augmentation ; as, 
 all^ each^ every, any, several, some; and all the numerical 
 Adjectives; as, one, two, three; first, secoiid, third. 
 
 But there are some other adjectives that do not admit of com- 
 parison. Consider, for a moment, such words as tru^, round, 
 tquare, perfect^ deai. Properly speaking, nothing can be truer 
 rounder, squarer, more perfect, or deader than another; yet, in 
 popular speech, these words are often used in the comparative or 
 superlative degree. How often we hear people say, " I never saw 
 any thing more perfect;" "this figure is not quite so round as 
 that;" and the like. I do not mean to say that such expressions 
 tre absolutely unpermissible ; only that they are not strictly cor- 
 rect. To say "more nearly round" or "more nearly perfect'* 
 would be more nearly correct. These expressions, however, occur 
 in the rapid how of conversation, and perhaps express the idea 
 intended better than a more correct (notice these very words) or 
 more choice expression. Editors sometimes speak of a political 
 question as ' ' the deadest of all dead issues ;" which is very forcible 
 language; and there is a comparison implied in the familiar ex- 
 pressions, "dead as a door-nail; dead as Julius Caesar."— I may 
 here mention that the word old, in its regular form, old, older, oldest, 
 is used with reference to persons and things in general ; while tke 
 form, elder, eldest, is used to distinguish kinsfolk or historical 
 personages : my elder brother er nephew, my eldest sister or 
 cousin; the elder Pliny, the elder Brutus, the elder or youngei 
 
 Put. 
 
 Far, farther, farthest are used exclusively with reference to di». 
 tance; but we sometimes use the form further, to indicate soiiiC' 
 thing more, or to point out that we have something irwre to say on 
 a subject. The latter form is also sometimes used as an ailjective; 
 liave you &uy furtJier objection? 
 3
 
 50 Etymology 
 
 80. Adjectives which end in tnost are superlative, and 
 admit of no change ; as, utmost, uppermost, innermost. 
 
 81. However, you will observe that all Adjectives which 
 admit of comparison may form their degi'ees by the use 
 of the words more and most; as. 
 
 P08ITIVE. 
 
 OOMPARA.TIVE. 
 
 SUPERLATIVE. 
 
 Kich, 
 
 More rich, 
 
 Most rich. 
 
 Tender, 
 
 More tender, 
 
 Most tender. 
 
 Wlien the positive contains but one syllable, the degrees 
 ai'e usually formed by adding to the positive according to 
 the four rules. When the positive contains two syllables, 
 it is a 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 m,ore 
 and most. We may say tender and tenderest, pleasanter 
 sjx^ pleasantest, prettier &nd prettiest/ but who could tol- 
 erate delicater and delicatest ? 
 
 Nobody but Thomas Carlyle, who uses beautifulest, wonderfuleat, 
 and the like. To use another of Carlyle's Germanisms, there is no 
 question but this usage is unright. 
 
 LETTER VIII. 
 
 etymology of vebbs. 
 
 My dear James: 
 
 82. The fii'st thing you have to do in beginning your 
 study, as to this important Part of Speech, is to read 
 again very slowly and carefully paragraphs 23, 24, 25, 
 and 26, in Letter III. Having, by well attending to what 
 is said in those pai'agraphs, learned to dijtinguish Verbs 
 from the words belonging to other Parts of Speech, you 
 •will now enter, with a clear head, on an inquiry into the
 
 Of Verbs. 51 
 
 variations to "which the words of this Part of Speech are 
 liable. 
 
 83. Sorts op Verbs. Verbs are considered as active, 
 passive, or neuter. A Verb is called active when it ex- 
 presses an action which is produced by the nominative of 
 the sentence ; as, " Pitt restrained the Bank." It is pas- 
 sive 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 expresses an action confined within the actor. 
 
 84. It is of great consequence that you clearly under- 
 stand these distinctions, becriuee 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 «he errors which ai^e 
 sometimes committed by those who do not understand 
 Grammar. This last-mentioned Verb, to lie, becomes, in 
 the past time, lay. Thus : " Dick lies on a bed now, but 
 Bome time ago, he lay on the floor." This verb is often 
 confounded with the Verb to lay, which is au active Verb, 
 and which becomes, in its past time, laid. Thus : " I lay 
 my hat on the table to-day, but, yesterday, I laid it on 
 the shelf." Let us take another instance, in order the 
 more clearly to explain this matter. A Verb may some- 
 times be what we call a neuter Verb, though it expresses 
 an action ; but this happens when the action is confined 
 within the actor ; that is to say, when there is no object 
 to ichich the action passes. Strike is clearly an active 
 Verb, because somethuig 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 a stick, I raise my hand, I raise
 
 62 Etymology 
 
 my head, and also I raise myself; because, though in thig 
 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 irregulai', or 
 though they are not, in any person, time, or mode, com- 
 posed of the same letters. This confusion could never 
 take place if attention were paid to the principle above 
 laid down. 
 
 This is one of the hard passages in the gospel of grammar; a 
 passage which, I am sure, has been a stumbling-block to many a 
 poor fellow who has been unable to make head or tail of it. Well 
 do I remember the difficulty I had myself, when I first studied 
 this grammar, in making it out. It is, I now see, no wonder that 
 the matter was very cloudy to me ; for even Cobbett, the plainest 
 and clearest of writers, has got into a muddle about it, as I shall 
 presently show. 
 
 Look again at my explanation of the difference between the 
 transitive and the intransitive verb (note to paragraph 11). Then 
 remember that Cobbett's ^^ nominative'''' is another word for subject, 
 and his '^verb" another word for predicate. " Boys study gram- 
 mar." These three words form subject, predicate, and object. ' ' Man 
 dies." Here is nothing but subject and predicate; and you will 
 notice that "study" has an object, while "dies" has not. 
 
 I rise at six o'clock. I raise a wall ; I raise the price ; I raise my 
 voice. You will readily see that the verb to rise is intransitive, 
 because it has no object; its action does not pass to anything; and 
 that to raise is transitive, because it has an object ; its action passes 
 to something, even if it is my own voice, head or hand. Now both 
 these verbs, as used by Cobbett, are in the active voice, for the pass- 
 ing or not passing of the action has nothing whatever to do with 
 the verb being in the active or passive voice, but only with its 
 being transitive or intransitive. It is the state of the stjbject (or 
 nominative) alone that determines whether a verb is active or pas- 
 sive. "I rise early. I raise my hand." Both these verbs are in the 
 active voice ; for the subject or nominative (I) is acting, and not 
 acted upon. The verb is in the passive voice where the strsjECT or 
 NOMINATIVE is ACTEr ON; as, I AM raiscd ; but it is m the active 
 voice when the stbjeo. or nominative is acting ; as, I rise at five
 
 Of Verbs. 53 
 
 o'clock. Notice that the verb in the passive voice always consists 
 of some part of the verb to be and the past participle of another 
 ▼erb. Cobbett is altogether wrong in saying that "^ raise is an 
 active verb because it passes on to an object ; " it would be active 
 whether the action passed on to an object or not; for, as I ha.\e 
 said, it is the state of the subject that determines its activeness or 
 passiveness, and not the verb itself. The passing of the actiou 
 simply shows that it is trandtive. 
 
 Now observe that this matter of transitive and intransitive verl is 
 is something by itself, and that active and passive voice is also 
 something by itself. It will, perhaps, help you to understand the 
 matter, when I tell you that no intransitive vei-h can be used in the 
 passive voice. You can not say, I am slept, I am dreamt, I am 
 lived. No ; only transitive verbs can be used in the passive voice : 
 I am hated, I am robbed, I am punished. These forms come from 
 the verbs to hate, to rob, to punish, all of which take an object, and 
 are therefore transitive ; but the forms to sleep, to dream, to live, do 
 not take an object and are therefore intransitive, and cannot be 
 used in the passive voice. 
 
 Now, as to that other bugbear, the neuter verb, I think we shall 
 not have much difficulty in understanding it. I never learned the 
 meaning of it from Cobbett, I must confess. And here I may 
 inform you that many grammarians discard the term neuter alto- 
 gether, and set neuter verbs down simply as intransitive verbsr 
 which, indeed, they are. But you must understand what is meant 
 by a neuter verb, any way. You have seen that when a verb is 
 used in the active voice, the subject or nominative of that verb 
 is ACTING, and that when one is used in the passive voice,^ 
 the subject or nominative of that verb is acted on. Now, 
 where a neuter verb is used, the subject is neither acting nor 
 acted on; it is neither, neuter. Take an example of all three 
 cases: Tommy kicks the pony; Tommy is kicked by the pony; 
 Tommy is ill. Now in the first case, kicks is active, because the 
 subject (Tommy) is acting ; in the second case, is kicked is passive, 
 because the subject is acted on; and in the third case, it is neuter, 
 because the subject is neither acting nor acted on : it is existence 
 WITHOUT ACTION. Just try if this is not the case with such verbs 
 as to sit, to stand, to exist, to live, to lie, to sleep. When you are 
 Bitting, standing, existing, living, etc., you are neither acting nor 
 acted on; you are neither, neuter. Of course, these verbs are 
 intransitive, too; for all neuter verbs are intransitive, but ali 
 intransitive verbs are not neuter. There's the rub ; there is where
 
 54 Etymology 
 
 Cobbett makes his mistake: he calls the verb to rise neuter, 
 while it is nothing of the sort; it is simply intransitive, and 
 active. The most recent classification of verbs is into active- 
 transitive, active-intransitive, and neuter. He kicks the pony; 
 he rises; he lives. (Jobbett, no doubt, followed the grammarians 
 and dictionary-makers of his time. 
 
 85. Having thus given you the means of distinguishing 
 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 Etymol- 
 ogy of Pronoiins. You will there clearly see the use of 
 this distinction about J^erso}is ; and, as I have told yon 
 you will find that it is a matter of great consequence ; be- 
 cause 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 Letter V, and at pai'agi'aphs 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 %orite; he writes.'''' 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 y but our Verbs have no variation in their 
 spelling, except for the third person singular. For we 
 say, "I write, you write, we xorite, they write ;'''' and only 
 " he, she, or it writes.''"' This, then, ia 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
 
 Of Verbs. 55 
 
 the tyrants." Not resists. But this will be more fully 
 dwelt on in the Syntax. 
 
 90. The Time. — The Verb has variations to express the 
 time of an action ; as, " Sidmouth lorites a Circular Letter ; 
 Sidmouth wrote a Circular Letter ; Sidmouth will lorite a 
 Circular Letter." Again: "The Queen defies the tyrants; 
 the Queen defied the tyi'ants ; 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, va. the spelling, or writiug, of the Verb, or of 
 the Uttle words used ^vith the Verb, in order to express 
 this difference in manner and sense. I will give you an 
 instance : " He walks fast." " If he walk fast, he will 
 fatigue himself." In most other languages the Verb 
 changes its form very often and very much to make it 
 express the different modes. In ours it does not ; because 
 we have httle words called signs, which we use with tha 
 Verbs instead of vai-ying the form of the Verbs them- 
 selves. To make this matter clear, I will give you an 
 example of the English compared with the French 
 language in this respect. 
 
 E. F. 
 
 I mai'ch, «/e m,arche. 
 
 I mai'ched, Je m,archais. 
 
 I miffht march, Je m,archasse. 
 
 I should march, Je marcherais. 
 
 There ai'e other variations in the French Verb ; but we 
 effect the piu-poses of these variations by the use of the 
 signs, shall, may, might, could, would, and others. 
 
 92. The Modes are foui" in number ; the Infinitive, the 
 Indicative, the Subjunctive, and the Imperative. Besides
 
 56 Etymology 
 
 these, there are the two Participles, of which I shall speaik 
 presently. 
 
 93. The Infinitive Mode is the Verb hi its primitive 
 state ; as, to march. And this is called the Infinitive be- 
 cause it is without bounds or limit. It merely expresses 
 the action of marching, without any constraint as to per- 
 son or number or time. The little word to makes, in fact, 
 a part of the Verb. This word to is, of itself, a preposi- 
 tion ; 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, aller means to go/ 
 ecrire means to write. Thus, then, you will bear in mind 
 that in English, the to makes a pai't of the Verb itself, 
 when in the Infinitive Mode. 
 
 94. The Iiidicative Mode is that in which we express 
 an action, or state of being, positively; that is to say, 
 without any cojidition, or any dependent circumstance. 
 It merely indicates the action or state of being, without 
 being subjoined to anything which renders the action or 
 state of being dependent on any other action or state of 
 being. Thus : '■'■lie writes.''^ This is the Indicative. 
 
 95. But the Subjunctive Mode comes into use when I 
 say, " If he write, the guilty tyi'ants will be ready with 
 their dungeons and axes." In this case there is some- 
 thing subjoined ; and therefore this is called the Sub- 
 junctive Mode. Observe, however, that in oui- language 
 there is no very gi'eat use in this distinction of modes ; 
 because, for the most pai't, om* little signs do the busi- 
 ness, and they never vaiy in the letters of which they are 
 composed. The distinction is usefvd 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 tyi-ants wiU be ready." And 
 observe, further, that when the signs are used, or under- 
 stood, the Verb retains its original or pi'imitive form 
 throughout all the persons, numbers, and times.
 
 Of Verbs.' 67 
 
 96. The Imperative Mode is meutioued here merely for 
 form's sake. It is that state of the Verb which com- 
 mands, orders, bids, calls to, or invokes ; as, come hither; 
 he good ; march away ; pay me. In other languages there 
 ai'e 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 mat- 
 ter 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 parti- 
 ciples because they partake of the qualities of other Paiis 
 of Speech as well as of Verbs. For mstance: "I am 
 working y xoorking is laudable ; a xoorking man is more 
 worthy of honor than a titled plunderer who Uves in idle- 
 ness." In the first instance, xoorking is a Verb, in the 
 second a JSfoun, in the thnd 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. 
 
 After the indicative, grammarians now insert another mood, 
 called the, potential mood, which indicates power, permission, pos- 
 sibility, necessity, determination, duty. This mood Cobbett runs 
 into the subjunctive, after the manner of the French. It is that 
 form which necessitates one of "those powerful little words," as 
 he calls them, may, might, can, must, loill, shall, should, would. 
 This matter of mood, which is quite a difficult subject for begin- 
 ners, became much clearer to me when I saw how the Germans 
 termed their moods in their expressive language. They call the 
 infinitive mood the. ground-farm ; the indicative ih.^ reality-form ; 
 the potential i\iQ possibility form ; the subjunctive, the doubt-form ; 
 and the imperative the comtnanding-fonn. Like the who-case, the 
 whose-case, and the lohom-case, these words are far more expressive 
 than the Latin terms we use, wliich ought to have been left where 
 they belonged, in Latin. 
 
 You will perhaps be surprised to see will and s?mII, would and 
 3*
 
 68 Etymology 
 
 sTiould, set down as belonging to the potential mood. You will 
 Bay they belong to the future and the conditional. So they do ; 
 but they belong to the potential, too, as I shall show you by-and- 
 by. Take these two examples of the difference between the future 
 and the potential : "I shall write (future) to you, if I can. I will 
 vyrite (potential) to you, come what may. You will do (future) 
 that to-morrow. You sAaM do (potential) as I tell you." This is 
 one of the most difficult matters in English grammar ; a matter 
 which, Cobbett says, foreigners never learn rightly, but which na- 
 tives learn to use rightly from infancy, and do so without ever 
 thinking of the matter. Extensive reading of good authors and 
 extensive intercourse with good speakers are among the best 
 means of learning the correct use of these words. I have read of 
 a FrenchTnan who, on falling into the river, exclaimed: "I will 
 drown, and nobody shall help me !" More of this anon. (Note to 
 paragraph 258.) 
 
 98. Thus have I gone through all the cii'cumstances 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 Avith the Paiiiciple. I will 
 now lay before you, then, the conjugation of the Verb to 
 work, exhibiting that Verb in all its persons, numbers, 
 tunes, and modes. 
 
 INFINITIVE MODE. 
 
 To WOKK. 
 
 INDICATIVE MODE. 
 Singular. Plural. 
 
 ( 1st Person. I work. We work. 
 
 ■< 2d 
 
 Present J ^^ person. Thou workest. You work, 
 lime, ^gj Person. He, she, or it works. They work. 
 
 Past C — ^ worked, "We worked. 
 
 Time i — Thou workedst. You worked. 
 
 (^ — He worked. They worked. 
 
 Future C — ^ shall or will work. We shall or will work. 
 
 Time, -< — Thou shalt or wilt work, You shall or will work* 
 
 (_ — He shall or will w^rk, They shall or will work»
 
 Of Verbs. 59 
 
 SUBJUNCTIVE 
 
 MODE. 
 
 
 If I work, or may, might, could. 
 
 would, or 
 
 should work 
 
 If thou work, or may " 
 
 
 " work 
 
 K he, she, or it work, or may " 
 
 
 " work 
 
 If we work, or may ' ' 
 
 
 " worlc 
 
 If you work, or may " 
 
 
 " work 
 
 If they work, or may " 
 
 
 ' ' work 
 
 DIPERATIVE MODE. 
 Let me work, Let us work. 
 
 "Work thou, Work you. 
 
 Let him work. Let them work. 
 
 PARTICIPLES. 
 
 A ctire. — Working. 
 Pasidve. — Worked . 
 
 99. Some explanatory remarks are necessary here. The 
 third person singular of the Indicative present used to be 
 written with eth ; as, icorketh ; but this spelling has long 
 been disused. Hhepast time may be formed by did; as, 
 did work, instead of xcorked ; and do work may be used 
 in the present time ; but, in fact, these little words are a 
 great deal more than mere mai'ks of the times. They are 
 used in one time to express the negative of another, or to 
 affirm with more than ordinaiy 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 futm-e 
 of that mode. These are httle words of vast import and 
 of constant use ; and though that use is so very difficult 
 to be learned by foreigners, we oiu'selves never make mis- 
 takes with regard to it. The Verb to be alone changes 
 its form in order to make a past time in the Subjunctive 
 Mode. 
 
 101. As to the Imperative Mode, where the pronouns 
 thou and you are put after the Verb, we seldom put the 
 thou and the yoic. We make use of the Verb only, which 
 is quite sufficient.
 
 60 Etymology 
 
 102. Some gi'ammai'ians put in their conjugations what 
 they call the compound times ; as, I have worked^ I had 
 worked, I shall have worked, I may have worked, and so 
 on. But this can only serve to fill up a book; for all 
 these consist merely in the introduction and use of the 
 Verb to have in its various parts. In the above conjuga- 
 tion all the changes or varlatio?is of the Yerb are exhib- 
 ited ; and it is those changes and valuations which, under 
 the present head, form the important object of our 
 inquiiy. 
 
 Well, at the risk of incurring the reproach of merely "filling up 
 a book," or, as the reviewers call it, "padding a book," I shall 
 give you this one verb entire, in its present form, with its present 
 names for moods and tenses. Do not be afraid ; it will not confuse 
 you, if you will only be patient. There are about six or seven 
 thousand verbs in our language, and they are all, except in the 
 past tense and past participle, conjugated like this. It is in these 
 last two parts that the irregular verbs vary. You cannot utter a 
 single sentence, however short, without a verb ; so, surely, you 
 ought to see this important part of speech from head to foot. Be- 
 sides, I believe that our present form of laying out the verb is 
 simpler than it was in Cobbett's time, for the tenses are so arranged 
 that they are more easily remembered. (See next page.) 
 
 You will notice that the compound forms are, as Cobbett says, 
 nothing but the past participle, worked, and the various forms of 
 the verb to have. But the seeing it will help you to remember it. 
 As to the tenses, consider for a moment how manj^ kinds of time 
 there are in nature. What is the time called in which you now 
 are? What time is that you had yesterday? What time is to- 
 morrow? Well, there are three "kind?,, present, past, and future; 
 and in grammar you may say there are really only th7-ee tenses, 
 with a tail to each of them, a perfect tail ; and this perfect tail is 
 the compound form of the verb. It is nothing but present, present- 
 peifect; past, -pnal-pe? feet ; future, tature-pe7fect. As to the using 
 of them, you will learn that when we come to the Syntax. Then 
 you will notice .hat there are five moods, just as there are five con- 
 tinents, five oceans, five races of men, and five zones. Notice that 
 the subjunctive has no changes whatever in its endings. This 
 mood, of which common people and common writers know nothing, 
 and which, some writers think, will finally disappear altogether, is
 
 Of Verbs. 
 
 61 
 
 Complete conjugation of the acUve verb To Woi-k. 
 
 INFINITIVE MOOD. 
 
 Present ten^se—To work. Present perfect tense— To have worked. 
 
 INDICATIVE MOOU. 
 
 SIMPLE TENSES. COMPOUND TENSES. 
 
 Present tense . Present pe7' feet tense. 
 
 I work. 
 Thou workest. 
 He works, 
 We work, 
 You work. 
 They work, 
 
 Pcist tense. 
 I worked. 
 Thou worked.st, 
 He worked, 
 We worked, 
 You worked. 
 They worked. 
 
 Future tense. 
 I shall work. 
 Thou wilt work. 
 He will work. 
 We shall work. 
 You will work. 
 They will work. 
 
 Present tense conditional 
 I should work, 
 Thouwouldst work. 
 He would work, 
 We should work. 
 You would work. 
 They would work. 
 
 Present tense. 
 I may, can, will work. 
 Thou mayst, canst, shalt work. 
 He may, can, shall work, 
 We may, can, sha'l work. 
 You may, can, shall work. 
 They may, can, shall work. 
 
 Past tense . 
 I might, could, should work, 
 
 I have worked. 
 Thou hast worked. 
 He has worked. 
 We have worked. 
 You have worked. 
 They have worked. 
 
 Past perfect tense. 
 I had worked. 
 Thou hadst worked. 
 He had worked. 
 We had worked. 
 You had worked. 
 They had worked. 
 
 Future perfect tense. 
 I shall have worked. 
 Thou wilt have worked. 
 He will have worked- 
 We shal. have worked. 
 You will have worked. 
 They will have worked. 
 
 Perfect teiue conditional. 
 I should have worked. 
 Thou wouldst have worked. 
 He would have worked. 
 We should have worked. 
 You would have worked. 
 They would have worked. 
 POTENTIAL MOOD. 
 
 Present perfect tense. 
 I may, can, will have worked. 
 
 Thou mayst, canst, shalt have worked. 
 He may, can, shall have worked . 
 We may, can, shall have worked. 
 You may, can, shall have worked. 
 They may, can. shall have worked. 
 
 Past perfect tense. 
 I might, could, should have worked. 
 Thoiimightst,couldst,shouIdst work, Thou mightst, couldst, shouldst have 
 
 worked. 
 He mijht, couM, should have worked. 
 ^^'e mij^ht, couid, should have worked. 
 Youmi^lit, could, should have worked. 
 They miglit,could, should have worked. 
 SUBJUNCTI\'E MOOD. 
 
 Present p':rfect tense. 
 
 He might could, should work. 
 We might, could, should work. 
 You might, could, should work. 
 They might, could, should work. 
 
 Present tense. 
 If I work, 
 
 thou work, 
 
 lie work, 
 
 we work, 
 
 you work, 
 
 they work. 
 
 Past tens*. 
 If I worked. 
 
 thou worked, 
 
 he worked, 
 
 we worked, 
 
 you worked, 
 
 they worked, 
 
 Work ! 
 
 Present particijUe. 
 Workmg. 
 
 If I have worked. 
 thou have worked, 
 he have worked. 
 we have v/orked. 
 you have worked, 
 they have worked. 
 Past perfect tense. 
 If I had worked, 
 thou had worked, 
 he had worked, 
 we had worked, 
 you had worked, 
 they had worked. 
 IMPERATIVE MOOD. 
 
 Work thou 1 
 PARTICIPLES. 
 /-"asi participle. Present perfect (participial form). 
 Worked. Uaving worked .
 
 62 Etymology 
 
 used to mark a certain uncertainty or contingency which the indic- 
 ative cannot well mark, and is used not only after ?"/", but after though,, 
 although, lest, unless, provided tliat, and various other expressions in- 
 dicating uncertainty. The only verb in our whole language which 
 makes a complete change in the subjunctive is tiic verb to be, and 
 that becomes if I be, if I were. Cobbett follows the conjugation of 
 the French verb in using the verb let in the imperative. " Let me 
 work " is not the imperative of the verb to work, but the imperative 
 of the verb to let ; as is the case with everything that follows let • 
 let me eat, let me drink, let me be. No English verb needs more 
 than the one word in the imperative, for the subject or pronoun 
 you is generally unexpressed, or left understood. It is sometimes 
 used for emphasis or contrast; as, "Work you! I shall not 
 work." As to those two great stumbling-blocks of many persons, 
 ihall and will, should and would, all you have to do here is to notice 
 that, in the future and conditional tenses, shall and should are gen- 
 erally used in the first person singular and plural — that is, after 
 / and we — and that will and would are geneeally used in the other 
 persons. 
 
 103. The Verbs to have and to be are of great use in our 
 language. They are called auxiliary verbs. To let and to 
 do are also called auxiliaries, but they are of far less im- 
 portance than to h(toe and to be. Before, however, I say 
 more on the subject of these auxiharies, I must speak of 
 all the Verbs as regular or irregular, just observing here 
 that the word auxiliary means helper, or helping. 
 
 104. Verbs are called regular when they have their 
 changes or vai'iations according to a certain rule or 
 manner. Thus: "I walk,\ loalked ; I work, \ 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 time of the Indicative and their jt9a.ss^u6 
 participle in ed; and if you now look back at the conju- 
 gation of the Verb to work, you will find that it is a regu- 
 lar Verb. Indeed this is the case with almost all Verba. 
 But there are some little irregularities even here, and they 
 must be very well attended to, because a want of attention 
 to them leads to very great errors even as to spelling.
 
 Of Verbs. 63 
 
 105. These little irregulaxities I shall notice under five 
 separate heads ; and if you should forget, at any time, 
 what has been said on the subject, a reference to these 
 ■will in a moment set you right. — I. The Verb to work is 
 •perfectly regular, for it has ed added to it in order to 
 form the past time, and also in order to form the passive 
 participle. It is the same with the Verbs to roalk, to turn, 
 to abandon, and many others. But if the Infinitive, that 
 is to say, the primitive or original word, end in e, then d 
 only is added ia the past time and participle, and st in- 
 stead of est after thou ; as in the case of to move, which 
 becomes moved and movest. You have seen, also, in the 
 case of the Verb to work, that we add only an s to form 
 the third person singular of the present of the Indicative ; 
 he works. But if the Infinitive end in A, s, x, or z, then es 
 must be added; as, to wish, he wishes ; to toss, he tosses , 
 to box, he boxes; to buzz, he buzzes. — II. When the Infini- 
 tive ends in y, and when that y has a consonant imme- 
 diately 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 vo^'.el 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 delay est. —III. "When the Infinitive ends in y 
 with a consonant immediately before it, the past time of 
 the Indicative and the passive participle are formed by 
 using an i instead of the y ; as, to reply, he replied; to 
 deny, it was denied. But if the y be preceded by a 
 vowel, ed is added to the y in the usual manner ; as, to 
 delay, he delayed. — IV. The active participle, which 
 always ends in ing, ia in general formed by simply adding 
 the ing to the Infinitive ; as, to work, working ; to talk, 
 talking. But if the Infinitive end in a single e, the e is
 
 64 Etymology 
 
 dropped ; as, to tnove, movrng. The Verb to be is an ex- 
 ception to this; but then that is an irregularYevh. It is 
 Say silent e, and the rule will hold good throughout. The 
 e is not silent in be, and is therefore not dropped in being. It is 
 never retained, even where one part of speech is converted into 
 another, except where the omission of it might cause a doubtful 
 pronunciation; as, peace, peaceable; change, changeable. 
 
 when the Infinitive ends in a single e, mind ; for if the 6 
 be double, the general rule is followed ; as, tofree^freekig, 
 "When the infinitive ends in i'e, those letters are cLangecJ 
 into y in the forming of the active participle ., as, to lie^ 
 lying. — ^V. When the Infinitive ends in a sin^U consonant^ 
 which has a single voicel imtnediately before it, the final 
 consonant is doubled, not only in fori^ng the active ptu-- 
 ticiple, but also in forming the past *nne of the Indicative, 
 and the passive participle ; as, to fap, rapping ; I rapped., 
 it was rapped. But, observe well, this rule holds good 
 only as to words of one syllable / for if the Infinitive of 
 the Verb have more than one syllable, the consonant is 
 not doubled unless the accent be on the last syllable; and 
 the accent means the main force, weight, or sound of 
 the voice in pronouncing the word. For instance, in thq 
 word to open, the accent is on the Jirst 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. 
 
 It is, perhaps, worth while noticing that these are principles 
 that apply not only to the verbs, but to various other parts of 
 speech; in fact, principles that run through the whole language. 
 Just as, with nouns, the Word ending in y preceded by a consonant 
 changes the y into ie (lady, ladies), but does not change the y if 
 preceded by a vowel (valley, valleys) ; so with verbs, I carry, he 
 carries; I obey, he obeys; so with adjectives, happy, happier; gay, 
 gayer. And as we have seen that adjectives of one syllable, ending 
 in a consonant preceded by a single vowel double the consonant in 
 the comparative and superlative degrees (hot, hotter, hottest), but 
 do not do so if preceded by a double vowel or by none at all (neat, 
 neater ; rich, richer), so it is with verbs, of similar ending, in the
 
 Of Verbs. 65 
 
 past tense aud in the participles, rap, rapped, rapping; cheat, 
 cheated, cheating: work, worked, working. It is something that 
 is demanded by the pronunciation of the words ; for if we did not 
 double the final consonant in words of this kind, we should have 
 to say Tto'ter instead of Jiot'ter, raping instead of rapping. And 
 this reminds me to say that it is of the utmost importance for you 
 to study and understand the marking and accentuation of words 
 in the dictionary; for if you wish to pronounce the English 
 language correctly, you will find it necessary to consult the dic- 
 tionary very frequently. The most learned Englishman or Ameri- 
 can that lives, or has ever lived — not excepting Doctor Johnson or 
 Noah Webster himself — is, or has been, constantly obliged to con- 
 sult the dictionary for the coiTCct pronunciation of English woi-ds. 
 How different, in this respect, is the German language! In that 
 language there is but one single word irregularly pronounced; 
 le-ben'-dig, instead of le'-ben-dig, like le ben. And as to the mean- 
 ing, every German word explains itself; so that no German boy or 
 man need ever look into a dictionary to find out tlie meaning or 
 the pronunciation of a word in his language. Every word in thai 
 language is spelled, too, as it is pronounced. But the gram- 
 matical construction of the language is far more difficult than 
 ours. Mr. White confesses that, in order to learn German, the 
 grammar of the language must be studied. I will go so far as to 
 say, that an Englishman or American who studies the grammar of 
 that language thoroughly well, will never need much further study 
 of the grammar of his mother-tongue. 
 
 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 
 mai'k of a regular Verb is that iis past time and passive 
 participle end in ed ; every Verb which does not answer 
 to this mark is irregular. 
 
 107. There ai'e many of these irregular Verbs, of 
 which I shall here insert a complete Hst. All the UTeg- 
 ularities (except the Httle in-egulaiities just mentioned) 
 which it is possible to find in an English Verb (the auxil- 
 iary Verbs excepted) are in the past time and thepassive 
 participle only. Therefore, it will be sufficient to give a 
 list, showing, in those two instances, what are the iiTeg- 
 ularities of each Verb; and, in order to render this list
 
 66 
 
 Etymology 
 
 convenient, and to shorten the work of referring to it, I 
 shall make it alphabetical. With the past time and the 
 passive participle 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 IRREGUIiAK VERBS. 
 
 INFINITIVB. 
 
 to abide, 
 to be, 
 to bear, 
 to beat, 
 to become, 
 to befall, 
 to beget, 
 to begin, 
 to behold, 
 to bend, 
 to beseech, 
 to bid, 
 to bind, 
 to bite, 
 to bleed, 
 to break, 
 to breed, 
 to bring, 
 to buy, 
 to catch, 
 to choose, 
 to cleave, 
 to come, 
 to cost, 
 to cut, 
 to die, 
 to do, 
 to drink, 
 
 PAST TIME. 
 
 I abode, 
 I was, 
 I bore, 
 I beat, 
 I became, 
 it befell, 
 I begot, 
 I began, 
 I beheld, 
 I bended, 
 I besought, 
 I bade, 
 I bound, 
 I bit, 
 I bled, 
 I broke, 
 I bred, 
 I brought, 
 I bought, 
 I caught, 
 I chose, 
 I clove, 
 I came, 
 I cost, 
 I cut, 
 I died, 
 I did, 
 I drank, 
 
 PAETICIPLK8. 
 
 I have abode. 
 
 " been. 
 
 " borne. 
 
 " beaten. 
 
 " become, 
 it has befallen. 
 
 I have begotten. 
 
 " begun. 
 
 " beheld. 
 
 " bent. 
 
 " besought. 
 
 " bidden. 
 
 " bound. 
 
 " bitten. 
 
 " bled. 
 
 " broken. 
 
 " bred. 
 
 " brought. 
 
 " bought. 
 
 " caught. 
 
 " chosen- 
 
 " cloven. 
 
 " come. 
 
 " cost. 
 
 " cut. 
 
 " died. 
 
 " done. 
 
 '* drunk.
 
 Of Verbs. 
 
 67 
 
 rNFINTTIVK. 
 
 to drive, 
 to eat, 
 to fall, 
 to feed, 
 to feel, 
 to fight, 
 to find, 
 to flee, 
 to fliBg, 
 to fly, 
 to forbear, 
 to forbid, 
 to forget, 
 to forgive, 
 to forsake, 
 to get, 
 to g^ve, 
 to go, 
 to grind, 
 to have, 
 to hear, 
 to hide, 
 to hit, 
 to hold, 
 to hui't, 
 to keep, 
 to know, 
 to lay, 
 to lead, 
 to leave, 
 to lend, 
 to let, 
 to lie, 
 to lose, 
 to make, 
 
 PAST TIME 
 
 I drove, 
 I ate, 
 I fell, 
 I fed, 
 I felt, 
 I fought, 
 I found, 
 liied, 
 I flung, 
 I flew, 
 I forbore, 
 I forbade, 
 I forgot, 
 I forgave, 
 I forsook, 
 I got, 
 I gave, 
 I went, 
 I ground, 
 I had, 
 I heard, 
 I hid, 
 I hit, 
 I held, 
 I hiu't, 
 I kept, 
 I knew, 
 I laid, 
 lied, 
 I left, 
 I lent, 
 I let, 
 Hay, 
 I lost, 
 I made, 
 
 PABTIOIPLBS. 
 
 I have driven. 
 
 " eaten. 
 
 " fallen. 
 
 " fed. 
 
 " felt. 
 
 " fought. 
 
 " found. 
 
 '' fled. 
 
 " flung. 
 
 '' flown. 
 
 " forborne. 
 
 *' forbidden. 
 
 " forgotten. 
 
 " forgiven. 
 
 " forsaken. 
 
 " gotten. 
 
 " given. 
 
 " gone. 
 
 " gi'ound. 
 
 " had. 
 
 " heard. 
 
 " hidden. 
 
 " hit. 
 
 '• held. 
 
 " hurt. 
 
 " kept. 
 
 " known. 
 
 " laid. 
 
 " led. 
 
 " left. 
 
 " lent. 
 
 " let. 
 
 " lain. 
 
 " lost. 
 
 " made.
 
 68 
 
 Etymology 
 
 
 
 INFINITIVB. 
 
 PAST TIMB. 
 
 PARTICIPLK8. 
 
 to meet, 
 
 I met, 
 
 I have met. 
 
 to overcome, 
 
 I overcame, 
 
 a 
 
 overcoma 
 
 to overdo, 
 
 I overdid, 
 
 u 
 
 overdone. 
 
 to pay. 
 
 I paid, 
 
 (( 
 
 paid. 
 
 to put. 
 
 I put, 
 
 u 
 
 put. 
 
 to read, 
 
 I read. 
 
 (( 
 
 read. 
 
 to rend, 
 
 I rent. 
 
 u 
 
 rent. 
 
 to ride, 
 
 I rode. 
 
 (( 
 
 ridden. 
 
 to ring, 
 
 I rang. 
 
 li 
 
 rung. 
 
 to rise. 
 
 I rose, 
 
 (( 
 
 risen. 
 
 to run. 
 
 I ran, 
 
 li 
 
 run. 
 
 to say, 
 
 I said. 
 
 il 
 
 said. 
 
 to see, 
 
 I save. 
 
 u 
 
 seen. 
 
 to seek. 
 
 I sought, 
 
 (( 
 
 sought. 
 
 to sell. 
 
 I sold. 
 
 u 
 
 sold. 
 
 to send. 
 
 I sent, 
 
 u 
 
 sent. 
 
 to set. 
 
 I set, 
 
 u 
 
 set. 
 
 to shake. 
 
 I shook. 
 
 u 
 
 shaken. 
 
 to shear, 
 
 I sheared. 
 
 ti 
 
 shorn. 
 
 to shed. 
 
 I shed. 
 
 il 
 
 shed. 
 
 to show. 
 
 I showed, 
 
 <( 
 
 shown. 
 
 to shrink, 
 
 I shrank, 
 
 11 
 
 shrunk. 
 
 to shoe. 
 
 I shod. 
 
 <( 
 
 shod. 
 
 to shoot, 
 
 I shot. 
 
 (( 
 
 shot. 
 
 to shut, 
 
 I shut, 
 
 (( 
 
 shut. 
 
 to sing, 
 
 I sang, 
 
 a 
 
 sung. 
 
 to sink, 
 
 I sank. 
 
 (( 
 
 sunk. 
 
 to sit, 
 
 I sat, 
 
 (( 
 
 sat. 
 
 to slay, 
 
 I slew, 
 
 (( 
 
 slain. 
 
 to sleep. 
 
 I slept, 
 
 « 
 
 slept. 
 
 to shde, 
 
 I shd, 
 
 '• 
 
 slidden. 
 
 to sht, 
 
 I sht. 
 
 « 
 
 slit. 
 
 to smite, 
 
 I smote, 
 
 a 
 
 smitten. 
 
 to speak, 
 
 I spoke, 
 
 li 
 
 spoken. 
 
 to speed, 
 
 I sped, 
 
 u 
 
 sped.
 
 Of Verbs. 
 
 69 
 
 INFINITIVE. 
 
 PAST TIMB. 
 
 PAKTI0IPLB8. 
 
 to spend, 
 
 I spent. 
 
 I have spent. 
 
 to Bpin, 
 
 I span. 
 
 u 
 
 spun. 
 
 to spit, 
 
 I spat, 
 
 (( 
 
 spat. 
 
 to spread. 
 
 I spread. 
 
 a 
 
 spread. 
 
 to stand, 
 
 I stood. 
 
 a 
 
 stood. 
 
 to steal, 
 
 I stole. 
 
 a 
 
 stolen. 
 
 to stick. 
 
 I stuck. 
 
 u 
 
 stuck. 
 
 to stink. 
 
 I stunk. 
 
 u 
 
 stnnk. 
 
 to strike. 
 
 I struck. 
 
 ii. 
 
 stricken. 
 
 to swear, 
 
 I swore. 
 
 u 
 
 sworn. 
 
 to take, 
 
 I took, 
 
 t; 
 
 taken. 
 
 to teach, 
 
 I taught, 
 
 a 
 
 taught. 
 
 to tear. 
 
 I tore, 
 
 u 
 
 torn. 
 
 to tell, 
 
 I told. 
 
 (C 
 
 told. 
 
 to think, 
 
 I thought, 
 
 a 
 
 thought. 
 
 to tread, 
 
 I trod. 
 
 (( 
 
 trodden. 
 
 to understand. 
 
 I understood, 
 
 u 
 
 understood. 
 
 to wear, 
 
 I wore, 
 
 a 
 
 worn. 
 
 to win. 
 
 I won. 
 
 u 
 
 won. 
 
 to wind, 
 
 I wound. 
 
 a 
 
 wound. 
 
 to write, 
 
 I wrote, 
 
 u 
 
 written. 
 
 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 Hst, placed 
 evei'y Verb in otu' language which is really irregular. 
 However, I will here subjoin a list of those Verbs which 
 are, by some grammarians, reckoned irregvilar ; and then 
 I will show you, not only that they are not irregulai", 
 strictly speaking, but that you ought by all means to use 
 ihem in a regular form.
 
 70 
 
 Etymology 
 
 LIST OF VERBS WHICH, BY SOME PERSONS, ARE ERRONEOUSLY 
 DEEMED IRREGTTLARS. 
 
 INFINITIVE. 
 
 PAST TIME. 
 
 PABTIOIPLES. 
 
 to awake, 
 
 I awoke, 
 
 I have awaked. 
 
 to bereave, 
 
 I bereft, 
 
 (( 
 
 bereft. 
 
 to blow, 
 
 I blew. 
 
 (( 
 
 blown. 
 
 to build, 
 
 I built. 
 
 (( 
 
 buUt. 
 
 to bum. 
 
 I burnt, 
 
 ii 
 
 burnt. 
 
 to burst, 
 
 I burst. 
 
 (( 
 
 burst. 
 
 to cast, 
 
 I cast. 
 
 (( 
 
 cast. 
 
 to chide, 
 
 I chid, 
 
 u 
 
 chidden. 
 
 to cling, 
 
 I clung. 
 
 (( 
 
 clung. 
 
 to creep, 
 
 I crept. 
 
 it 
 
 crept. 
 
 to crow, 
 
 I crew, 
 
 u 
 
 crowed. 
 
 to curse, 
 
 I curst, 
 
 (( 
 
 CVU'st. 
 
 to daie, 
 
 I dared, 
 
 (( 
 
 dared. 
 
 to deal, 
 
 I dealt. 
 
 a 
 
 dealt. 
 
 to dig. 
 
 I dug, 
 
 (1 
 
 dug. 
 
 to dip, 
 
 I dipt. 
 
 u 
 
 dipt. 
 
 to draw, 
 
 I drew, 
 
 (( 
 
 drawn. 
 
 to dream, 
 
 I dreamt. 
 
 (( 
 
 dreamt. 
 
 to dwell. 
 
 I dwelt, 
 
 i( 
 
 dwelt. 
 
 to freeze, 
 
 I froze, 
 
 (( 
 
 frozen. 
 
 to geld, 
 
 I gelt, 
 
 (( 
 
 gelt. 
 
 to gild. 
 
 I gilt. 
 
 41 
 
 gilt. 
 
 to gird, 
 
 I girt. 
 
 (1 
 
 girt. 
 
 to grow. 
 
 I grew. 
 
 (k 
 
 grown. 
 
 to bang, 
 
 I hung. 
 
 li 
 
 hung. 
 
 to help. 
 
 I helpt, 
 
 " 
 
 helpt. 
 
 to hew, 
 
 I hewed. 
 
 (( 
 
 hewn. 
 
 to kneel. 
 
 I knelt. 
 
 <t 
 
 knelt. 
 
 to knit, 
 
 I knit. 
 
 • 
 
 knit. 
 
 to lade. 
 
 I laded. 
 
 « 
 
 laden. 
 
 to leap. 
 
 I leaped, 
 
 (( 
 
 leapt. 
 
 to light. 
 
 Iht, 
 
 i( 
 
 Hghted.
 
 Of Verbs. 
 
 71 
 
 INFINITIVE. 
 
 PAST TIMB. 
 
 PAKTIOIPLBS. 
 
 to load, 
 
 I loaded. 
 
 I have loaden or laden 
 
 to mean. 
 
 I meant, 
 
 I have meant. 
 
 to mow, 
 
 I mowed, 
 
 (( 
 
 mown. 
 
 to overflow. 
 
 I overflowed. 
 
 <( 
 
 overflown. 
 
 to saw. 
 
 I sawed, 
 
 (( 
 
 sawn. 
 
 to shave. 
 
 I shaved, 
 
 (( 
 
 shaven. 
 
 to shred, 
 
 I shred, 
 
 (( 
 
 shi-ed. 
 
 to shine, 
 
 I shone. 
 
 u 
 
 shone. 
 
 to sling. 
 
 I slung, 
 
 (( 
 
 slung. 
 
 to sHnk, 
 
 I slunk, 
 
 (( 
 
 slunk. 
 
 to shp. 
 
 I slipt, 
 
 « 
 
 shpt. 
 
 to smell, 
 
 I smelt. 
 
 u 
 
 smelt. 
 
 to snow. 
 
 it snowed, 
 
 it has 
 
 snown. 
 
 to sow, 
 
 I sowed. 
 
 I have 
 
 sown. 
 
 to spell. 
 
 I spelt, 
 
 (( 
 
 spelt. 
 
 to spill. 
 
 I s;)ilt. 
 
 u 
 
 spilt. 
 
 to spUt, 
 
 I split. 
 
 (C 
 
 split. 
 
 to spring. 
 
 I sprang. 
 
 (( 
 
 sprung. 
 
 to stamp, 
 
 I stampt. 
 
 (( 
 
 stampt. 
 
 to sting, 
 
 I stung, 
 
 a 
 
 stung. 
 
 to strew. 
 
 I screwed, 
 
 a 
 
 strewn. 
 
 to strow, 
 
 I 8 trowed. 
 
 11 
 
 strown. 
 
 to stride, 
 
 I strode, 
 
 u 
 
 stridden. 
 
 to string. 
 
 I strung, 
 
 (; 
 
 strung. 
 
 to strip, 
 
 I stript. 
 
 i( 
 
 stript^ 
 
 to strive. 
 
 I strove, 
 
 it 
 
 striven. 
 
 to sweep. 
 
 I swept, 
 
 11 
 
 swept. 
 
 to swell. 
 
 I swelled, 
 
 (( 
 
 swollen. 
 
 to swim. 
 
 I swam, 
 
 '• 
 
 swum. 
 
 to swing. 
 
 I swung. 
 
 ii 
 
 swung 
 
 to thrive. 
 
 I throve. 
 
 a 
 
 thriven 
 
 to throw. 
 
 I threw. 
 
 Cl 
 
 thrown. 
 
 to thrust. 
 
 I thrust. 
 
 a 
 
 thrust. 
 
 to wax. 
 
 I waxed. 
 
 « 
 
 waxen. 
 
 to weave, 
 
 I wove, 
 
 u 
 
 woven.
 
 72 Etymology 
 
 INFrNTTIVK. PAST TIME. PARTI0IPLK8. 
 
 to weep, I wept, I have wept, 
 
 to whip, I whipt, " whipt. 
 
 109. The greater part of these verbs have become 
 irregular by the bad practice of abbreviating or shorten- 
 ing in writing. We are always given to cut our words 
 short; and, with very few exceptions, you find people 
 writing lo'o'd^ mov'd, waWd ; instead of loved, moved, 
 walked. They wish to make the pe7i 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 speak- 
 ing. From lov'd, movd, waWd, it is very easy to slide 
 into lovt, 77iovt, wallet. And this has been the case with 
 regard to curst, dealt, dwelt, leapt, helpt, and many others 
 in the last inserted list. It is just as proper to ssLjJumpt, 
 as it is to say leapt/ and just as proj)er to say walkt as 
 either ; and thus we might go on, till the orthography of 
 the whole language were changed. When the love of 
 contraction came to operate on such Verbs as to hurst and 
 to light, it found such a clump of consonants akeady at the 
 end of the words that it could add none. It could not en- 
 able the organs even of English speech to pronounce 
 bursfd, 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 hai-monious, as well as more correct, to say, " the 
 bubble is almost bursted,''' than it is to say, " The bubble 
 is almost burst? " And as to hang, is it not better to say 
 hanged than hung? " I will be hanged if I do," is a very 
 common phrase, and is it not better than it would be to 
 say, " I will be hung if I do ? " Many of these Verbs, by 
 being very difficult to contract, have, as in the case of to 
 hang, to swing, and the like, reduced the shorteners to 
 the necessity of changing almost all the letters of the
 
 Of Verbs. 73 
 
 words ; as, to dare, durst / but is it not better to saj I 
 dared than I durst? This habit of contracting or Bhort- 
 ening is a very mischievous habit. It leads to the de- 
 struction of all propriety in the uae of letters ; and instead 
 of a saving of time, it produces, by ihe 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 ir- 
 regular verbs, that those in the last list are to be used in 
 the regidar form, and that the only real irregulai'S are 
 those of the fii'st list. Nay, I have, after all, left some 
 Verbs in the first hst which m,ay be used in the regular 
 form ; as, pas^, which may be, in the participle, j^assed, and 
 with full as much propriety. 
 
 The fact that this second series of verbs, which Cobbett declares 
 ought to be used in the regular form, are now almost all used in 
 that form, is a pretty good proof of the soundness of his judgment. 
 Tnere is a strong tendency now-a-days to make irregular verbs 
 regular, as well as to make irregaiarly-pronounced words regular. 
 Mr. White is singular in his notions on this subject. He dislikes all 
 departm-es from old-estaolistied pronunciations ; calls them " book- 
 talk, not free, manly speech." Though the people of the town of 
 Derby, for instance, pronounce the name of their town just as it is 
 spelled, he thinks the aristocratic pronunciation "Darby" is the 
 proper one, because it has support in other words pronounced in the 
 old style, such as dark for clerk, dargy for dergy, sarjeant for serjeant. 
 And yet he seems to agree with Walker that vurgin and vurtue 
 instead of virgin and virtue have ' ' a grossness approaching to vul- 
 garity ! " Is not the one just as bad as the other ? nay, worse ; for 
 the i in these words, like that in thirst and girl, has, in everybody's 
 mouth, something of the sound of the u. Ought we, in order 
 to satisfy a peculiarity or nicety of taste, to retain an irregular 
 pronunciation in particular words, which gives endless trouble to 
 thousands of teachers and millions of children ? I am all the more 
 surprised at this peculiar notion of Mr. White's, as he seems willing 
 to abolish every change in the ending of words in order to simplify 
 the grammar : even the m in whom he is willing to discard. There is 
 no use in talking about it; it is quite natural that a practical, pro- 
 gressive, reading people like the Americana should pronounce 
 words as they are spelled. We no longer hear housewife pro- 
 4
 
 74 Etymology 
 
 nounced hmzif, as in England ; or, haunt pronounced hant. Nor 
 do I think there i« any loss whatever, but a gain, in so pro- 
 nouncing. "Derby" sounds just as good as "Darby," "clerk" 
 as good as "dark;" "Berkeley" as "Barkeley." 
 
 Simplicity is, in fact, the order of the day ; it is the tendency of 
 the age in all thiix^s ; for modern progress, modern ideas, are ren- 
 dering all mankind more neighborly, more brotherly, more 
 nearly akin to each other. Mr. White is inclined to think that 
 those we call irregular verbs are the real strong ones, and tlie 
 others the weak. I notice that my little girl, five years old, fre- 
 quently makes irregular verbs regular (I drinked, I eated, etc.), 
 although she never hears them so used. This to me is a proof 
 that there is a natural tendency in the language to regularity of 
 construction. And indeed there is a reason for this change, as for 
 all changes, in our language — a satisfactory, a compensatory 
 reason ; for most of the old irregular forms are needed for other 
 and different service : they are wanted for quaJificative and figiu*a- 
 tive use. Let us take some of these very verbs in the second list- 
 to burn, to chide, to gild, to gird, to hew, to load, to shave, to 
 spill, to weave — and we shall see that though used in the regular 
 form as verbs, the irregular form is used as adjectives. I 
 burned the cork; here is burnt cork; — he chided the children; 
 there they go, like a chidden train ; — she gilded the faces of the 
 sleepers ; she wears gilt lace ; — he girded himself for the combat ; 
 here is a sea-girt isle ; — he hewed the stone ; here is a temple built 
 of hewn stone ; and so on. Though we speak of having worked 
 hard, of having melted the ice, and of having swelled the tide of 
 prosperity, yet we speak of vsTought iron, of a swollen flood, and 
 of molten lead. Though we say that " she knitted the stockings" 
 and "he freighted the vessel," we say that "her brows were knit" 
 and "the enterprise was fraught with misfortune." Thus we see 
 that the irregular form of the verb has been turned into an adjec- 
 tive, and the regular form retained as a verb. 
 
 The old form is also needed to form nouns as well as adjectives. 
 "During the past year, he has often passed me without a glance ; 
 but, never mind ; the past is forgotten." And the old form is 
 sometimes used to show a difference of meaning as compared with 
 the regular form; for "he durst not do it" is quite a different 
 thing from "he dared not do it;" the former indicating that he 
 had not the permission to do it, and the latter that he had not the 
 courage.— Having forgotten what Cobbett said above of the verb 
 to pass, I struck it out of the list of irregulars, as it is never now
 
 Of Verbs. 75 
 
 used irregularly. Otherwise I should have let it stand. It is, 
 however, the only verb I did strike out. 
 
 110. Auxiliary Verbs. — In the present Letter, para- 
 graph 103, I opened this pai"t of my subject. The word 
 let is the past time and the passive participle of the Verb 
 to let. It is used as an auxiliary, however, in the present 
 time; and only in the imperative mode; as. Let me go; 
 let us go; let him go. That is to say, Leave me to go, 
 leave us to go, leave him, to go. Perhaps the meaning, 
 fully expressed, would be, Act in such a way that I may 
 be left to go, or suffered to go. 
 
 The peculiarity of this verb to let is, that like a dozen other irreg- 
 ular verbs, it may be used in all the tenses without undergoing any 
 change of form ; as, I let him come now ; I let him come yesterday ; 
 I have let him come. I put it away now ; I put it away yesterday; 
 I have put it away. So with cut, cast, hit, and others. 
 
 111. The auxihary do, which, for the past time, be- 
 comes did, is part of the Verb to do, which in its past 
 time is did, and in its passive participle done. In this 
 sense, it is not an auxiliary, but a principal Verb, and its 
 meaning is equal to that of to execute, or to perform; as, 
 I do my work, I execute my work, I perform my work. 
 As an auxihary 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 fii-st do is an auxihary, and the last 
 do a principal Verb. However, as I said before, do and 
 did, used as auxiharies, do a great deal more than merely 
 express titne. In fact, they are not often used for that 
 pxirpose only. They are used for the purpose of afl^'ming 
 or denying in a manner pecuHaily strong ; as, I do work, 
 means, that I work, notwithstanding all that may be, or 
 may have been said, or thought, to the contrary; or it 
 means, that I work now, and have not done it at some 
 other stated or supposed time. It is the same, with the 
 exception of time, as to the use of did. These aie
 
 76 Etymology 
 
 amongst those little words of vast import, the proper 
 force and use of which foreigners scaa'cely ever learn, and 
 which we learn from our very infancy. 
 
 This is, I think, the proper place to state that the English verb 
 has, in fact, five forms in the present tense — something which, I 
 believe, is not found in the verbs of any other modern tongue : 
 
 He works, common form. 
 
 He is working, progressive form. 
 
 He does work, emphatic form. 
 
 He worketh, solemn form. 
 
 He doth work, solemn emphatic form. 
 
 All these forms convey a different shade of meaning, and are 
 used under different circumstances, which will be explained by- 
 aud-by. I will only say here that the first three are the most fre- 
 quently used. The French and the Germans have only one form 
 for the whole five : il travaille, er arbeitet. They have, it is true, 
 the progressive form, too, but it is seldom used by the French and 
 Jiardly ever by the Germans. 
 
 Now, concerning do, you must notice that, as an auxiliary, it is 
 used chiefly in negative and iNTERROGATrvE sentences : 
 
 He works, he is working, affirmative. 
 
 He does not work, negative. 
 
 Does he work ? interrogative. 
 It is never used in affirmative sentences except for emphasis. 
 The French and the Germans, for the last two forms, simply say: 
 He works not. Works he ? We use this form when we speak sol- 
 emnly or earnestly : He works not ; He comes not ; I see him not. 
 Notice that when any other auxiliary is used (have, be, must, may, 
 etc.), we cannot use do in either negative or interrogative sentences : 
 " I have not seen him. He must not go. Am I your friend? May 
 I speak?" To say, therefore, " I did not have a penny," is not bo 
 good as, "I had not a penny." 
 
 112. The Verbs to have and to be oxe the two great 
 auxiharies. These words demand an extraordinaiy por- 
 tion of your attention. They ai'e principal Verbs as well 
 as auxiliai-ies. The Verb to have, as a principal Verb, 
 signifies possession / as, I have a pen, that is to say, / 
 possess a pen. Then, this is a word of very great use in- 
 deed in its capacity of principal Verb ; for we say, J have 
 a headache, I have a hatred of such a thing, / have a
 
 Of Verbs. TT 
 
 mind to go ; and hundreds of similar phrases. I possess 
 a headache has the same mea?iinff / but the other is more 
 agreeable to the natural turn of our language. As aux 
 iliary, this Verb is absolutely necessary in forming what 
 are called the compound times of other Verbs, and those 
 times aie called compound because they are formed of two 
 or ino7'e Verbs. Suppose the subject to be of my workingj 
 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, Jtoorky 
 or J worked, or J will work / these will not answer my 
 purpose. No : I must call in the help of the Verb to have, 
 and tell you I have worked. So, in the case of the past 
 time, I must say, I had worked; in the future, I shall 
 have worked ; in the subjunctive mode, I must say, I may, 
 might, could, or should have worked. If you reflect a 
 little, you will find a clear reason for employing the Verb 
 to have in this way ; for when I say, " I have worked,'''' vaj 
 words amount to this : that the o.ct of working is now in 
 my possession. It is completed. It is a thing I oton, and 
 therefore I say, I 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 pov- 
 erty. 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 these phrases mean as follows: existing in 
 work, he exists in work, it exists iii a worked state. Both 
 these Verbs are sometimes used, at one and the same 
 time, as auxiharies to other principal Verbs/ as, I have 
 been writing ; I have been imprisoned ; and so on; and, 
 upon patient attention to what has akeady been said, you 
 will find that they retain upon all occasions their full
 
 78 
 
 Etymology 
 
 meaning, of possession in the one case, sind of existence in 
 the other. 
 
 114. Now, my dear James, if I have succeeded in mak- 
 ing clear to you the principle out of which the use of 
 these words, as auxiliaries, has arisen, I have accomplished 
 a great deal ; for, if well grounded in that principle, all 
 the subsequent difficulties will speedily vanish before you. 
 
 115. I now proceed to close this long and important 
 Letter, by presenting to you the conjugation of these two 
 Verbs, both of which aie irregular, and every irregularity 
 is worthy of your strict attention. 
 
 Present 
 Time. 
 
 Past 
 Time. 
 
 Future 
 Time. 
 
 Present 
 Time. 
 
 Singular. 
 /-1st Person. 
 - 2(1 Person, 
 (3d Person. 
 
 INFINITIVE MODE. 
 
 To Have. 
 INDICATIVE MODE. 
 
 . Plural 
 . I have, We have. 
 
 . Thou hast, You have. 
 
 He, she, or it has They have, 
 or hath], We had. 
 You had. 
 
 /■ — I had, 
 •< — Thou hadst, 
 ( — He, she or it had, 
 ^ — I shall, or will have, 
 ^' — Thou shalt, or wilt have, 
 ( — He, she, or it shall or will 
 have], 
 
 They had. 
 
 We shall, or will have. 
 You shall, or will have. 
 They shall, or will have. 
 
 SUBJUNCTIVE MODE, 
 
 f If I have, or may, might, could, or should liave. 
 
 I If thou have, or may " " " have. 
 
 ', If he, she, or it have, or may " have. 
 
 I If we have, or may " " have; 
 
 If you have, or may " " have. 
 
 Lif they liave, or may " *' have. 
 
 IMPERATIVE MODE. 
 Let me have, Let us have. 
 
 Have thou, Have you. 
 
 Let him, her, or it have, Let them have.
 
 Of Verbs. 
 
 79 
 
 PARTICIPLES. 
 
 Active. —Having. 
 Passive. — Had. 
 
 116. Though I have inserted hath in the third person 
 singular of the present of the indicative, it is hardly ever 
 used. It is out of date, and ought to be wholly laid 
 aside. 
 
 117. The Verb to be is still more in-egular, but a little 
 attention to its irregidarities will prevent all errors in the 
 use of it. 
 
 Present 
 Time. 
 
 Past 
 Time. 
 
 Futiu-e 
 Time. 
 
 INFINITIVE MODE. 
 
 To Be. 
 INDICATIVE MODE. 
 
 Singular. 
 /1st Person. 
 -. 2d Person. 
 (3d Person. 
 
 I am, 
 
 Thou art, 
 
 He, she, or it is, 
 
 /- — I was, 
 - — Thou wast, 
 ( — He, she, or it was, 
 /- — I shall, or will be, 
 Thou shalt, or wilt be. 
 
 Plural. 
 We are. 
 You are. 
 They are. 
 We were. 
 You were. 
 They were. 
 We shall, or will be. 
 You shall, or will be 
 
 ( — He, she, or it shall, or will be, Tliey shall, or will be. 
 
 SUBJUNCTIVE MODE. 
 'If I be, or may, might, would, could, or should be, 
 If tliou be, or may " " 
 
 Present I If he, she, or it be, or may 
 Ti™6- I If we be, or may " 
 If you be, or may " 
 .If they be, or may " 
 
 fif I were. 
 If thou were. 
 If he, she, or it were. 
 I If we were. 
 { If you were. 
 I If they were. 
 
 Past Time.
 
 80 Etymology 
 
 IMPERATIVE MODE. 
 Let me be. Let us be. 
 
 Be tliou, Be you. 
 
 Let lum, 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 expressed conditionally, 
 or when the action or state of being is, in some way or 
 other, dep&yident 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, tvill, would, shall, should, 
 and 7nust, 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 ioilled, they are imlling, 
 they will be willing. The word would is certainly the 
 past time and passive participle of the same Verb ; and, 
 indeed, it is used as a principal Verb now, in certain cases ; 
 as, "I would he were rich." That is to say, I desire, or 
 am willing, or, it is my icill, that he should be rich. But 
 deep inquuies regarding the origiu of these words aie 
 more cuiious than useful. A mere idea of the natvu-e of 
 their origin is enough. The Verb ought is a Verb de- 
 fective, 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 ; " 1 ought to wiite to you,"
 
 Of Verbs. 81 
 
 means that " I owe the performance of the act of writing 
 to you." Ought is made use of only in the present imiCy 
 aaid for that reason a great deal has been lost to our lan- 
 guage by this coiTuption. As to the Verbs which some 
 grammaiians have called impersonal, there are, in fact, no 
 such things in the English language. By im2^ersonal 
 Verb is meant a Verb that has no noun ov pronoun for its 
 nominative case ; no j^erson or thing that is the actor, or 
 receiver of an action, or that is in being. Thus: "it 
 rams," is by some called an impersonal Verb ; but the 
 pronoun it represents the person. Look again at Letter 
 VI, and at pai-agraphs 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 endeavors to 
 make the matter clear to you, I am awai'e, that, after the 
 Jirst reading of this Letter, your mind will be greatly 
 confused. You will have had a glimpse at everything in 
 the Letter, but will have seen nothing cleai-ly. But, my 
 deal* James, lay the book aside for a day or twp; then 
 read the whole Letter again and again. Read it eai'ly, 
 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, lliink as you proceed ; and, at 
 the end of your copying, you will understand clearly all 
 the contents of the Letter. Do not attempt to study the 
 Letter piece by piece. Li yoiu* 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. 
 
 As to this last piece of advice, 1 caunot agree with Cobbett, 
 Reading the whole letter at once is the very way to get a confused 
 impression of the whole subject; just as going through a whole 
 museum at once leaves a confused impressiou of everything and a 
 distinct impression of nothing. Ko ; go through one roomful of
 
 «2 
 
 Etymology 
 
 cunositics at one visit; master the whole collection step by step; 
 and when you have got it pretty clear in your mind, then you may 
 go over it all at one run. 
 
 To complete this, the most important part of etymology, I must 
 give you a full view of a passive verb, or rather of a verb in the 
 passive voice. Just devote one little half-hour to it in the early 
 morning, when your mind is fresh ; and you will see its nature 
 clearly; compare it with the same verb in the active voice, and 
 you will get a fair idea of what a verb in the passive voice is. 
 For, to make the matter all the more plain, I see no reason why 
 this same verb to work, which I have given you in the active voice, 
 should not be given in the passive, too ; for we often say, He t» 
 worked to death; the mine was well worked; the problem has been 
 worked out, and so on. Besides — and this is a secret which every 
 school-boy does not know — there must, in the conjugation of every 
 passive verb, be displayed a complete conjugation of the verb to be; 
 so here we kill two birds with one stone. 
 
 Complete Conjugation of the Passive Verb To be worked : 
 
 INFINITIVE MOOD. 
 
 BIMFLE TENSES. 
 
 Present tense. 
 To be worked. 
 
 COMPOUND TEN8K8. 
 
 Present perfect tense. 
 To have been worked. 
 
 INDICATIVE MOOD. 
 
 Present tense. 
 I am worked, 
 Thou art worked, 
 He is " 
 
 We are " 
 
 You are " 
 They are " 
 
 Past tense. 
 I was worked, 
 Thou wast worked, 
 He was " 
 
 We were " 
 
 You were " 
 They were " 
 
 Simple future tense, 
 I shall be worked, 
 Thou wilt be worked, 
 He will be " 
 
 We shall be 
 You will be " 
 They will be " 
 
 Present coii'litUmalform. 
 I should be worked. 
 Thou wouldst be worked, 
 He would be " 
 
 We should be " 
 
 You would be " 
 
 They would be " 
 
 Present perfect tense. 
 I have been worked. 
 Thou hast been worked. 
 Hhi has been " 
 
 We have been ' ' 
 You have been " 
 They have been " 
 
 Past perfect tense. 
 I had been worked. 
 Thou hadst been worked. 
 He had been " 
 
 We had been " 
 
 You had been " 
 
 They had been " 
 
 Perfect future tense. 
 I shall have been worked. 
 Thou wilt have been worked. 
 He will have been " 
 
 We suall have been " 
 
 You will have been " 
 
 They will have been " 
 
 Perfect conditional form. 
 I should have bepn worked. 
 Tbou wouldst have been worked. 
 He would have been " 
 
 We should have been " 
 
 You would have been " 
 
 They would have been "
 
 
 Of 
 
 Adverbs. 
 
 
 POTENTIAL MOOD. 
 
 Present tente. 
 I may be worked, 
 Thou mayst be worked, 
 He may be " 
 We may be " 
 You may be " 
 They may be " 
 
 
 Present perfect tente. 
 I may have Deen worked. 
 Thou raayst have been worked. 
 Ho may have been 
 We may have been " 
 You may have b>?en " 
 They may have been 
 
 Pa«t tense. 
 I mipht be worked. 
 Thou mijihtst be worked, 
 HemigrhtbH " 
 We might be " 
 You mi^ht be " 
 They might be " 
 
 
 Past perfect tense. 
 I might have boen worked. 
 Thou mightst have been worked. 
 He mijiht have been " 
 We might have been " 
 You might have been " 
 They might have been " 
 
 
 SUBJUNCTIVE MOOD. 
 
 Prestntteru*. 
 If I be worked, 
 thou be worked, 
 he be 
 
 we be " 
 you be " 
 they be " 
 
 
 Present pert ect tense. 
 If I have been worked, 
 thou have been worked, 
 he have been " 
 wehivebeen " 
 you have been " 
 they have been " 
 
 Past tense. 
 If I were worked, 
 thou were worked, 
 he were '* 
 we were 
 you were " 
 they were 
 
 
 Past perfect tense. 
 If I had been worked, 
 thou had been " 
 he had been " 
 we had been " 
 yuu had been " 
 they had been " 
 
 
 IMPERATIVE MOOD. 
 
 Be worked. 
 
 
 or, Be thou worked. 
 
 83 
 
 PARTICIPLES. 
 lV««i<— Being worked, Pa«<— Having been worked. 
 
 LETTER IX. 
 
 ETYMOLOGY OF ADVERBS. 
 
 121. In Letter III, and in pai'agraphs 27 and 28, you 
 will find a description of this Part of Speech. Read 
 again those two pai-agraphs, in order to refresh your 
 memory. There is not much to be said about Adverbs 
 imder the head of Etymology. They are words hable to 
 few vaiiations. Adverbs are very numerous, and may be 
 divided into five principal classes : that is to say, Adverbs 
 of time., of place, of order., of quality., and of manner.
 
 84 Etymology 
 
 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 /y, are, for the most 
 part, formed by simply adding ly to the adjective; as, es- 
 pecial 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 adjective end in le, 
 the e is dropped in forming the Adverb; as, possible, 
 possibly. 
 
 123. Some few Adverbs have degrees of comparison; 
 as, often, oftener, oftenest ; and those which are derived 
 from irregular adjectives are m-egular in forming their 
 degrees of compai'ison ; as, xcell, better, best. 
 
 124. Some Adverbs are simple or single ; others cotn- 
 pound. The former consist of one word, the latter of 
 two or more words; as, happily / at present/ now-a-days / 
 which last means at the days that noio are. Another Ad- 
 verb of this description is, by-and-by ; which is used to 
 express, in a short time ; and literally it means near and 
 near ; because by itself, as an Adverb, means near, close, 
 beside. When Adverbs are compound, the words com- 
 posing them ought to be connected by a hyphen, or 
 hyphens, as in the above examples of now-a-days and 
 by-and-by. 
 
 I must here explain to you two important tilings, of which Cob- 
 bett makes no mention : the phrase and the clause. In the sen- 
 tence, "I shall return immediately,'''' the word immediately is 
 simply an adverb of time, modifying the verb shall return; but 
 when I change the adverb into several words, as, "I shall return in 
 an instant" it becomes a phrase, an adveriial pJirase. Plu-ases are 
 used to express all that adverbs are used to express, and nearly all 
 adverbs can be turned into adverbial phrases. The adverb now 
 may be changed into at this moment or at present ; beautifully may 
 be rendered by in a beautiful manner ; here may be turned into at 
 this place; in a quiet way may he rendered hy quietly ; and so on. 
 And here I must show you that there are many cases where w©
 
 Of Adverbs. 85 
 
 prefer the adverbial phrase to tlie adverb. To what part of speech 
 do you think the words m'Ui/, Mildly, friendly, belong ? They look 
 like adverbs, do they not? But they are not, as you will find by 
 trial: a silly boy, a kindly gentleman, a friendly lady. Shall I 
 then say, The boy speaks sillily? The gentleman acts kindlily? 
 The lady received us f riendlily ? These expressions are not abso- 
 lutely incorrect; they are better than with the adjective. The boy 
 speaks silly, etc. ; but they do not sound agreeable ; so we prefer 
 the adverbial pnRASE : The boy speaks in a silly manner ; the gen- 
 tleman acts in a kindly manner; the lady received us in a friendly 
 manner, or in a friendly tcay. Observe, too, that you ought never 
 to put a preposition before an adverb of place ; as, to here, from 
 there. You must use a pJircbse, and say, to this place, from that 
 city, etc., always naming the place referred to. Never s^y from 
 whence, from thence ; but simply whence, thence. 
 
 Now for the clause. The difference between the phrase and the 
 clause is this : the clause always has a subject and predicate (nom- 
 inative and verb), the phrase never has either. "I shall return 
 when I please.''^ Here, instead of the phrase in an instant, we have 
 an assertion, with subject (I) and predicate (please), which cannot 
 be changed for a single word. This is called an adverbial clause; 
 adverbial because it modifies the verb of the first clause ; for the 
 sentence now contains two clauses, and is changed from a simple 
 into a complex sentence. Every sentence must have at least one 
 clause, while there may not be a single phrase in ten consecutive 
 sentences. A clause may be not only adverbial, but objective, 
 participial, infinitive, or relative. "He asked what J was doing, '^ 
 objective clause; "He came in as I was going away," participial 
 clause; " He wants to see what icill come of it," infinitive clause; 
 "The boy who learns English is my son," relative clause; anc^ 
 so on. Observe the following three examples, and you will see 
 how the adverb may be turned into an adverbial phrase, and the 
 latter into an adverbial clause: 
 
 Speak distinctly. 
 
 Speak in a distinct manner. 
 
 Speak so that you may be understood. 
 It is worth noticing that some adverbs help to join clauses as well 
 as to express time or place, and are therefore called conjunctive ad- 
 verbs : I shall return when he returns. I will toll you v^liere we are 
 going. Others, again, express negation, affirmation, or cause, 
 and are called adverbs of negation, of affirmation, or of cause, as, 
 (1) no, not, never; (2) yes, yea, truly, certainly; (3) why, w/iereforcy
 
 86 Etymology. 
 
 therefore. No, coming immediately before a noun, is, of course, an 
 adjective ; as, No person under 25 years of age can become a mem- 
 ber of Congress. Observe that all adverbs ending in ly are com- 
 pared with more and irKJSt, or less and least ; as, haudsomely, more 
 handsomely, most handsomely ; — handsomely, less handsomely, 
 least handsomely. Do you remember the names of these three 
 degrees? An adverb modifies a verb, an adjective, or another ad- 
 verb. To vrhat part of speech, then, does the word the belong, in 
 such phrases as, "the more the merrier," " the longer the better"? 
 
 LETTER X. 
 
 ETYMOLOGY OF PREPOSITIONS. 
 
 125. Letter III, iDaiagiai^hs 29 and 33, has taught you 
 of what description of words Prep'^sitions are. The 
 chief use of them is to express the different relations or 
 connections which nouns have with each other, or in 
 which nouns stand with regard to each other ; as, John 
 gives money <o Peter ; Peter receives money /rom 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 cleai* to you, when you come to the 
 Syntax. 
 
 126. There are two abbreviations, or shortenings, of 
 Prepositions, which I will notice here, because they are 
 in constant use, and may excite doubts in your mind. 
 These are a and o' / as, I am a hunting ; he is a coming ; 
 
 at 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 you wiJ frequently see this 
 a made use of in a very odd sort of way ; as, " Six bales 
 marked 1 a 6." The merchant means, "Six bales mai'ked 
 from 1 tj 6." But this I take to be a relic of the Norman 
 French, which was once the law and mercantile language
 
 Of Prepositions. 87 
 
 of England ; for, in French, a with an accent, means to or 
 at. I wonder that merchants, who are generally men of 
 sound sense, do not discontinue the use of this mark of 
 aSfectation. And, I beg you, my dear James, to bear in 
 mind, that the only use of words is t) c luse our me':t7ung 
 to be clexrly understood ; and that the best words are 
 those which are familiar to the ears of the greatest num- 
 ber of persons. The o' with the mark of elision means 
 of, or of the, or on, or on the ; as, two o'clock, which 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 verbs 
 or other words; as, to outlive, to undervalue, to be over- 
 done, it would be to waste our time to spend it in any 
 statements about them; for these are other loords than 
 to live, to value, to be done. If we were to go, in this 
 way, into the subject of the composition of words, where 
 should we stop? Thank/ «^, thankless, vdihout, withm/ 
 these are all compound m^ ox i\^, but, of what tise to us to 
 enter on, and spend our time in, inquiries of mere cario- 
 sity? It is for monks and for Fellows of English colleges, 
 who hve by the sweat of other people's brows, to spend 
 their time in this manner, and to call the result of theu* 
 studies learning ; for you, who wid have to earn what 
 you eat and what you di'ink and what you wear, it is to 
 avoid everything that tends not to real utiity. 
 
 It may, however, not be quite useless to mention the names 
 given to the parts of derived words. Kind, ua-kind, kiad-ness. 
 The original word is called the root; the syllable placed before the 
 root is called the prefix; and the syllable added to the root is 
 called the suffix. Although any word having a prefix or a sufBx 
 may be called a compound word, we generally call those words 
 compound which are formed by uniting two or more whole words ; 
 svs, workshop, schoolmaster, army-chest. And as to which com- 
 pound words take a h}'phen, and which do not, this depends a 
 good deal upon the shape of the first and the last letter of the two 
 words united. For instance, churchyard needs no hyphen, because
 
 88 Etymology 
 
 the two parts are sufficiently separated by the ascending h and the 
 descending y ; but church-bell or clmrch-hymn must be so separated, 
 because the parts of the word would otherwise not be sufficiently 
 distinct. 
 
 As to the correct iise of prepositions generally, there is no guide 
 equal to tlie feeling for propriety acquired by much reading and 
 speaking, and by frequent hearing of good speakers. Well do I 
 remember that, among my most advanced scholars in Germany, 
 almost the only mistake they finally made was in the use of the 
 prepositions, showing that this was the last difficulty to be mas- 
 tered. It was sometimes a matter so peculiar, so delicate, so diffi- 
 cult to choose the right preposition, that I was myself obliged to 
 repeat a sentence aloud several times before I could hit on the 
 riglit word. 
 
 Do not forget that the preposition governs the objective case — I 
 send for him— nor that the same word may sometimes belong to 
 another part of speech : I send for him, for I cannot do without 
 him. Notice that people are said to be in any place, but that they 
 go into a place. We are in the garden, we are going into the 
 jQOUse. In the Broadway stages there stands, over the fare-box, 
 tills sentence : " Put the exact fare in the box." It should be ««■&> 
 the box ; for, though the money may be in the box, it is put into 
 it. — Do not suppose that every preposition must be a little word ; 
 for concerning, respecting, regarding, notwithstanding are also prepo- 
 sitions. Observe, too, that nine phrases out of ten begin with a 
 preposition. 
 
 In regard to the expressions, a-hunting, a-coming, and the like, 
 Cobbett can not mean that these are vulgar and redundant,— 
 which is what, at first, I thought he meant, — but that at hunting, 
 at coming, are so. The other expression is perfectly legitimate, 
 and used by tl^e best authors. You may say, therefore, that some- 
 thing or anything is a-doing, a-making, a-building, a-ripeniug, 
 a-brewing, and so on.
 
 Of Conjunctions. 89 
 
 LETTER XI. 
 
 ETYMOLOGY OF CONJUNCTIONS. 
 
 128. In Letter III, pai-agraph 31, you have had a de- 
 scription of this sort of words, and also some account of 
 the uses of them. Some of them are called copulative 
 Conjunctions, aud others disjunctive. They all serve to 
 join together words, or parts of sentences ; but the for- 
 mer express an union in the actions, or states of being, 
 expressed by the verb; as, you (nid I talk. The latter a 
 disunion; as, you talk, but I act. The words of this 
 Part of Speech never vary in theu' endings. They are 
 always spelled in one and the same way. In themselves 
 they present no difficulty ; but, as you will see by-and-by, 
 to use them properly, with other words, in the forming 
 of sentences, demands a due portion of your attention 
 and cai'e. 
 
 You see Cobbett says "aa union." Can you tell why this is 
 wrong? If not, look at Letter IV, paragraph 36 (note). 
 
 LETTER XII. 
 
 c a u t i o n a k y k k m a r k s . 
 
 My dear James : 
 
 129. Before we enter ou Syntax, let me give you a 
 caution or two with regard to the contents of the forego- 
 ing Letters. 
 
 130. There are some words which, vmder different cir- 
 cumstances belong to more than one Part of Speech, as, 
 indeed, you have seeu in the Participles. But this is by 
 no means confined to that particulai' description of words.
 
 •90 Cautionary Remarks. 
 
 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 hy him ; he stood hy at the time. In 
 the fiist of these examples hy is a preposition ; in the last 
 an adverb. Mind, therefore, that it is the sense hi which 
 the loord is used, and not the letters of ichich it is com- 
 posed, that determines what is the Pai-t of Speech ta 
 which it belongs. 
 
 131. Never attempt to get by rote any part of your in- 
 structions. Whoever falls into that practice soon begins 
 to esteem the powers of memory more than those of rea- 
 son ; and the former are despicable indeed when com- 
 pared with the latter. When the fond parents of an 
 eighth wonder of the world call him forth into the middle 
 of the parlor to repeat to their visitors some speech of a 
 play, how angry would they be if any one were to tell 
 them that their son's endowments equalled those of a 
 parrot or a bullfinch ! Yet a German bird-teacher would 
 make either of these more perfect in this species of 
 oratory. It is this mode of teaching, Avhich is practised 
 in the gi'eat schools, that assists very much in making 
 dunces of lords and country squii-es. They '■'' yet their 
 lesson ;" that is to say they repeat the ivords of it ; but, 
 as to its sense and meaniny, they seldom have any under- 
 standing. This operation is sometimes, for what reason 
 I know not, called getting a thing by heart. It must, I 
 should think, mean by liearH ; 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 cleai* 
 from the fact, of which we have daily proof, that people 
 sing the words and the tune of a song with perfect cor- 
 rectness, at the very time that they are most seriously 
 thinking and debating in theu* minds about matters of 
 great importance to them. 
 
 132. I have cautioned you before against studying the 
 foregoing icstructions piecemeal; that is to say, a little
 
 Cautionary Remarks. 91 
 
 hit 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 cai'efully; 
 and, at the end of a few days, all the matters treated of 
 will form a connected whole in your mind. 
 
 133. Before you proceed to the Syntax, try yourself a 
 little, thus: Copy a short sentence from any book. Then 
 write down the words, one by one, and write against each 
 what Pai't of Speech you think it belongs to. Then look 
 for each word in the dictionary, where you will find the 
 several Pai-ts of Speech denoted by little letters after the 
 word : s. is for substantive, or noun ; ^>ro. for j^ronoun y 
 a. for article ; v. a. for verb active ; v. n. for verb neuter ; 
 adj. for adjective; adv. for adverb; />re. for preposition; 
 con. for conjunction; int. for interjection. It will give 
 you great pleasui e 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 the objects will still appear a good deal 
 confused, will dart into every part of the science ; and 
 you will pant to complete what you will be convinced you 
 have successfully begun. 
 
 This is Mr. White's much-ridiculed and thoroughly-despised 
 parsing exercise. Of course, carried on as it is at the public- 
 schools, with little or no real understanding of the matter, and 
 with a kind of rapid, mechanical, parrot-like repetition of gram- ; 
 maticul terms, it is worse than useless. But I am convinced . 
 that, properly considered, and understandingly carried out, this 
 exercise is of positive value. To a boy or girl of proper age, it 
 may be made indeed, tolerably interesting. Let us look at a 
 single little sentence. " Boys love swimming." 
 
 Boyn is a common noun, third person, plural niunber, masculine 
 gender, nominative case.
 
 92 Syntax Generally Considered. 
 
 Love is a regular transitive verb, active voice, third person, 
 plural number, present tense, indicative mood. 
 
 Swimming is a common (or participial) noun, third person, sin- 
 gular number, objective case. 
 
 Now, take each one of these definitions, and ask why? and if 
 you can answer properly, then the exercise has become of real and 
 substantial benefit to you. Why a common noun ? Because it is a 
 general name, &nd. not & particular one. Why iM-(? person ? Be- 
 cause it is spoken of. W\ij plural number? Because it means 
 more than one. l^h.j masculine gender "i Because it is the name 
 of males. Why nomi native case? Because it is the subject of the 
 sentence; and so on. If I had said, " Boys love to swim," the ob- 
 ject, to swim, would be called a verbal noun. 
 
 LETTER XIII. 
 
 syxtax 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 aie, 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 coiTectly 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 wdsh to express ; yet, 
 for want of a due observance of the principles and rules 
 of Syntax, youi- sentences may be incoiTCct, and, in some 
 cases, they may not express what you wish them to 
 express. 
 
 136. I shall, however, carry my instructions a Httle
 
 Sy7itax. 93 
 
 fiu'ther than the construction of independent sentences. 
 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 remai'ks will show you the use of 
 figui'ative language, and will, I hoj)e, teach you how to 
 avoid the very common error of making your writing con- 
 fused and unintelligible. 
 
 LETTER XIV. 
 
 The Points and Marks made use of in Writing. 
 My deak James: 
 
 137. There are, as I informed you in paragragh 9, Let- 
 ter 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 dependent upon the points which 
 are used along with the words. For histance: " You will 
 he rich if you be industrious, lu a feiv years.'''' Then 
 again : " You will be rich, if you be industrious in a few 
 years^ Here, though in both sentences the words and 
 also the order of the words are precisely the same, the 
 meaning of one of the sentences is very different from 
 that of the other. The first sentence means that you will, 
 in a few years' time, be rich, if you be industrious now. 
 The second sentence 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 word industrious, and the meaning becomes dubious.
 
 94 Syntax. 
 
 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 secre- 
 tary of one of those clubs presented a petition to 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 then* 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 con- 
 sequence in the forming of sentences, it is necessary that 
 I explain to you the use of them, before I proceed any 
 farther. There are fom* of them: the Fidl-point^ or 
 Period; the Colon; the Semi-colon; the Comm,a. 
 
 139. The Full-point is a single dot, thus [.], and it is 
 used at the end of every complete sentence. That is to 
 Bay, at the end of every collection of words which make a 
 full and complete meaning, and is not necessarily con- 
 nected with other collections of words. But a sentence 
 may consist of several members or divisions, and then it 
 is called a compound sentence. When it has no divisions, 
 it is calied a simple sentence. Thus: "The people suffer 
 great misery." This is a simple sentence; but, "The 
 people suffer great misery, and daily perish for want," is 
 a 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 cieaier.
 
 Syntax. 95 
 
 141. The Semi-colon is written thus [;], and it is used 
 to set off, or divide, simple sentences, in cases when the 
 comma is not quite enough to keep the meaning of the 
 simple sentences esufGciently distinct. 
 
 142. The Comma is written thus [,], and is used to 
 maxk the shortest pd,uses in reading, and the smallest 
 divisions in 'ivritiiig. It has, by some grammarians, been 
 given as a rule to use a comma to set off every part of a 
 compound sentence, which part has in it a verb not in the 
 infinitive mode ; and, certainly, this is, in general, proper. 
 But it is not always proper; and, besides, commas are 
 used, in numerous cases, to set off pai'ts 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 evi- 
 dent that, in maL,y 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 feebie and low-spirited now." "I am very 
 willing to yie^d to yoiu- kind requests; but, I will set 
 yoiu" harsh commands at defiance." Commas are made 
 use of when phrases, that is to say, jjortions of words, 
 are throwed into a sentence, and which are not absolutely 
 necessaiy to assist in its grammatical construction. For 
 instance: "There were, in the year 1817, petitions from a 
 million and a ha.f of men, who, as they distinctly alleyed^ 
 were suffering the greatest possible hai'dships." The two 
 phrases, in italics, may be left out in the reading, and 
 still the sentence wixl have its full grammatical con- 
 struction. 
 
 Here Cobbett shows he made no distinction between a phrase 
 and a clauric. It is true tliat in a popular sense aay number of 
 words may be called a phrase ; as, " How do you do .-' Good-bye." 
 But in grammar this word has a particular sense, and these last-
 
 96 Syntax. 
 
 mentioned expressions do not agree with it. " In the year 1817" is 
 a phrase, and " as they distinctly alleged " is a clause, because the 
 former has neither subject nor predicate and the latter has both. 
 I must say, too, that at the present day no corrector for the press 
 (proof-reader) would allow those commas to stand after those buts. 
 Further, thrmoed instead of thrown is not yet in common use ; but 
 I am inclined to think it will soon be, just like sawed instead of 
 sawn, or crowed instead of cre^D. 
 
 143. Let us now take a compound sentence or two con - 
 taining all the four points. " In a land cf liberty it is ex- 
 tremely dangerous to make a distinct order of the profes- 
 sion of arms. In absolute monarchies this is necessary 
 for the safety of the priace, and arises from the maia 
 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 ob- 
 ject of jealousy. In these states no man should take up 
 arms, but witl\ 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 kingdoms 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 Commentaries, Book I. Chap. 13. Here aie 
 four com|)lete sentences. The first is a simple sentence. 
 The other thi-ee are compound sentences. Each of these 
 latter has its members, all very judiciously set off by 
 points. The word so, in the thu'd sentence, ought to be 
 such, or the words a citizen ought to be rejDeated. But, 
 with this trifling excejDtion, these are very beautiful sen- 
 tences. Nothing affected or confused in them : all is sim- 
 ple, 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..
 
 Syntax. 97 
 
 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 ai'e wiiting. 
 
 145. Besides these points, however, there are certain 
 gi'ammatical signs, or marks, which are made use of in 
 the writing of sentences : the mark of parenthesis, the 
 mark of interrogation, the mai'k of exclaynation, 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 wiiting, or of print. Its 
 use is to enclose a phrase throwed in hastily to assist in 
 elucidating oiu' subject, or to add force to our assertions 
 or ai'guments. But, observe, the parenthesis ought to be 
 very spai'ingly 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 sen- 
 tence. I will give you, fi'om IVIi". Tull, Chap. XIII, an 
 instance of the omission of the pai'enthesis, and also of 
 the proper employment of it. " Palladiijs thought also, 
 with others of the ancients, that Heaven was to be fright- 
 ened with red cloth, with the feathers or the heart of an 
 owl, and a multitude of such ridiculous scarecroxos, from 
 spoiHng the fruits of the fields and gardens. The ancients 
 having no rational principles, or theory of agriculture^ 
 placed theu* chief confidence in magical charms and en- 
 chantments, which he, who has the patience or cvuiosity 
 to read, may find, tmder the title aforementioned, in Cato, 
 in Vakeo {and eoen Columella is as fulsome as any of 
 them), all written in very fine language ; which is most of 
 the erudition that can be acquii-ed as to field husbandry, 
 from the Greek and Latin writers, whether in verse or 
 prose." For want of the mai'k 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 
 
 5
 
 98 Syntax. 
 
 Heaven, being frightened from spoiling the fruits of the 
 fields and the gardens. Bat 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 im- 
 portance. 
 
 It is, perhaps, worth mentioning that this word parenthesis, like 
 all the words ending in is, changes the i into e ia the plural : paren- 
 theses, crises, theses. So that we must speak of a word or sen- 
 tence being enclosed in parentheses, not parenthesis. 
 
 147. The mark of Interrogation, which is written thus 
 [?], is used when a question is asked ; as, " Who has my 
 lyenf'' "What tnan is that?^"* In these and numerous 
 other cases, the mark is not necessary to oui* clear'y com- 
 prehending the meaning of the writer. Bat this is not 
 always the case. "What does he say? Put the hoi'se 
 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 si^eaker ; but, in writing, 
 the mark of interrogation is, you see, absolutely necessary 
 in order to accomjjlish the pui-pose. 
 
 148. The mai'k of Exclamation, or Admiration, is writ- 
 ten thus [!], and, as its name denotes, is used to distin- 
 guish words or sentences that are exclamatory, from such 
 as are not : " What do you say ! 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-7ught.'''' 
 The last simply states the fact; bat the first, besides 
 stating the fact, expresses surjyrise at it. 
 
 119. The Apostrophe, or mark of Elision, is a comma 
 placed above the hne, thus [']. Elision means a striking 
 out; and this mark is used for that purpose; as, don''t 
 for do not; tho' for though/ lov\l for loved. I have 
 mentioned this mark, because it is used properly enough 
 in poetry ; but, I beg you never to use it in prose in one 
 single instance during your whole hfe. It ought to bo
 
 J^oints and Marks. 99 
 
 called the tu>ix\ not of elision, but of laziness and vul- 
 garity. It is necessai'y as the mai'k of the possessive case 
 of novms, as you have seen in Lettei' V, paragraph 47. 
 That is its use, and any other employraent of it is an abuse. 
 
 150. The Hyphen or Conjoiner is a little line used to 
 connect words, or parts of words ; as in sea-fish., water-rat. 
 For here are two distinct words, though they, in these in- 
 stances, make but one. Sometimes the hyphen is used to 
 coiuiect many words together : " The never-to-be-forgotten 
 craelty of the borough-tyrants." When, in writing, or in 
 printing, the line ends with pai't 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 pm-pose 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 enclose words taken from other 
 writings or from other persons' discoui'se ; and, indeed, it 
 is fi-equently used to enclose certain sentences, or words, 
 of the writer, when he wishes to mark them as wholly 
 distinct from the general com'se of any statement that be 
 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 fill is found in the Bible. It stands 
 for paragraph. This [§] is sometimes used instead of 
 the word section. As to stars [*] and the other marks 
 which are used for the purpose of leading the eye of the 
 reader to notes, in the same page, or at the end of the
 
 100 Syntax. 
 
 book, they are perfectly arbitrary. You may use for 
 this purpose any marks that you please. But let me 
 observe to you here, that notes ought seldom to be re- 
 sorted to. Like parentheses, they are interrupters^ and 
 much more troublesome interrupters, because they gener- 
 ally tell a much longer story. The employing of them 
 arises, iu almost all cases, from confusion in the mind of 
 the wi'iter. He finds the matter too much for him. He 
 has not the talent to work it all up into one lucid whole ; 
 and, therefore, he puts part of it into notes. Notes ai'e 
 seldom read. If the text, that is to say, the main part 
 of a writing, be of a nature to engage our earnest atten- 
 tion, we have not time to stop to read the notes : and if 
 om* attention be not earnestly engaged by the text, we 
 soon lay down the volume, and of com'se read neither 
 notes nor text. 
 
 153. As a mark of abbreviation, the full point is used ; 
 as, " ]Mi\ ]\Ii-s." But I know of hardly any other words 
 that ought to be abbreviated ; and if these were not it 
 would be all the better. People may indulge themselves 
 in this practice, until at last they come to write the 
 greater part of their words in single letters. The fre- 
 quent use of abbreviation 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 &. For what 
 reason I should like to know. But to this & is sometimes 
 added a c / thus, &c. And is in Latm et, and c is the 
 first letter of the Latin word ccetera, which means the 
 like, or so on. Therefore this cbc. means and the like, or 
 and so 07i. This abbreviation of a foreign word is a most 
 convenient thing for such writers as have too much indo- 
 lence 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
 
 Points and Marks. 101 
 
 made use of without the writer having any idea of its 
 import. A wiiter on grammar says, "When these 
 words are joined to if, sitice, etc., they ai'e adverbs." 
 But where is the like of if, or of since f The best way 
 to guard yourself against the committing of similar errors 
 is never to use this abbreviation. 
 
 154. The use of capitals and italics I will notice in 
 this place. In the books printed before the middle of 
 the last centm-y, a capital letter was used as the first 
 letter of every noun. Capitals ai-e now used more spar- 
 ingly. We use them at the beginning of every para- 
 graph, let the word be what it may ; at the beginning of 
 every sentence which follows a full-point ; at the begin- 
 ning of all proper names / at the beginning of all adjec- 
 tives growing out of the names of countries, or nations ; 
 as, the E)igHsh 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 of italic charac- 
 ters in print is to point out, as worthy of particular atten- 
 tion, the words distinguished by those chai'acters. la 
 writing with a pen, a stroke is drawn imder such words 
 as we wish to be considered to be in italics. If we wish 
 words to be put in sjlill capitals, we diaw two strokes 
 under them ; if in FULL CAPITALS, we di-aw three 
 strokes under them. 
 
 155. The last thing I shall mention, under this head, 
 is the caret [a], which is used to poiut upwards to a pai't 
 which has been omitted, and which is inserted between 
 the line, where the caret is placed, and the line above it. 
 Things should be called by theu- right names, and this 
 should be called the hhcnder-rnark. 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, gram-
 
 102 Syntax. 
 
 mar, and sense prevail, when you write to a blacksmitli 
 about shoeing a horse, as when you write on the most 
 important subjects, and when you expect what you wiite 
 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 wiite. This will make your 
 handwriting, and also your meaning, plain. Never think 
 of mending what you write. Let it go. No patcliing ; 
 no after pointing. As your pen moves, bear constantly 
 in mind that it is making strokes which are to remain 
 for ever. Fai", I hope, from my dear James v^'ill be the 
 ridiculous, the contemptible a^ectation, of wril^ing in a 
 slovenly or illegible hand ; or that of signing his name 
 otherwise than in plain letters. 
 
 156. In concluding this Letter, let me caution you 
 against the use of what, by some, is called the dash. 
 The dash is a stroke along the line ; thus, " I am rich — 
 I was poor — I shall be poor again." This is wild work 
 indeed! "Who is to know what is intended by the use of 
 these dashes ? Those who have thought proper, like IVIr. 
 Liadley Murray, to place the dash amongst the grairi" 
 matical points, ought to give us some rule relative to its 
 dilierent longitudinal dimensions in different cases. The 
 inch, the three-quarter-iyich, the half-inch the quarter- 
 inch ; these would be something determinate ; but, " the 
 dash,'' without measure, must be a most perilous thing 
 for a yotmg grammarian to handle. In short, " the dash " 
 is a cover for ignorance as to the use of points, and it 
 can answer no other pui-pose. — 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.
 
 JPoints and Marks. 103 
 
 As to the " no patching; no after-pointing," this is all very well 
 for those who arc endowed with uncommon talent for composi- 
 tion ; but everybody cannot be a Shakespeare or a Cobbett. It is 
 well known that Pope corrected and recorrected, polished and re- 
 polished his lines "many a time and oft," and I have heard that 
 Schiller and other good writers have done the same thing ; 
 Macaulay, for instance. You will have written many a page 
 before you acquire such surcness cf hand and perfect power of 
 expression as never to need to change a word or add a point on 
 looking over what you have written. In this very paragraph I had 
 . fii'st written "everybody cannot be Shakespearcs or Cobbetts;" 
 but, on looking it over, I saw that everybody, the subject, is singular, 
 and that therefore the attribute ought to agree with it. The eye 
 often detects errors committed by the ear or the tongue ; and the 
 ear often detects errors committed by the hand or the pen. 
 
 Cobbett's advice concerning the dash is, I think, by no means to 
 be followed. His contempt for this mark is one of his crotchets, 
 of which he had quite a l&,rge stock. The dash is now universally 
 used by good writers, and is, in its proper place, conducive to 
 clearness; it is, in fact, quite as good a point as any other. 
 There are some persons — especially half-educated young board- 
 ing-school misses — who clap in a dash for almost every pause; 
 but this is no reason why it should not be used in its proper 
 place, which is either immediately before some expression tend- 
 ing to complete the thought, or to enclose some explanatory 
 clause thrown in like a parenthesis. The first case may be illus- 
 trated by the dash on page 10, immediately before the words "I 
 mean dictation," and the second case by the above expression 
 concerning half-educated young misses. To be sure, there are 
 cases in which another point may, perhaps, be used with equal 
 propriety ; but this mark is now generally recognized as a proper 
 mark in punctuation, and you may use it whenever you think 
 proper. 
 
 The very best way of learning punctuation is, as I have else- 
 where said, by writing to dictation. By the frequent writing' 
 down of otlier people's points, one gets a good general knowledge 
 of the whole subject, and then one gradually forms a style of one'a 
 own. For it is well known that in the English language punctua- 
 tion is, to a great extent, a matter of taste ; and Cobbett himself, 
 as you must have seen by this time, is quite peculiar in hi^ taste 
 in this matter. lie uses far more points than most other writers, 
 especially commas, and he capitalizes far more words than most
 
 104 Syntax. 
 
 others writers. This he does for the sake of emphasis, or of 
 prominence ; as, for instance, in the names of the parts of speech 
 throughout this whole grammar. He overdoes this matter I think, 
 and he uses too many italics ; for in most sentences the proper 
 emphasis must be left to the reader. 
 
 I notice that the tendency in our modern newspapers is to drop 
 as many points as possible. Whether this is done to save space, 
 time, and labor, or whether it is done for the sake of improve- 
 ment, I do not know ; but I do know that the punctuating of our 
 New York editor of to-day presents a remarkable contrast to that 
 of Cobbett ; for you may see any day in the leading columns of 
 the Herald, the Tribune, or the Times, sentences of seven or ' 
 eight lines, with all manner of phrases and clauses, without a 
 single point of any description, except a period at the end. I 
 suppose they will leave that out too, by-and-by. I once heard of 
 £ painter who put a period between every word of the sign which 
 /je was painting, but put no point at the end. Oa being reproached 
 with this, he exclaimed : " Why, every fool knows enough to stop 
 when he comes to the end!" I suppose our New York editor 
 would excuse his omission of points on the same principle, that 
 every one should know enough to stop where he ought to stop. 
 Cobbett committed, I think, the opposite error; he seems to have 
 attempted to put a point after every word, or nearly every word, 
 where a pause occurs ; which is something that ought not to be 
 done, and indeed never is nor can be done. Those pauses occurring 
 where there are no points are rhetorical pauses, which the feeling 
 or instinct of every good reader leads him to make. We often 
 pause, for instance, for the sake of emphasis; as after points, 
 feeling and instinct in the preceding sentence. 
 
 The matter of simple, compound, and complex sentences, which 
 Cobbett merely touches, is very important to those who intend to 
 pass an examination in grammar ; for a knowledge of it is neces- 
 sary in Analysis, and all those who pretend to have a " teaching" 
 knowledge of grammar must know how to analyze. I will there- 
 fore try to give a little fuller explanation of it. " I study." This 
 is a simple sentence, because it consists of but one simple proposi- 
 tion or assertion, having but one subject and one predicate. "I 
 study and Charles plays." Here there are two distinct propositions, 
 or two distiiict clauses ; hence the sentence is compound. (Mark 
 that word distinct.) "When I study, Charles plays." Here there 
 are also two clauses, but not distinct; they are dependent, or 
 rather one depends on the other; hencp the sentence is called
 
 Points and Marks. 105 
 
 complex. The clause that makes complete sense (Charles plays), 
 is the chief clause, and the other is the dependent one. You per- 
 ceive that the dependent clause simply shows when Charles plays ; 
 tliercfore the main thing is the playing of Charles, and the other 
 simply shows the time of his playing. "When there is but one 
 proposition or statement, the sentence is simple; when there are 
 two or more distinct or separate propositions, tlie sentence is com- 
 pound ; but when there are two or more propositions, one depend- 
 ing on the other, the sentence is complex. " Every morning at 
 five o'clock we walk into the forest beyond the river." Here is 
 but one simple statement, we walk, and the rest consists of modi- 
 fying phrases. We walk. When? Every morning. At what 
 part of the morning? At five o'clock. Where? Into the forest. 
 Where is the forest ? Beyond the river. 
 
 Here is a good, though somewhat mechanical rule, for deter- 
 mining the nature of a sentence : Any sentence that you may cut 
 into two sentences by placing a period after any word in it, is 
 compound; any sentence, consisting of two or more clauses, 
 which you can not thus cut into two sentences, is complex. A 
 sentence consisting of but one proposition, having but one subject 
 or predicate, is simple. Of Cobbett's three sentences, at the begin- 
 ning of this paragraph 156, the first is complex, the second com- 
 pound, the third simple. 
 
 And now I see that I have to explain something else that is 
 necessary to a knowledge of Analysis, — I mean the classification 
 of sentences into declarative, interrogative, exclamatory and im- 
 perative. ' ' I study " is called a simple declarative sentence ; 
 declarative, because it declares or affirms something. Nine out of 
 ten of all the sentences we utter are declarative. " Do I study?" 
 is a simple interrogative sentence ; interrogative, because it asks a 
 question. An interrogation may sometimes be merely a forcible 
 way of declaring something ; as, Should anj' man be deprived of 
 his liberty because he is black ? But this is a figure, as you will 
 see by-and-by. "How I love to study!" is a simple exclamatory 
 sentence; exclamatory, because it contains an exclamation. 
 "Study, and get on in the world!" is a compound imperative sen- 
 tence; imperative, because it contains a command or an entreaty. 
 Thus, we find that a sentence that declares or aflirms anything is 
 declarative; that one that asks a question is interrogative; that 
 one that contains an exclamation is exclamatory; and that one 
 that contains a command or an entreaty is imperative. Let me 
 give you three more examples, covering the whole ground : 
 
 5*
 
 106 Sy7itax, 
 
 John Brown was hanged. (Simple declarative sentrice.) 
 Was John Brown hanged? (Simple interrogative sentence.) 
 What a spectacle for men and angels ! John Brown b^naed and 
 
 Jefferson Davis pardoned ! (Compound exclamatory sentence. 'i 
 Hang John Brown, and pardon Jefferson Davis. (Coffi\«-?^ji^ 
 
 imperative sentence.) 
 
 LETTER XV. 
 
 syntax, as relating to articles. 
 
 My dear James : 
 
 157. Before you proceed to my instructions relative tc 
 the employing of Ai'ticles, you will do well to read again 
 all the paragraphs in Letter IV. Our Articles are so 
 few in number, and they are subject to so little variation 
 in their orthography, that very few eiTors 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 eiTors in the use 
 of the Ai'ticles. You will not say, as in the erroneous 
 passage cited by Doctor Lowth, " And I persecuted 
 this way imto the death," meaning death generally ; but 
 you may commit errors less glaring. " The Chancellor 
 informed the Queen of it, and she immediately sent for 
 the Secretary and Treasurer." Now, it is not certain 
 here, whether the Secretary and Treasurer be not one 
 and the same person ; which uncertainty would have been 
 avoided by a repetition of the Article : " the Secretary 
 and the Treasurer:" and you will bear in mind that, in 
 every sentence, the very first thing to be attended to is 
 clearness as to meaning. 
 
 159. Nouns which 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
 
 As Relating to Articles. lOT 
 
 the appearance of tlae 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. "Howdo Ar^ps sell? T/bps ai-e dear ; but f/te 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 '■Hhe corn ;" for ha does 
 not mean corn universally, but the standing corn, and the 
 corn amongst which weeds grow; and, therefore, the 
 definite Article is requii-ed. 
 
 IGO. "Ten shillings the bushel," and like phrases, are 
 perfectly correct. They mean, "ten shillings hy the 
 bushel, or for the bushel." Instead of this mode of ex- 
 pression we sometimes use, "ten shillings a bushel:'' 
 that is to say, ten shillings /br a bushel, or a bushel at a 
 time. Either of these modes of expression is far prefer- 
 able to per bushel ; for the per is not English, and is, to 
 the greater part of the people, a mystical sort of word. 
 
 161. The indefinite Article a, or an^ is used with the 
 words day, month, yeai', 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 phi-ase is, 
 in all respects, the best. The same may be said of per 
 cent.f that ia per centum, or, in plain English, ybr the hun- 
 dred, or a hundred: by ten per centum we mean ten for 
 the hundred, or ten for a hundred ; and why can we 
 not, then, say, in plain English, what we mean? 
 
 162. "When there are several nouns following the indef- 
 inite Article, care ought to be taken that it accord with 
 them. "^1 dog, cat, owl, and spaiTow." Oto^ requires a?i / 
 and, therefore, the Article must be repeated in this 
 phi-ase ; as, a dog, a cat, an owl, and a spaiTow. 
 
 1G3. Nouns, signifying fixed and settled collections of 
 individuals, as thousand, hundred, dozen, score, take tlie 
 
 \
 
 108 Syntax, 
 
 indefinite Article, though they axe of plural meaning. It 
 is a certain mass, or number, or multitude, called a score ; 
 and so on ; and the Article agrees with these understood 
 •words, which are in the singular number. 
 
 In a recent announcement of a new novel by Robert Buchanan, 
 the publishers quote this one line concerning it from the London 
 Spectator: "The work of a genius and a poet," — which is in it- 
 self a suflQcient comment on the discriminating taste of the pub- 
 lisher and the culture of the critic. But I suppose a man may be 
 a good publisher or a good critic, and yet not know how to write 
 or to select good English. 
 
 You must say either "the first and the second class," or "the 
 first and second classes ;" not "the first and second class," which 
 would mean one class that is both first and second. Take one or two 
 similar examples: " I have read the first and the second chapter, 
 or the first and second chapters ; strike out the first and the second 
 line, or the first and second lines." You may say, "the north and 
 south line," because this is one line that runs north and south ; but 
 you cannot say "the north and west line." It will not do to say 
 "the two first classes," because there cannot be any such thing as 
 Uyo first classes; but " the first two classes," which means simply 
 the two classes that come first in order. So with other similar ex- 
 pressions ; as, the first two pages, the first two days, &c. You 
 must say, "He is a better speaker than writer," not "than a 
 writer." "He is a statesman and historian," not "a statesman 
 and an historian." " Wanted — A clerk and copyist." How often 
 such an expression is used to mean two persons, whereas it really 
 means one ! "There lives in this town a philosopher and a poet." 
 The predicate shows that one person is meant, while the subject 
 indicates two. Mr. White quotes the following announcement 
 from a street-car : "Passengers are requested not to hold conversa- 
 tion with either conductor or driver;" and then says : "Now this 
 implies that there are two conductors and two drivers, and that 
 the passengers are asked not to talk, or, in elegant phrase, ' hold 
 conversation,' with either of them. The simple introduction of t?ie 
 rectifies the phrase : ' not to hold conversation with either the con- 
 ductor or the driver.' " 
 
 I saw the other day in Pearl Street, New York, a place with 
 this sign: "Hatters, Tailors, and Factory Stoves." This really 
 means that the owner of the place has hatters and tailors to sell, as 
 well as factory stoves. It might pass with the sign of the pos-
 
 As Helating to N'ouns. 109 
 
 sessive: "Hatters', Tailors', and Factory Stoves;" but this, too, 
 is bad, because hatters and tailors cannot be placed in the same 
 category v;i\\\ a factory. It should be " Stoves for Hatters, Tailors, 
 and Manufacturers," or " Hatters', Tailors', and Manufacturers' 
 S loves." But this would probably be too long for the stove-maker; 
 so he preferred writing nonsense. This trj-iug to make everything 
 sliort is the root of these errors. Here is a man in Beekman Street 
 who calls his Eating-House a " Commercial Lunch! " Wliat kind 
 of a compound may a commerdal lunch be? Is it not a lunch 
 made of various articles of commerce : beeswax, potatoes, turpen- 
 tine, pig-iron, and leather? Of course he means a Lunch for 
 Commercial People, or Lunch for Business Men, or still better, 
 Business Men's Lunch ; but this, no doubt, was too long for him. 
 
 LETTER XVI. 
 
 syntax, as eelating to nouns. 
 
 ]\It dear James 
 
 164. Read again Letter V, the subject of whicli is the 
 Etymology of Noims. Nouns are governed, as it is called, 
 by verbs and prepositions; that is to say, these latter 
 sorts of words cause nouns to be in such or such a case / 
 and there must be a concord, or an agreement, between 
 tlie Nouns and tlie other words, which, along with the 
 Nouns, compose a sentence. 
 
 1G5. But these matters will be best explaiued 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 little more than to give 
 some farther account of the manner of using the ^^osses- 
 slve case of Nouns ; that being the only case to denote 
 which our Nouns vary their endings. 
 
 166. The possessive case was pretty fully spoken of by 
 me in the Letter just referred to; but there aie certain
 
 110 Syntax, 
 
 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 words in heu 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 jouied by a conjunctive con- 
 junction, 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 ex- 
 ample, the tbing possessed being one and the same thing, 
 the sign app^?e3 equally to each of the three possessive 
 Nouns. But "Peter's, Joseph's, and Richard's estate," 
 imphes 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 tho sign of the possessive case is left 
 out, and a hyphen is use(? in its stead ; as, " Edwards, the 
 government-spy.'''' That is to say, " the government's 
 spy ;" or, " the spy of the government." These two words, 
 joined in this manner, are called a compound Noun ; and 
 to this compounding of Noun? oui- language is very 
 prone. We say "■ chamber- floor, horse-shoe, dog-collar /'' 
 that is to say, '■'■ chamber' s floor, horse's shoe, dog's collar." 
 
 169. This is an advantage peculiar to oirr 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 Yorkshkemen flew to arms." If we could not com- 
 pound our words, we would have to say, " The men of the 
 shire of York flew to arms." When you come to learn 
 French, you will soon see how much the Enghsh lau' 
 guage is better than the French in this respect.
 
 As Helating to Nouns. Ill 
 
 170. You must take cai'e, when you use tlio posdessive 
 case, not to use aftex* 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 
 1 elate to persons only ; but if it had been an attack on 
 Northumberland's vien, the meaning would have been 
 that the men loere pict to death. However, the sentence, 
 as it stands, is sufficiently incorrect. It should have been : 
 " They flew to ai-ms, and attacked the house of Northum- 
 berland, 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 compai'ing Demosthenes and 
 Cicero, most of the French critics are disposed to give 
 the preference to the latter. P. Rapin, the Jesuit, in the 
 parallels which he has di'awn between some of the most 
 eminent Greek and Roman writers, uniformly decides in 
 favor of the Roman. For the preference which he gives 
 to Cicero, he assigns and lays stress on one reason, of a 
 pretty extraordinary nature, viz., that Demosthenes could 
 not possibly have so clear an insight as Cicero into the 
 manners and passions of men. Why ? because he had not 
 the advantage of perusing Aristotle s I'reatise on Rheto- 
 ric^ wherein, says our critic, he has fully laid open that 
 mystery ; and to support this weighty ai'gument, he en- 
 ters into a conti'oversy with A. Gellius, in order to prove 
 that Aristotle's Rhetoric was not published till after De- 
 mosthenes had spoken, at least, his most considerable 
 orations." It is sui-prising that the Doctor should have 
 put such a passage as this upon paper, and more siu'pris- 
 ing that he should leave it in this state after having 
 perused it with that care which is usually employed in 
 examining writings that are to be put into print, and 
 especially writings in which every word is expected to be
 
 112 Syntax, 
 
 used in a proper manner. In Bacon, in Tull, in Black- 
 stone, 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 gi-ammatical 
 criticism, the sense generally is clear to our minds ; and 
 we read on. But, in this passage of Dr. Blair, all is 
 confusion : the mind is puzzled : we at last hardly know 
 whom or what the writer is talking about, and we fahly 
 come to a stand. 
 
 172. In speaking of the many faults in this passage, I 
 shall be obliged to make here observations which would 
 come under the head of pronouns, verbs, adverbs, and 
 prepositions. The first two of the three sentences are in 
 themselves rather obscui'e, and are well enough calculated 
 for ushering in the complete confusion that follows. The 
 he, which comes immediately after the word because, may 
 relate to Demosthenes ; but to what Noun does the second 
 he relate? It would, when we first look at it, seem to 
 relate to the same Noun as the first he relates to ; for the 
 Doctor cannot call Aristotle s T'reatise on Rhetoric a he. 
 No : in speaking of this the Doctor says " wherein /" that 
 is to say, in which. He means, I dare say, that the he 
 should stand for Aristotle; but it does not stand foi 
 Aristotle. This Noun is not a nominative in the sentence ; 
 and it cannot have the pronoun relating to it as such. 
 This he may relate to Cicero, who may be supposed to 
 have laid open a mystery in the perusing of the treatise , 
 and the words which follow the he would seem to give 
 coimtenance to this supposition; for lohat mystery is 
 meant by the words ""that mystery f Is it the mystery 
 of rhetoric, or the mystery of the manners and passions 
 of men ? This is not all, however ; for the Doctor, as if 
 bewitched by the love of confusion, must tack on another 
 long member to the sentence, and bring forward another 
 he to stand for P. Rapin, whom and whose argument we 
 have, amidst the general confusion, wholly forgotten.
 
 As Relating to Nouns. 113 
 
 There is an error also in the use of the active participle 
 perusing. " Demosthenes could not have so complete an 
 insight as Cicero, because he had not the advantage of 
 perusing. That is to say, the advantage of being en- 
 gaged in perusing. But this is not what is meant. The 
 Doctor means that he had not had the advantage of 
 perusing/ or, rather, that he had not the advantage of 
 having perused. In other words, that Demosthenes could 
 not have, or possess, a certain kind of knowledge at the 
 time when he made his orations, because at that time, he 
 had not, or did not possess, the advantage of having 
 perused, or ha,\ing ^/i7iished to peruse, the treatise of Ai'is- 
 totle. Towai'ds the close of the last sentence the adverb 
 " at least " is put in a wrong jilace. The Doctor means, 
 doubtless, that the adverb should apply to considerable, 
 and not to spoken/ but, from its beuig improperly placed, 
 it applies to the latter, and not to the former. He means 
 to say that Demosthenes had spoken the most consider* 
 able, 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 eiTor in the use 
 of the word " insight,''^ followed, as it is, by " into.'''' We 
 may have a look, or sight, into a house, but not an insight. 
 This would be to take an inside vieio of an inside. 
 
 173. "We have here a pretty good proof that a knowl- 
 edge of the Greek and Latin is not sufficient to prevent 
 men from writing bad Enghsh. Here is a p>^^f^'^^^^ 
 scholar, a teacher of Rhetoric, discussing the comparative 
 merits of Greek and Latia 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 youi' reading of this little book. Lest it 
 should be supposed that I have taken great pains to himt 
 out this erroneous passage of Doctor Blah', I will inform 
 you that I have hardly looked into his book. Your 
 brothers, in reading it through, marked a great number
 
 114 Syntax, 
 
 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 lan- 
 guages?" 
 
 We take the form 's from the Germans, and hence it is called 
 the Saxon possessive ; we take the form of the from the French, 
 and hence it is called the Norman possessive. You will notice 
 that the Saxon possessive is used, generally, in speaking of limng 
 things, and the other in speaking of things without life: "the 
 man's hat, the horse's tail, the cow's horns ; the top of the house, 
 the lid of the kettle, the color of the apple;" but this is by no 
 means always the case, for we can speak of the mountain's top&ndi 
 of the roar of the lion. Sometimes we are obliged to use the Nor- 
 man possessive to avoid a misconstruction, as in the case of "the 
 house of Northumberland," above quoted. 
 
 There is another peculiar use of the possessive case, which Cob- 
 bett has not mentioned. "He spoke of John's (his) going to col- 
 lege. There is no doubt of the bilPs passing the House." "We often 
 see the objective used in such cases, instead of the possessive; 
 but the latter is correct. Just as we say "a friend of mine, of 
 thine, of his, of hers, of yours, of theirs," so we say "a soldier of 
 the king's, a horse of my neighbor's, a book of George's." So 
 Cobbett ought to have said above, "this erroneous passage of 
 Doctor Blair's." 
 
 You notice that the only case-change an English noun can un- 
 dergo is the addition of 's in the possessive. In both English and 
 French the nominative and objective cases of nouns are invariable. 
 Not so in German. The following sentence will show you at a 
 glance the difference between our language and the German in this 
 respect : 
 
 Don. obj. nom. obj. 
 
 The boi/ loves the traveler. The traveler loves t7ie hoy. 
 Der Knabe liebt den Beisenden. Der Reisende liebt den Knahen. 
 
 Here is a curious passage on this subject from Mr. White's 
 "Everyday English" — a passage which, to prevent a confusion of 
 apostrophes, I give in one paragraph, with none but Mr. White's 
 points, except the dash at the beginning and at the end : 
 
 — The Board of Civil Service . examiners at Washington gave, as 
 a test of the knowledge of the use of the apostrophe as a sign of 
 the possessive case, the following sentence: "The Commissioner 
 of Custom's decisions are correct," requiring tlie apostrophe to be
 
 As Relating to J^ronouns. 115 
 
 placed after " Customs." A dispute having arisen upon the point, 
 and it being contended that the proper form was "The Commis, 
 sioner's (of Customs) decisions are correct," an officer of the 
 Treasury Department submitted the question to me for an 
 opinion. — 
 
 And Mr. White declares that the decision of the Civil Service 
 Board is correct. Now I am positive that in this case, both Mr. 
 White and the Board of Examiners are wrong. It is when a word 
 or title is in the possessive case plukal that we put merely an 
 apostrophe after the s; as, the Examiners' duties; the Commission- 
 ers' affairs; but the teran "Commissioner of Customs" is not plural, 
 any more than "Secretary of the Treasury" is plural. We say 
 "The Secretary of the Treasury's report;" and if the Saxon posses- 
 sive is to be used, grammar demands that we say ' ' The Commis- 
 sioner of Customs's decisions;" for the sign of the possessive is for 
 the wJwle expression, and not simply for customs. An apostrophe 
 alone may be placed after Customs, because it will sound I)etter, but 
 not because it is grammatical. 
 
 But why use this form at all ? Has it not been from a desire to 
 avoid just such awkward expressions that the Norman possessive 
 has come into use? Does it not sound much better to say "The 
 decisions of the Commissioner of Customs" than "The Commis- 
 sioner of Customs's decisions?"— By the bye, is it not somewhat 
 remarkable, not to say absurd, that the Board of Examiners should 
 give applicants for inferior offices questions such as they tihem- 
 selves are in dispute about, and concerning which even critics in 
 language are at variance? 
 
 LETTER XVII. 
 
 syntax, as relatrng to pronottk8. 
 
 My deab 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
 
 116 Syntax, 
 
 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 anything 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 gi'eat errors in point of meaning. In order to 
 impress, at the outset, these precepts on yotu* mind, I 
 •will give you an instance of this kind of error from 
 Addison ; and, what is well calculated to heighten the in- 
 terest you ought to feel upon the occasion, is, that the sen- 
 tence which contains the error is, by Doctor Blair, held 
 forth to students of languages, in the University of Edin- 
 burgh, as a perfect model of correcti.tiess 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 pleasui-es that 
 are not criminal; every diversion they take is at the ex- 
 pense of some one vu'tue or other, and their very first 
 step out of business is into vice or folly." Dr. Blair says: 
 "Nothing can be more elegant, or more finely tiu*ned, 
 than this sentence. It is neat, clear, and musical. We 
 could hardly alter one word, or displace one member, 
 without spoiling it. Few sentences are to be found more 
 finished, or more happy." See Blair's 20th Lecture on 
 Rhetoric. 
 
 176. Now, then, my dear little James, let us see whether 
 we plain English scholars have not a httle 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 ]VIr. Addison? What noim 
 does it relate to,- or stand for? What noun is the noini-
 
 ^ia delating to Pronouns. 117 
 
 native of the sentence'? The nominative of the sentence 
 ia the word few, meaning fern persons. Very well, then, 
 the Pronoun t/iei/ relates to this nominative; and tho 
 meaning of the sentence is this : " That but few persons 
 know how to be idle and innocent; thut fe >o j^ersons havo 
 a reHsh of any pleasures that ai*e not criminal ; that every 
 diversion these few persons take is at the expense of some 
 one vii'tue or other, and that the very first step o/* these 
 few persons out of business is into vice or folly." S"» 
 that the sentence says precisely the contrary of what tho 
 author meant ; or, rather, the whole is perfect nonsense. 
 All this aiises from the misuse of the Pronoun they. If, 
 instead of this word, the author had pat people in gen- 
 eral, or most people, or tnost men, or any word or words 
 of the same meaning, all would have been right. 
 
 177. I will take another instance of the consequence of 
 being cai'eless in the use of personal Pronouns. It is 
 jErom Judge Blackstone, Book II, 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 per- 
 formed, or stipulated for by fealty, he cannot, in the first 
 instance, refuse to admit the heir of his tenant upon his 
 death; nor, m the second, can he remove his present 
 tenant so long as he Uves." Here are lord, heir, and 
 tenant, all confounded. We may guess at the Judge's 
 meaning ; but we cannot say that we knoto what it is ; we 
 cannot say that we are certain lohose life, or %ohose death, 
 he is speaking of. 
 
 178. Never write a personal Pronoun, without duly 
 considering rohat noun it will, upon a reading of the 
 sentence, be found to relate to. There must be a noun, 
 expressed or vmderstood, to which the Pronoun clearly 
 relates, or you will not wiite 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
 
 118 Syntax. 
 
 take from the people fifteen j:)ence out of every quai'tern 
 loaf. They have been told that Parliamentary Reform is 
 no more than a half measure, changing only one set of 
 thieves for another ; and that they must go to the land, as 
 nothing short of that would avail themy This is taken 
 from the memorable report of a cormnittee of the House 
 of Lords, in 1817, on which report the cruel dungeon bill 
 was passed. Now, to what nouns do these Pronouns 
 lelate? Who are the fiotnlnatives in the first sentence? 
 The land-holder and the fund-holder., to be siu'e ; and, 
 therefore, to them do the Pronouns relate. These lords 
 mean, doubtless, that the peo2)le had been told that the 
 people must go to the land ; that nothing else would avail 
 the people ; but, though they mean this, they do not say 
 it ; and this part of their report is as false in grammar as 
 other parts of the report were in fact. 
 
 179. When there are two or more nouns connected by 
 a copulative conjunction, and when a Personal Pronoun is 
 made use of to relate to them, or stand for them, you must 
 take care that the personal Pronoun agree with them in 
 number. "He was fonder of nothing than of loit and 
 raillery ; but he is far from being happy in it." This 
 Doctor Blair, in his 19th Lecture, says of Loi-d Shaftes- 
 bury. Either %cit and raillery are one and the same thing, 
 or they are different things; if the former, one of the 
 Avords is used unnecessai'ily ; if the latter, the Pronoun 
 . ought to have been them and not it. 
 
 :; " I learned from Macaulay never to be afraid 
 
 •?of using the same word or name over and over again, if by that 
 ; means anything could be added to clearness or force. Macaulay 
 ■ never goes on, like some writers, talking about 'the former' and 
 'the latter,' 'he, she, it, they,' through clause after clause, while 
 his reader has to look back to see which of several persons it is 
 that is so darkly referred to. No doubt a pronoun, like any other 
 word, may often be repeated with advantage, if it is perfectly 
 clear who is meant by the pronoun. And with Macaulay's pro- 
 nouns, it is always perfectly clear who is meant by them." — E. A.
 
 .(.<? Relating to Pronouns. 119 
 
 Freeman, in the International Review. Quoted by A. S. Hill. 
 I have frequently noticed that there is a misty uncertainty as to the 
 meaning of sentences in which "the former" and "the latter" 
 occur. How often one is obliged to stop for a moment, and con- 
 sider which is "the former" and which "the latter"! I do not 
 say you must not use these words; Cobbett, you see, uses them 
 quite clearly in tins last paragraph; but it is, generally, better to 
 repeat the words for Avhich they stand. 
 
 180. When, however, the nouns take the disjunctive 
 conjunction or, the Pronoun must be in the singular ; as, 
 '* When he shoots a partridge, a pheasant, or a woodcock, 
 he gives it away." 
 
 181. Nouns of number, or multitude, such as Mob, Far- 
 liament, liahhle. 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, " Thei/ refused to hear evidence 
 against Castlereagh when Mi". Maddox accused him of 
 having sold a seat;" or, "-Zi refused to hear evidence." 
 But we must be unifoim in our use of the Pronoun in 
 this respect. We must not, in the same sentence, and 
 appHcable to the same noun, use the singular in one part 
 of the sentence and the plufal in another part. We must 
 not, in speaking of the House of Commons, for instance, 
 say, '■'■lliey one year voted unanimously that cheap corn 
 was an evil, and the next year- it voted unanimously that 
 dear corn was an evil." There are persons who pretend 
 to make very nice distinctions as to the cases when these 
 nouns of multitude oiight to take the singular, and when 
 they ought to take the plural. Pronoun ; but these dis- 
 tinctions are too nice to be of any real use. The rule is 
 this: that noiuis of multitude may take either the singu- 
 lar, or the plural, Pronoim; but not both in the same 
 sentence. 
 
 Tiiis will never do; it is far too indefinite. Tlie pronoun stand- 
 ing for a noiui of multitude is used in the singular if the idea of
 
 120 Syntax^ 
 
 unity is to be conveyed, and in the plural if the idea of plurality ia 
 to be conveyed. Let me illustrate with some of these very nouns 
 "which Cobbett so sarcastically huddles together : "Themobnovsr 
 began to scatter in every direction, and tliey set up a hideous yell 
 as they moved off. The mob came on in one compact body, and 
 it did not fail to press itself iXn-ongh. the gates of the palace. He 
 liated the rabble, because they hated him. The rabble of New- 
 York Jms a language and a literature of its oven. The House of 
 Commons could not agree on any measure of Reform ; so they 
 were dismissed by the king. The House of Commons was unani- 
 mous in condemning the obstructing Irish members, and it sus- 
 pended them for two weeks. When the Court of King's Bench 
 passed sentence on Mr. Cobbett, it refused to reconsider its 
 decision. I have been informed that there was some diHerence 
 cf opinion in the Court of King's Bench concerning Mr. Cobbett's 
 < asc, though they refused to reconsider their decision. Here is a 
 den of thieves ; suppress it. We came upon a den of thieves, who 
 were so numerous that we did not venture to attack them.'''' Thus, 
 you see, that the singularity or plurality of the pronoun standing 
 for a noun of multitude depends entirely upon whether an idea of 
 U7iity or of plurality is to be conveyed. 
 
 182. As to gender., it is haxdly possible to make a mis- 
 take. There ai'e no terminations to denote gender, except 
 in the third person singular, he., she, or it. We do, how- 
 ever, oiienpersoiiify things. Sjjjeaking of a nation, we often 
 say she ; of the sun, we say he j of the tnoon, we say she. 
 We may personify things at our pleasure ; but we must 
 take care to be consistent, and not call a thing he, or she, 
 in one part of a sentence, and it in another part. The 
 occasions when you ought to personify things, and when 
 you ought not, cannot be stated in any jirecise rule. 
 Your own taste and judgment will be your best guides. 
 I shall give you my opinion about figm-es of speech in a 
 futiu-e Letter. 
 
 In an article on Lo igfellow, in the North American Review for 
 July, 1882, the wiiter speaks of meeting "Mrs. William Cullea 
 Bryant and her dairghter, and others of my countrymen ," but you 
 can hardly make such a blunder as that. 
 
 183. Nouns which denote sorts, or kinds, cf living crea-
 
 As Relating to JPro7iouns. 121 
 
 tures, and which do not of themselves distinguish the 
 male from the female, such as rabbit, hare, hog, cat, pheas- 
 ant, 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 A^ml"' but if you tell me you 
 have SLpheasajit, I say, "Where did you shoot it?'^ (See 
 paragraphs 42 and 43. ) 
 
 184. The personal PronoTins in their possessive case 
 must, of coiu-se, agree in number and gender with 
 their cori'espoudent nouns or Pronouns : " John and 
 Thomas have been so foolish as to sell their land and to 
 purchase what is called stock; but their sister, who has 
 too much sense to depend on a bubble for her daily bread, 
 has kept her land; theirs is gone forever; but hers is 
 safe." So they must, also, in then* objective case : " John 
 and Thomas will lose the interest of then* money, which 
 will soon cease to be paid to them. The rents of then- 
 sister will be regularly paid to her ; and Richard will also 
 enjoy his income, which is to be paid to Mm by his sister." 
 If there be nouns of both genders used before Pronouns, 
 cai'e must be taken that no confusion or obscmity arise 
 from the misuse of the Pronoun. Hume says: "They 
 declared it treason to attempt, imagine, or speak evil of 
 the king, queen, or Ids heiis." This has, at least, a mean- 
 ing, which shuts out the heu's of the queen. In such a 
 case the feminine as well as the mascuUne pronoun shovdd 
 be used: "Ais or her heu's." 
 
 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 oj^posite error. 
 "Him strikes I: Her loves he." These offend the ear at 
 once. But when a number of words come in between 
 the discordant parts, the ear does not detect the error. 
 "It was 3ome >f tho.3e who came hither last night, and 
 went away this morning, who did the mischief, and not 
 
 6
 
 122 Syntax, 
 
 my brother and /«e." It ought to be " my brother and /." 
 For I am not, in this instance, the object but the actor, or 
 supposed actor. " "Who broke that glass ? " "Itwaswie." 
 It ought to be I; that is to say, "It was I xoho broke it.'" 
 Fill up the sentence with all the words that are under- 
 stood ; and if there be eiTors, you will soon discover them. 
 After the words than and as, this error, of putting the 
 objective for the nominative, is frequently committed; as, 
 "John was very rich, but Peter was richer than him; 
 and, at the same time, as learned as him, or any of his 
 family." It ought to be richer than he ; as learned as he; 
 for the full meaning here is, "richer than he was; as 
 learned as he toas." But it does not always happen that 
 the nominative case comes after than or as. " I love you 
 more than him ; I give you more than him ; I love you 
 as well as him ; " that is to say, I love you more than / 
 love him ; I give you more than I give to him ; I love 
 you as well as I love him,. Take away him, and put he, in 
 all these cases, and the granunar 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 Ae," means, that I love you as well as 
 he loves you. 
 
 186. You see, then, of what importance this distinction 
 of cases is. But you must not look for this word, or that 
 word, coming before or coming after to be your guide. 
 It is reason which 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 con- 
 founding of cases arise most fi-equently when the Pro- 
 nouns are placed, in the sentences, at a great distance 
 from the words which ai"e connected with them, and which
 
 As Relating to Pronouns. 123 
 
 determine the case, "//e and his sister, and not their 
 uncle and cousins, the estate was given to." Here is 
 nothing that sotmds hai'sh ; but, bi'ing the Prono\in close 
 to the preposition that demands the objective case; say 
 the estate was given to he ; and then you perceive tho 
 grossness of the error in a moment. "The work of 
 national ruin was pretty effectually caiTied on by the 
 ministers; but more effectually by the paper-money 
 makers than they.''' This does not hiut the ear; but it 
 ought to be them ; "more effectually than by them.''' 
 
 188. The Pronouns mine, thine, theirs, yours, hers, his, 
 stand fi'equently by themselves; that is to say, not fol- 
 lowed by any no\ra. But then the noun is understooiJ. 
 "That is A<^rs." That is to say, her projoer^y y her Aa<, or 
 whatever else. No difficulty can arise in the use of these 
 words. 
 
 Except one. Some people erroneously write these words with 
 an apostrophe; owr's, etc. A gentleman once showed me a letter 
 which he considered perfect. So it was ; all except the last two 
 words, which were written thus: " Your's truely." 
 
 189. But the use of the personal Pronoun it is a subject 
 of considerable importance. Read again paragraphs 60 
 and 61, Letter VI. Think well upon what you find there ; 
 and when you have done that, proceed with me. This 
 Pronoun with the verb to be is in constant use in our 
 language. To say, " Yoiu' uncle came hither last night," 
 is not the same thing as to say, "7i icas your uncle who 
 came hither last night," though the fact related be the 
 same. '• It is I who write " is very different from " I . 
 write,'' though in both cases, my writing is the fact very 
 clearly expressed, and is one and the same fact. "7)5 is 
 those men who deserve well of their country," means a 
 great deal more than '■^ Those men deserve well of then- 
 country." The principal verbs are the same ; the prepo- 
 sitions are the same; but the real meaning is different. 
 *^It is the dews and showers that make the grass grow,"
 
 124 Syntax, 
 
 is very different from merely obsei-ving, ^'•De'ws and 
 showers make the grass grow." 
 
 190. Doctor Lowth has given it as his opinion, that it 
 is not correct to place plural nouns or pronouns after the 
 it, thus used ; an opinion which arose fr-oju the want of a 
 little more reflection. The it has nothing to do, gram- 
 matically speaking, with the rest of the sentence. The it, 
 together with the verb to he, 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 affii'med 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 plvu*al number. I 
 forbear to multij)ly examjiles, or to enumerate the various 
 ways in which this phrase is used, because one grain of 
 reasoning is worth whole tons of memory. The 2>rmciple 
 being once in your mind, it will be ready to be applied 
 to every class of cases, and every pai'ticular case of each 
 class. 
 
 An example, however, often sticks where the priuciple fails to 
 do so. "ItisI; it is thou; it is he; it is she; it is we; it is you; 
 it is they; it is the devil; it is the devils." These are all correct; 
 because it is the subject, is is the predicate, and what follows is 
 the attribute, which may be singular or plural. — I cannot help 
 remarking that the pause after "thus used" in the third line of 
 the above paragraph is a capital example of the place where the 
 DASU ought to be used. 
 
 191. For want of reliance on principles, instead of ex- 
 amples, 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 the sentence is this : It being, or the
 
 As Melating to PronotDifi. 125 
 
 ■State of things being such, that "shame is lost, all viitue 
 is lost." 
 
 This " shame being lost " is culled by some grammarians a parti- 
 cipial phrase; by others, an abridged participial clause, standing 
 for "As shame is lost." Therefore, "all virtue is lost, as shame 
 is lost;" the second clause modifying the first. "On arriving in 
 London, I went to see ]\Iadame Tussaud's Exhibition." These first 
 four words form another such participial phrase or abridged parti- 
 cipial clause, modifying went: "I went, on arriving in London 
 (when I arrived in London), to see Madame Tussaud's Exhibi- 
 tion." — -This absolute case is something like what other grammarians 
 call the independent case: "Charles, mind what you are about. 
 Sir, I deny the charge. I have seen a wax figure of Cobbett, 
 boys, at Madame Tussaud's E.xhibition." Charles, Sir, boys, are 
 here said to be in the independent case, because they have no 
 bearing on any other part of the sentence. These words may, 
 liowevcr, be resolved into the nominative case, thus: To }''0U, 
 whose name is Charles, I have this to say : mind what you are 
 about. To you, who are a Sir — to you, who are boys, etc. 
 Remember, therefore, that any word standing alone like these, or 
 in an exclamation — O Roscoe ! Roscoe ! what an ass you have 
 made of yourself! — is said to be in the independent case. 
 
 192. Owing- to not seeing the use and powex- of this it 
 in theu" true light, many persons, after long puzzling, 
 think they must make the pronouns which immediately 
 follow conform to the cases which the verbs and pre- 
 positions of the sentence demand. "It is them, and not 
 the people, whom I address myself to.'' "It was hiniy 
 and not the other man, that I sought after.'' ' The prepo- 
 sitions to and after demand an objective case; and they 
 have it in the words v^hora and that. The Pronouns 
 which follow the it and the verb to he must always be in 
 the nominative case. And, therefore, in the above ex- 
 amples, it should be, "It is they, and not the other 
 people;" "It was he, and not the other man." 
 
 193. This it with its verb to be is sometimes employed 
 with the preposition for, with singular force and effect. 
 *^It is for the guilty to live in fear, to skulk and to hang
 
 126 Syntax, 
 
 their heads ; but for the innocent it is to enjoy ease and 
 tranquilhty of mind, to scorn all tlisguise, and to carry 
 themselves erect." This is much more forcible than tt> 
 say, "The guilty generally live in feai*," and so on. 
 throughout the sentence. The word for, in this case, 
 denotes appropriateness, or fitness; and the full expres- 
 sion would be this: "To the state of being, or state of 
 things called guiltmess, to live in fear is fitting, or is 
 appropriate.'' If you pay attention to the reason on which 
 the use of these words is founded, you will never be at a 
 loss to use them properly. 
 
 194. The word it is the gieatest ti'oubler that I know 
 of in language. It is so small, and so convenient, that 
 few are careful enough in using it. Writers seldom spare 
 this word. ^\1ienever they are at a loss for either a nomi- 
 native or an objective to theii* sentence, they, without any 
 kind of ceremony, clap in an it. A very remarkable in- 
 stance of this pressing of poor it into actual service, con- 
 trary to the laws of grammar and of sense, occui'S in a 
 piece of composition, where we might, with justice, insist 
 on correctness. This piece is on the subject of gi-ammar ; 
 it is a piece written by a doctor of divinity, and read by 
 him to students in gi-ammar and language in an academy ; 
 and the very sentence that I am now about to quote is 
 selected, by the author of a gi-ammar, as testimony of 
 high authority in favor of the excellence of his work. 
 Surely, if correctness be ever to be expected, it must be 
 in a case like this. I allude to two sentences in the 
 "Charge of the Revekend Doctor Abercrombie to the 
 Senior Class of the Philadelphia Academy," published in 
 1806 ; which sentences have been selected and published 
 by Mr. Lindley Murray, as a testimonial of the merits of 
 his grammar ; and which sentences ai'e, by Mr. Murray, 
 given to us in the following words : " The unwearied 
 exertions of this gentleman have done more towards elu- 
 cidating the obscurities, and embellishing the structure
 
 As Relating to Pronouris. 127 
 
 of our language, thau any other writer on the subject. 
 Such a toork has long been wanted ; and, from the success 
 with which it is executed, cannot be too highly appre- 
 ciated." 
 
 195. As, in the learned Doctor's opinion, obscurities 
 can be elucidated, and, as, in the same opinion, Mb. Mur- 
 ray is an able hand at this kind of work, it would not be 
 amiss were the grammarian to try his skill upon this 
 article 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 
 un existence, notwithstanding it is said to be " executed.'" 
 In the first sentence, the " exertions " become, all of a 
 Hudden, a '■'■ \oriter f the exertions have done more than 
 *' any other wi'iter ;" for, mind you, it is not the gentleman 
 that has done anything; it is "the exertions'''' that have 
 <lone 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. Let us give the sentence a turn, and 
 the Doctor and the grammarian will hear how it will 
 sound. " This gentleman's exertions have done more 
 than any other writer^ This is upon a level with " This 
 gentleman's dog has killed moi-e hares than any other 
 sportsma7iy No doubt Doctor Aberceombie meant to 
 say, "the exertions of this gentleman have done more 
 than those of any other writer. Such a w^ork as this 
 gentleman's has long been wanted : his work, seeing the 
 successful manner of its execution, cannot be too highly 
 commended." Meant! No doubt at all of that! And 
 when we hear a Hampshire ploughboy say, " Poll Cherry- 
 <heek have giv'd I thick handkechei'," we know very well 
 that he means to say, " Poll Cherrycheek has given me 
 this handkerchief ;" and yet, we are but too apt to laugh 
 at him, and to call him ignorant ; which is wi'ong; be-
 
 128 Syntax, 
 
 cause he has no pretensions to a knowledge of grammar, 
 and he may be very skillful as a ploughboy. 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, pro- 
 ducing, in imitation of the possessors of invaluable medi- 
 cal secrets, testimonials vouching for the efficacy of his 
 literary panacea, and when, in those very testimonials, we 
 Qnd 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 with- 
 out 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 so say, the Relative Pronouns, of which you have 
 had some account in Letter VI, paragraphs 62, 63, 64, 
 65, and 66 ; which pai-agraphs you should now read over 
 again with attention. 
 
 198. Who, which becomes lohose 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 xohose fertility is great," and the like, it is not 
 con-ect. We must say, "the country the fertility of 
 whichP But if ^e personify ; if, for instance, we call a 
 nation a she, or the sun a he, we must then, if we have 
 need of relative Pronouns, take these, or the word that, 
 which is a relative applicable to rational as well as irra- 
 tional and even inanimate beings. 
 
 It is now correct to say "the country whose fertility is great;" 
 for it is a much more direct and easy way of speaking than the 
 other. This form was begun by the poets, and is now constantly 
 used by prose- writers.
 
 As Relating to Pronouns. 129 
 
 199. The errors which are most frequent in the use of 
 these relative Pronouns arise from not taking cai'e to uso 
 whx) and whom^ when they are respectively demanded by 
 the verbs or prepositions. " To tcho did you speak ? 
 "Whom is come to-day ? " These sentences are too glar- 
 ingly wrong to pass from ovu: pens to the paper. But, as 
 in the case of personal Pronouns, when the relatives are 
 placed, in the sentence, at a distance from their ante- 
 cedents, or verbs or prepositions, the ear gives us no 
 assistance. " Who, of all the men in the world, do you 
 think I saic, the other day? Who, for the sake of his 
 numerous services, the office was given to." In both 
 these cases it ought to be tchotn. Bring the verb in the 
 first, and the preposition in the second case, closer to the 
 relative ; as, who I saw ; to who the office teas given / 
 and you will see the eiTor at once. But take care! 
 " Whom of all men in the world, do you think was chosen 
 to be sent as an ambasssador? TFAom, for the sake of 
 his numerous services, had an office of honor bestowed 
 upon him." These are nominative cases, and ought to 
 havei/^Ao/ that is to say, "wAo loas 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 yom' 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 employing 
 whom, which I must point out to your pai'ticular atten- 
 tion, because it is so often seen in very good writers, and 
 because it is very deceiving. "The Duke of Argyle, 
 ttian whom, no man was more heaity in the cause." 
 "Cromwell, than whom no man was better skilled in arti- 
 fice." A hundi'ed such phrases might be collected from 
 Hume, Blackstone, 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 
 6*
 
 130 Syntax, 
 
 objective. "No man was more hearty in the cause than 
 he was/ no man was better skilled in artifice than he 
 wasy 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, described a pensioner as a slave of state, and 
 having afterwards myself become a pensioner.'' 
 
 201. I differ, as to this matter, from Bishop Lowth, 
 who says that " the relative who, having reference to no 
 verb or preposition understood, but only to its antece- 
 dent, when it follows than, is alioays in the objective case ; 
 even though the Pronoun, if substituted in its place, 
 would be in the nominative." And then he gives an in- 
 stance from IVIilton. "Beelzebub, than whom, Satan 
 except, none higher sat." It is emious 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 \oho, or to 
 its antecedent. 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 de- 
 partiu'e from a clear general principle ; unless we are to 
 regai'd as a reason the example of Milton, who has com- 
 mitted many hirndreds, 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 under- 
 stood." I do not see the reason, even if this could be; 
 for it appears to me impossible that a Norm or Pronoun 
 can exist in a grammatical state without having reference 
 to some verb or preposition, either expressed or under- 
 stood. "What is meant by Milton? "Than Beelzebub 
 none sat higher, except Satan." And when, in order to 
 avoid the repetition of the word Beelzebub, the relative
 
 As Relating to Pronouns. 131 
 
 becomes necessary, the full construction must be, "no 
 devil Slit higlier 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. 
 
 Mr. Swinton quotes these two sentences about Pope and Beelze- 
 bub, and then says: "This construction must be regarded aB 
 anomalous; but it has been used by so many reputable authors 
 that we can scarcely refuse to accept it." It seems to me that this 
 is one of those cases where long usage has made a faulty expression 
 appear or sound correct ; just as there are many people who think 
 "it is me" sounds much better than "it is I." I am sure "than 
 whom " is now much more rarely used than formerly. 
 
 202. That, as a relative, may, as we have seen, be ap- 
 phed either to persons or things ; but it has no possessive 
 <;ase, 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 aie some instances when it can 
 hardly be called proper to use that instead of wfio or 
 whom. Thus, directly after a proper name, as in Hume: 
 "The Queen gave orders for taking into custody the 
 Duke of Northumberland, who fell on his knees to the 
 Earl of 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 antecedent, in the same sentence. 
 And, indeed, it is very awkward, to say the least of it, to 
 use both in the same sentence, though relating to different 
 antecedents, if all these be names of rational beings. " The 
 Lords, who made the first false report, and the Commons, 
 that seemed to vie with then* Lordships in falsehood, be- 
 came equally detested." l^hat, as a relative, cannot take 
 the preposition or verb immediately before it. I may say 
 " The man to whom I gave a book ; " but I cannot say, " the
 
 132 Syntax, 
 
 man to that I gave a book ; " nor "the knife to that I put a 
 handle." "Having defeated tchom, he remained quiet;" 
 but we cannot, in speaking of persons, say, "Having de- 
 feated that, he remained quiet." 
 
 203. Which, as a relative Pronoun, is apphed to irra- 
 tional beings only, and, as to those beings, it may be em- 
 ployed indifferently with that, except in the cases where 
 the relative comes directly after a verb or a preposition, 
 in the manner just spoken of. We say, "the town, the 
 horse, the tree, lohich ; or to which f 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 wJio 
 or ichom, 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 cannot say, " the crowd 
 who was going up the street and which was making a 
 gi'eat noise." We must take the ^oho, 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 iuchviduals in our minds ; and therefore 
 we make use of v^ho and vjhom. " The assembly, inho 
 rejected the petition, but to xohom another was immedi- 
 ately presented." 
 
 205. Who, xohose, xohom, and which, are employed in 
 asking questions ; to which, in this capacity, we must add 
 what. ^'■Who is in the house? Whose gun is that? 
 
 Whom do you love best? What has happened to-day?" 
 What means, generally, as a relative, " the thing which;'''' 
 as, " Give me what I want." It may be used in the nom- 
 inative and in the objective case: "What happens to-day 
 may happen next week ; but I know not to what we shall
 
 As Relating to J^ronouns. 133 
 
 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." 
 
 Tliis little word what may, sometimes, curiously enough, be both 
 subject and object iu the same sentence. "Give what is proper. 
 Tell me what was done." In the first sentence, what is the object 
 otgive and the subject of is proper ; and may be set down as equal 
 to that which. In the second sentence, tchat is the object of tell 
 and the subject of was done; me being the indirect object, or 
 adverbial phrase, meaning to me. You may also say that the whole 
 clause what loas done is the object of tell, and call it an objective 
 clause. 
 
 Notice that the relative pronoun is sometimes omitted, but only 
 in the objective case ; as. You are the boy (whom) I mean; this is 
 the book (that) 1 want. This omission of words, which gram- 
 marians call an ellipsis, is very common in our tongue ; as. Dinner 
 done, we walked into the garden ; that argument granted, I pro- 
 ceed to the next. 
 
 The place of the relative pronoun is a mighty important matter. 
 Somebody sent Mr. White this striking instance of such misplace- 
 ment: "Just now, I saw a man talking to the Rev. Mr. Blank, 
 who was so drunk that he could hardly stand." The last two 
 clauses were intended, of course, to come after ma/i, who was 
 drunk, and not the reverend j!;entlcnian Here are some striking 
 examples from Greene's Grammar : " Mr. Brown needs a physician 
 who is sick. The oranges came in a basket which we ate. Found, 
 a gold watch by a gentleman with steel hands. A man brought 
 home my Newfoundland dog in his shirt-sleeves." These last two 
 sentences have no relative pronoun, but they are good examples of 
 misplacement of words. "I told you to do that this morning" is 
 a very different thing from " I told you, this morning, to do that.'' 
 
 Here is an advertisement which I have just noticed in the 
 Tribune: "Conditioned scholai-s coached for fall examinations 
 during the summer months at Tarrytown." These words, as they 
 stand, mean that the scholars are to be coached (that is, prepared) 
 for fall examinations, taking place during the summer months at 
 Tarrytown ; but the advertiser did not mean anything of the kind. 
 He meant to say, "Conditioned scholars coached, during the sum- 
 mer months, at Tarrytown, for fall examinations." You will say 
 that the fall examinations could not be during the swwmer months. 
 No ; but the words say so.
 
 134 Syntax, 
 
 206. Which, though in other cases it cannot be em- 
 ployed as a relative with nouns which are the names of 
 rational beiags, is, with such nouns, employed in asking 
 questions ; as, " The tyi'ants allege that the petition was 
 disrespectful. TFAecA of the tyrants?" Agaia: "One of 
 the petitioners had his head cleaved by the yeomanry. 
 
 Which?''' That is to say, "Which of the petitioners 
 was it?" 
 
 207. What, when used in asking for a repetition of 
 what has been said — as, what? — means, "Tell me that 
 which, or the thing which, you have said." This word is 
 used, and with great force, in the way of exclamation: 
 " What ! rob us of oirr right of suffrage, and then, when 
 we pray to have oui' right restored to us, shut us up in 
 dungeons!" The fvill meaning is this: " What do they do? 
 They rob us of our right." 
 
 208. It is not, in general, advisable to crowd these rela- 
 tives together ; but it sometimes happens that it is done, 
 " Who, that has any sense, can believe such jDalpable false- 
 hoods? What, that can be invented, can disguise these 
 falsehoods? By whom, that you ever heai-d of, was a par- 
 don obtained from the mercy of a tyi-ant ? 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, whosesoever, whomsoever, whatsoever, 
 whichsoever, follow the rules applicable to the original 
 words. The so is an adverb, which, in its general accep- 
 tation, means in like manner ; and ever, which is also an 
 adverb, means, at any time, at all times, or always. These 
 two words, thus joined in whosoever, mean, who hi any 
 case that may he ; and so of the other three words. We 
 sometimes omit the so, and say, tohoever, whomever, what- 
 ever, and even whosever. It is a mere abbreviation. The 
 so is understood ; and it is best not to omit to write it. 
 Sometimes the soever is separated from the Pronoun:
 
 As Relating to Pronouns. 135 
 
 " WJiat 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 subject. 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 caution you against the commission of a very 
 common error. You will hai'dly say, '■'•Them that write;" 
 but you may say, as many do, " We ought always to have 
 great regard for them who are wise and good." It 
 ought to be, ^^for those who ai-e wise and good ;" because 
 the word persons is understood : " those persons who aro 
 wise and good ;" and it is bad grammar to say, " them per- 
 sons who are wise and good." But observe, in another 
 sense, this sentence would be correct. If I be speakin^f 
 of particular persons, and if my object be to make you 
 understand that they are icise and good, and also that 1 
 love them ; then I say, very correctly, " I love them, who 
 ai'e wise and good." Thus : " The father has two childi'en ; 
 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 reason must tell you what is the meaning. 
 "2%ey, who can write, save a great deal of bodily labor," 
 is very different from " Those who can write save a great 
 deal of bodily labor." The those stands for those persons; 
 that is to say, any persons, persons in general, who can 
 write: whereas, the they, as here used, relates to some 
 particular persons; and the sentence means that these 
 particular persons are able to write, and, by that means, 
 they save a great deal of bodily labor. Doctor Blair, in
 
 136 Syntax, 
 
 his 21st Lecture, has faJlen into an error of this sort: 
 thus, "These two paragraphs are extremely worthy of 
 Mr. Addison, and exhibit a style, which they, who can 
 successfully imitate, may esteem themselves happy." It 
 ought to be those instead of they. But this is not the 
 only fault in this sentence. Wliy say " extremely worthy?" 
 Worthi7iess is a quality which hardly admits of degrees, 
 and surely it does not admit of extremes/ Then, again, 
 at the close: to estee^n is to prize, to set value on, to 
 value highly. How, then, can men " esteem themselves 
 happy?" How can thej prize themselves happy? How 
 can they highly value themselves happy? My dear James, 
 let chambermaids, 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 them- 
 selves happy. — It is truly curious that Lindley Mureay 
 should, even in the motto in the title-page of his JSnglish 
 Gratnmar, have selected a sentence containing a gram- 
 matical error ; still more curious that he should have 
 found this sentence in Doctor Blair's Lectiures on Lan- 
 guage ; and most curious of all that this sentence should 
 be intended to inculcate the great utility of correctness in 
 the composing of sentences. Here, however, are the 
 proofs of this combination of curious cu-cumstances : 
 '■^They who are learning to compose, and arrange their 
 sentences with accm-acy and order, are learning, at the 
 same time, to think with accuracy and order." Poh! 
 Never think a man either learned or good merely on 
 account of his being called a Doctor. 
 
 211. The Indeterminate Pronouns have been enumerated 
 in Letter VI, parapraph 71. They are sometimes Adjec- 
 tives, as is stated in that paragraph. Whoever, whatever, 
 and whichever (that is, whosoever, whatsoever, whichso- 
 ever), though relatives, are indeterminate too. But, in- 
 deed, it signifies little how these words are classed. It
 
 As lielatlng to l*ronouns. 137 
 
 is the use of tliem that we ouglit to Icok to. JSvery, 
 which I have now reckoned amongst these Pronouns, is 
 never, now-a-days, used without a noun, and is therefore, 
 in fact, an -adjective. The error that is most frequently 
 committed in using these Pronouns is the putting of the 
 plural verb or phf?-al Pronoun after nouns preceded by 
 every, each, or either; especially in the case of every : as, 
 •^ every man ; every body; every house." These ai'e under- 
 stood to mean, all the men, all the people, all the houses; 
 but, only one man, one body, one house, is sj^oken of, and 
 therefore the verb ought to be in the singular ; as, " every- 
 body ^s disgusted;" and not "everybody are disgusted." 
 
 212. Before you use any of these words, you should 
 think well on theii* trice ineaning; for, if you do this, you 
 will seldom commit errors in the use of them. Doctob 
 Johnson, in his Rambler, No. 177, has this passage: 
 '■'■Every one of these virtuosos looked on all his associates 
 as wietches of depraved taste and narrow notions. Their 
 conversation was, therefore, fretful and waspish, their be- 
 havior brutal, t!. eir merriment bluntly sai'castic, 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 tlte whole body 
 of virtuosos, including the every one. The word there- 
 fore adds to the confusion. The virtuosos were, there- 
 fore, fretful and waspish. What for ? Was it because 
 every one saw his associates in a bad light ? How can my 
 thinking meanly of others make their conversation fretful? 
 If the Doctor had said, " These virtuosos looked on each 
 other'''' . . . the meaning would have been cleai". 
 
 213. The Pronoun either, which means 07ie of two, is 
 very often improperly employed. It is sometimes used 
 to denote one of three or more, which is always incorrect. 
 We say, ^'■either the dog, or the cat f but not '■^either the 
 dog, the cat, or the pig.'' Suppose some one to ask me 
 which I choose to have, mutton, veal, or woodcoclt; I
 
 138 SyntaXy 
 
 answer any one of them ; and not either of them. Doctor 
 Blair has used any one where he ought to have used 
 either: "The two words are not altogether synonymous; 
 yet, in the present case, any one of them would have been 
 sufficient." 
 
 214. In concluding this Letter on the Syntax of Pro- 
 nouns, I must observe that I leave many of these inde- 
 terminate Pronouns unnoticed in a particular manner. 
 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. 
 
 Sometimes one cannot help using eithkr . . . ob with reference 
 to one of three things. Expressions like the following will 
 be found in the works of the best authors ; Either the Romans, 
 the Greeks, or the Persians. Neither the planters, the poor 
 whites, nor the blacks. 
 
 Nearly all the grammars set down the rule that one must use 
 each other with reference to two persons, and one anot?ier with refer- 
 ence to more than two. I have not, however, found a single author, 
 good or bad, that adheres to this rule. When you are speaking of 
 three persons, it is perhaps better to say, "They love one another," 
 than "They love each other;" but sometimes these words have to 
 be repeated so frequently that it would be very disagreeable to use 
 always the same word. In Punch's Address to Brother Jonathan, 
 these words occur almost interchangeably: "Let us quarrel, Ameri- 
 can kinsmen. Let us plunge into war. We have been friends too 
 long. We have too highly promoted each otJier's wealth and pros- 
 perity. We are too plethoric ; we want depletion ; to which end 
 let us cut one another's throats. Let us sink each other's shipping, 
 bum eaxh other's arsenals, destroy each other^s property at large. 
 Let our banks break while we smite and slay one another. Let us 
 maim and mutilate one another ; let us make of each other miserable 
 objects," etc. — Notice thatea«A has a restricting sense, and every an 
 extended or general one. "lie examined each one; he examined 
 every one." The first means c«c/i single one; the second means 
 them all, in a general sense. "Ilcre are ten lazy boys ; give each 
 one a caning. Give a caning to every lazy boy in the school." 
 
 That error of making verbs and pronouns agree with each and 
 mery, as if these words were plural, is as common to-day as it was 
 In Cobbett's time. How often we hear such expressions as,
 
 As Relating to Adjectives. 139^ 
 
 "Everybody have their faults — Every one are dissatisfied — Let 
 each boy and girl take up their pens," etc. These are all wrong. 
 Even if the noun with each or evern/ be repeated, the verb or pro- 
 noun must be in the singular; as, "Each day and each hour has 
 its duties ; every man and woman has his or h^r peculiarities ; every 
 window and every house-top was crowded with spectators." Be- 
 cause, in these instances, the predicate or verb is understood after 
 the first noun : Every window was crowded and every house-top 
 was crowded. 
 
 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 
 whole of Letter VII. 
 
 216. Adjectives, having no relative effect, containing no 
 representative quality, have not the dangerous power, 
 possessed by pronoiins, 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 congruity, or fitness, 
 in the things or qualities compared. Do not say that a 
 thing is deeper than it is broad or long; or that a man is 
 taller than he is wise or rich. Hume says, " The principles 
 of the Reformation were deeper in the prince's mind than 
 to be easily eradicated."' This is no comparison at all. 
 It is nonsense. 
 
 218. When Adjectives are used as nouns, they must, iu 
 all respects, be treated as nouns. " The guilty, the inno- 
 cent, the rich, the poor, ai'e mixed together." But we 
 cannot say " a guilty," meaning to use the word guilty as- 
 a noun.
 
 140 Syntax, 
 
 219. If two or more Adjectives be used as applicable 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 the comma or commas may 
 be omitted ; as, " a lofty and large and excellent house." 
 
 220. Be rather sparing than liberal in the use of Adjec- 
 tives. One which exj)resses jowx 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 endeavoring 
 to strengthen the /adjective by putting an adverb before 
 it, and which adverb conveys the notion that the quality 
 or property expressed by the Adjective admits of degrees ; 
 as, " 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 dis- 
 honest ; a' .d every act which is not just must be unjust. 
 " Very right," and " very wrong," are very common ex- 
 pressions, but they are both incorrect. Some expressions 
 may be more common than others ; but that which is not 
 right is wrong; or that which is 7iot wrong is right. 
 There are here no intermediate degrees. We should laugh 
 to hear a man say, " You are a little right, I am a good 
 deal wrong; that person is honest in a trifling degree; 
 that act was too just." But our ears are accustomed to 
 the adverbs of exaggeration. Some wiiters deal in these 
 to a degree that tues the ear and offends the understand- 
 ing. With them, everything is excessively or immensely 
 or extremely or vastly or surprisingly or loonderfully 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 corresponding, ai*e 
 effort without effect.
 
 As delating to Adjectives. 141 
 
 221. Care must be taken, too, not to use such adjectives 
 as are impropei' to be api:)lied to the nouns along with 
 which they are used. '■'■Good vu'tues ; had vices ; painful 
 tooth-aches ; pleasing pleasures." These are stavingly 
 
 ' absvu'd ; but, amongst a select society of empty heads, 
 " moderate Reform " has long been a fashionable expres- 
 sion; an expression which has been well criticised by 
 asking the gentlemen who use it how they would like to 
 obtain moderate justice in a coiirt of law, or to meet with 
 m,oderate chastity in a wife. 
 
 222. To seciu-e yourself against the risk of committing 
 such errors, you have only to take care to ascertain the 
 full meaning of every word you employ. 
 
 To show you how easy our English is, in this part of its gram- 
 mar, as compared with other languages, I shall ask you to look at 
 this one little sentence: "The good boy loves a good book and a 
 good friend; to good bread and butter he gives not a thought." 
 Here the adjective good occurs four times without ever once chang- 
 ing its form ; now you will see that this little word, iu this one 
 little sentence, changes Jive diHerent times in German : Der gute 
 Knabe liebt ein gutes Buch und einen guten Freund ; gutem Brod 
 und guter Butter gibt er keinen Gedanken. What do you think 
 of that, my lad ? Would you not think that the poor German, 
 when he speaks, would be constantly thinking of his genders, 
 numbers, and cases? Would jon not think he would be apt to 
 get things mixed? But he doesn't; he speaks his language in 
 correct form, as naturally as a canary-bird sings iu correct tune; 
 for he has learned to speak as the canary has learned to sing. 
 
 This is why some writers, like Mr. Grant White, say that the 
 English language has no grammar; that is, because its words have 
 few or no declensions, or changes to indicate person, number, gen- 
 der, case, mood, and tense. It has, however, a grammar of its 
 own ; and the proof of it is this : Notwithstanding the fact that it 
 has so few declensions, as compared with German, it is just as 
 hard, if not harder, for an adult German to learn to speak and 
 write English in a perfectly correct and idiomatic manner, as 
 it is for an adult American or Briton to learn to speak and write 
 German in a similar manner. Of the two or three millions of 
 native Germans who are now in the United States, how many of
 
 142 Syntax, 
 
 them, do you think, are able to speak our English in such a man. 
 ner as to have their words taken down on the spot, and printed 
 just as spoken ? I do not think there are half a dozen ; I know of 
 but one; and that is Mr. Carl Schuez. When I say Tiafose Ger- 
 mans, I mean, of course, those who, like him, have come to this 
 country and learned the language after attaining manhood. Those 
 who come here in infancy, or in childhood, become, in fact, Ameri- 
 cans. Of the others, not one in ten thousand ever learns to speak 
 like a native. As an offset to Mr. Schurz, we have at least ono 
 American who may be said to have spoken and written German 
 as perfectly as Mr. Schurz speaks and writes English ; and that is 
 our lamented Bayard Taylor. 
 
 It is very easy to learn enough English to talk about one's daily 
 wants ; to ask for meat and drink ; to count money ; to buy and 
 sell; and to inquire one's way; it is far easier for a German to 
 learn this much in English than for an American to learn as muck 
 in German; but it is, I think, as hard for the German to master the 
 English as it is for the Englishman to master the German. The Ger- 
 man language, in utterance and in construction, is, like the people 
 who speak it, almost as regular, formal, and law-conforming as 
 mathematics ; while our English, in utterance and in construction, 
 is, like the typical Englishman, though grounded in law and prin- 
 ciple, essentially a mass of peculiarities, irregularities, and eccen- 
 tricities. 
 
 LETTER XIX. 
 
 SYNTAX, AS RELATING TO VERBS. 
 
 223. Let us, my dear James, get well through this Let- 
 ter; and then we may, I think, safely say that we know 
 something of grammar: a httle more, I hope, than is 
 known by the greater part of those who call themselves 
 Latin and Greek scholars, and who dignify then* having 
 studied these languages with the name of '^'■Liberal Edu- 
 cation^^ 
 
 224. There can be no sentence, there can be no sen«e 
 in words, unless there be a Yerh either expressed or un- 
 derstood. Each of the other Parts of Speech may alter-
 
 ^1^ Relating to Verbs. 143 
 
 nately be dispensed with ; but the Verb never can. The 
 Verb being, then, of so much importance, you will do well 
 to read again, before you proceed further, paragraphs 23, 
 24, 25, and 26, in Letter III, and the whole of Letter 
 
 vni. 
 
 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 dii-ection 
 written on a post letter. "To John Goldsmith, Esq., 
 Hambledon, Hampshu-e." But what do these words 
 really mean? Why, they mean, "This letter is to be 
 delivered to John Goldsmith, who is an Esquu-e, who lives 
 at Hambledon, which is in Hampshire." Thus, there are 
 no less than five Verbs where we thought thei-e 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 
 A'jV a2:)pears to stand wholly without connection. How- 
 ever, 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?" Again, 
 in the date of a letter ; " Long Island, March 25, 1818." 
 That is : "Z atn now writing in Long Island ; this is the 
 twenty-fifth day of March, and this month is in the one 
 thousand eight hundred and eighteenth year of the Chris- 
 tian 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 gi-ammarians 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. (See paragraph 191.) 
 
 227. We almost always, whether in speaking or in writ- 
 ing, leave out some of the words which are necessary to a
 
 144 Syntax, 
 
 full expression of our meaning. This leaving out is called 
 the Ellipsis. Ellipsis is, in geometry, an oval figui'e ; 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 lear^e out parts of the 
 area, or surface, which parts would be included in the 
 circle. Hence it is, that the skipping over, or leaving outy 
 in speaking or in writing, is called the Ellipsis ; without 
 making use of which, we, as you will presently see, 
 scarcely ever open oui* lips or move our pens. " He told 
 me that he had given John the gun which the gunsmith 
 brought the other night." That is: "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, there- 
 fore, seeing that the meaning is quite clear without the 
 words marked by itahcs, we leave these words out. But 
 we may easily go too far in this elliptical way, and say: 
 "He told me he had given John the gun the gunsmith 
 brought the other night." This is leaving the sentence 
 too bare, and making it to be, if not nonsense, hardly 
 sense. 
 
 228. Reserving some further remarks, to be made bj- 
 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 sentence, 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 subject of 
 understood words, you will now listen attentively to me, 
 while I endeavor 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 understanding 
 with regard to the cases of norms and pronouns as con- 
 nected, in use, with Verbs and prepositions y for on this
 
 As Relating to Verbs. 145 
 
 connection depends a great deal. Verbs govern, as it ia 
 called, nouns and pronouns; that is to say, tbey some- 
 times cause, or make, nouns or pronouns to be in a cer- 
 tain case. Nouns do not vary their endings to denote 
 different cases ; but 2y^onoims do ; as you have seen in 
 Letter VI. Therefore, to illustrate this matter, I will 
 take the pronoun personal of the thhd person singular, 
 which in the nominative case is he, possessive case his, 
 objective case him. 
 
 231. Wlien a man (it is the same with regard to any 
 other person or thing) is the actor, or doer, the ma?i is in 
 the nominative case, and the corresponding pronoun is 
 he; '■'•lie strikes." The same case exists when the man is 
 the receiver or endurer, of an action, "//e is stricken." It 
 is still the same case when the man is said to be in any 
 state or condition. "JTe is imhappy." Indeed, there is 
 no difference in these two latter instances; for "Ae is 
 stricken" is no other than to say that "he is in a state or 
 condition 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 be-er (if 
 I may make a word) is, and must be, in the nominative 
 case. But now let me stop a little to guai-d 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 thuxl person singular. "I write.'" I should 
 say that here is the pronoun I and the Verb to write ; 
 that is to say, it is the Verb to write in one of its forms. 
 The to is the sign of the infinitive mode ; and the Verb in 
 that state is the root, or the foundation, from which all 
 the different parts or forms proceed. Having guarded 
 ourselves against this puzzler, let us come back to om- 
 nominative case. The actor, the doer, the receiver of an 
 action, the be-er, must always be in the nominative case ; 
 7
 
 146 Syntctx, 
 
 and it is called nominative 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 
 foregoing action or purpose; as, "Ae strikes; he is 
 stricken; he is unhappy." 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 is bad ; it is inadequate to its intended purpose ; but it 
 is used ; and if we imderstand its meaning, 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 ; 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 performs it, but also the 
 person upon whom it is performed. 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 instead of he. 
 
 This is simply another way of saying that the transitive verb 
 puts the noun or pronoun which follows it in the objective case, 
 and that a sentence with a transitive verb must consist of subject, 
 predicate, and object; as, Garfield defeated Hancock. (See par. 48.) 
 
 233. However, I remember that I was very mirch puz- 
 zled on account of these cases. I saw that when "Peter 
 was smitten,'''' Peter was in the nominative case ; but that 
 when any person or thing '■'■had smitten Peter," Peter was
 
 As Relating to Verba. 147 
 
 in the objective case. This puzzled me much; and the 
 loose and imperfect definitions of my grammar-book 
 yielded me no clue 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 object of the action of some other person or thing, 
 expressed or understood. I perceived that, in the first 
 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 received. And 
 I perceived that, iai the second instance, '•'■John has 
 smitten Peter,"" there was an actor who took possession of 
 the use of the Verb, and made Peter the object of it ; and 
 that this actor, John, now took the 7iominative, and put 
 Peter in the objective case. 
 
 234. This puzzle was, however, hardly got over when 
 another presented itself : for I conceived the notion that 
 Peter was in the nominative otdi/ 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 bi/ 
 John,'^ still left Peter in the, nomiyiative ; and that, if I 
 used the pronoxin, I must say, " he is smitten by John ;" 
 and not "/i*«i 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 everything 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, Jolm. My ear, indeed, 
 assured me that it was right to say, "//e is smitten by 
 John ;" but my reason doubted the information and assur- 
 ances of my ear. 
 
 236. At last, the little insignificant word by attracted 
 my attention. This word, in this place, is a preposition. 
 Ah ! that is it ! prepositions govern nouns and pronoims ;
 
 148 Syntax, 
 
 that is to say, make them to he 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 hy himy 
 
 237. Now, then, my dear James, do you clearly tmder- 
 stand this? If you do not, have patience. Read and 
 think, and weigh well every part of what I have here 
 written : for, as you will immediately see, a clear under- 
 standing with regard to the cases is one of the main inlets 
 to a perfect knowledge of grammar. 
 
 As soon as a verb is changed from the active-transitive to the 
 passive voice, the object becomes tlie subject of the sentence ; as, 
 " He loves her," active; " She is loved by him," passive. 
 
 Be careful to observe the difference between tlie object and the 
 attribute. I remember I could not, for a long time, see the differ- 
 ence in such sentences as these : "He is a Jew. She loves a Jew." 
 I thought that "a Jew" was, in both instances, the object of the 
 verb; but it is not. When I came to learn German, I saw the 
 difference at once, and the matter became clear to me. Er ist eiu 
 Jude. Sie liebt einen Juden. You see that "loves " is a transitive 
 verb, whereas " is " is a neuter, or intransitive one. The objective 
 case follows a transitive verb, never a neuter or intransitive one. 
 What follows the neuter verb, therefore, or any verb naming or 
 nominating anybody, is not the object, not anything in the objective 
 case; but the attribute — so called because it generally attributes 
 something to somebody — and, if a noun, is always in the nomina, 
 tive case. ^'He\s aman; he is manly ; he stands a freeman ; ho 
 remains a prince; he seems poor; he appears wealthy; he looks 
 Tiandsame; he is called T/ie Great Unknown ; he is appointed ^"m^Z^c;; 
 he is elected governor " — in all these cases, what follows the verb is 
 an attribute or quality, and, wherever it is a noun, it is in the 
 nominative case. Remember, therefore, that nouns following such 
 verbs as be, become, seem, appear, stand, walk, and the passive verbs 
 is called, is named, is styled, is appointed, is elected, is made., are 
 always in the nominative case, and are termed the attribute, or, by 
 some grammarians, the complement, of the sentence. 
 
 238. Verbs, of which there must be one, at least, ex- 
 pressed or understood, in every sentence, must agree in
 
 As Relating to Verbs. 149 
 
 persoji and in number with the nouns or pronoxins which 
 :ire the nominatwes 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 the nomina- 
 tives. How necessary it is, then, to know what is, and 
 what is not, a nominative in a sentence ! Let us take an 
 example. "John smite Peter." What are these words ? 
 John is a noun, third person, singular number, nomina- 
 tive case. Sjnite is a Verb, Jirst person, singular number. 
 Peter is a noun, thu'd person, singular number, objective 
 case. Therefore, the sentence is incorrect; for the nomi- 
 native, John, is in the third person, and the Verb is ia 
 the Jirst ; 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 eiTor; but stil 
 it is no more than an eiTor, 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 covmtry," it ought 
 to be. These errors stare vis 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 committed. " 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 iiitention is 
 the nominative to the Verb, which therefore ought to be 
 decides. Let us take a sentence still more deceiving. 
 " Without the aid of a fraudulent paper-money, the tyrants 
 never could have performed any of those deeds by which 
 their safety have been endangered, and which have, at the 
 same time, made them detested." Deeds is the nominu-
 
 150 Syntaae, 
 
 tive 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 T Watch me 
 iiovr, in the next sentence. " It must be observed that 
 land fell greatly in price as soon as the cheats began to 
 draw in their paper-money. In such cases the quantity 
 and quality of the land is the same as it was before ; but 
 the price is reduced all of a sudden, by a change in the 
 value and power of the money, which becomes very dif- 
 fei'ent from what it was." Here are two complete sen- 
 tences, which go very ghbly off the tongue. There is 
 nothing in them that offends the eai*. The first is, indeed, 
 correct ; but the last is a mass of error. Quantity and 
 quality., Which are the nominatives 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 followed, should, of coui'se, have 
 been they were. In the second member of the sentence, 
 value and power are the nominatives of becomes, which, 
 therefore, should have been become; and then, again, 
 there follows an it was, instead of they were. We are 
 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 
 quahty is; value and power becomes.'''' But when a sin- 
 gular novm comes in between such nominatives and the 
 Verbs, we are very apt to be thinking of that noun, and 
 to commit error. When we once begin, we keep On; 
 and if the 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
 
 As Melating to Verbs. 151 
 
 of the admixdstration of common justice, between party 
 and party, icas entii'ely settled by this king ; and has con- 
 tinued neai'ly the same to this day." Administration of 
 common justice was full upon the judge's ear ; down he 
 clapped was / and has natvu-ally followed ; and thus, my 
 dear son, in gi'ammai' as in moral conduct, one fault 
 almost necessai'ily produces others. 
 
 240. Look, therefore, at your nominative, before you 
 put a Verb upon paper ; for, you see, it may be one loord, 
 or Uco or more words. But observe, if there be two or 
 more singulai' nouns or pronouns, sepaiated by or, which, 
 you know, is a disjoining conjunction; then, the Verb 
 must be in the singular ; as, "A soldiei', or a sailor, who 
 has served his country faithfully, is fau-ly entitled to n. 
 pension ; but who will say that a j)rostituted peer, a jjimp, 
 or a buffoon, merits a similar provision from the pubHc?" 
 
 241. It sometimes happens that there jue, in the nomi- 
 native, two or more novms, or pronouns, and that they 
 are in different numbers^ or iu different persons ; as, " The 
 minister or the borough-tyrants!'^ These nouns cannot 
 have the Verb to agree Avith 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, 
 "The minister or the borough- tyrants conspire ; " because 
 the Verb would not then agree in number with the norm 
 minister/ nor can we say cons2)ires / because the Verb 
 would not agree with the noun borough-tyrants. There- 
 fore, we must not write such sentences; we must say, 
 "The minister conspires, or the borough-tyrants co7ispire, 
 against the liberties of the people." Repetition is some- 
 times disagreeable to the ear ; but it is better to rej^eat, 
 be it ever so often, than to wiite bad grammar, which is 
 only another term for nonsense. 
 
 242. When nominatives are sepai'ated by nor, the rule 
 of or must be followed. " Neither man ncr beast is safe 
 in such weather ; " and not are safe. And if nominatives
 
 152 Syntax, 
 
 of different nvunbers 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 nor the 
 bayonets are sufficient to prevent us from obtaining oui* 
 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 wiite bad gram- 
 mar, if we can express oui' meaning in good grammar? 
 
 243. If or or nor disjoin nouns and pronoims of different 
 persons, these nouns and pronouns, though they be all of 
 the same number, cannot be the nominative of one and 
 the same Verb. We cannot say, "They or I am in fault; 
 I, or they, or he, is the author of it ; George or I a'tn the 
 person." ]VIi-. Lindley Mun-ay says that we may use 
 these phrases ; and that we have only to take care that 
 the Verb agrees with that person which is placed nearest 
 to it ; but he says, also, that it would be better to avoid 
 euch phrases by giving a different turn to our words. 
 I do 2iot like to leave anything to chance or to discretion 
 when we have a cleai' principle for otu* guide. Fill up the 
 sentences, and you will see what pretty work there 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 aw* the person." Mi". Murray gives a similai' 
 latitude as to the Verbs used with a mixture of plurals 
 and singulars, as mentioned in the foregoing paragraph. 
 The truth, I suspect, is, that Mx. Murray, observing that 
 great writers frequently committed these errors, thought 
 it pmdent to give up the cause of grammar', rather than 
 seem to set himself against such formidable authoiity. 
 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. 
 
 The grammarians declare that you may say, ' ' Eithei he or I am 
 the guilty one;" or, "He is the guilty one, or I am;" "You or
 
 As Melatiny to Verbs. 153 
 
 William is to go;" or, "You are to go, or William is." The eye 
 or the ear often decides which is best. "You must not tell us 
 what you or anybody else thinks" seems more compact than " You 
 must not tell us what 3^0 w think, or what anybody else tliinks." If 
 one of the nominatives be negatively used, the verb must be in the 
 singular. Thus, "He, and not I, is chosen;" "I, and not they, 
 am to go." These are, indeed, correct ; and yet I think it is better 
 to say, lie is chosen, and not I; I am to go, and not the}-. I beg 
 you to DOtice how frequently and nicely Cobbett uses the subjunc- 
 tive be after if and thovyh, which is correct, and wliich now, 
 unfortunately, is falling out of use among common writers. 
 
 244. The nominative is frequently a noun of multitude ; 
 as, mob, parliament, gang. Now, where this is the case, 
 the Verb is used in the singulai' or in the plui-al, upon 
 precisely the same principles that the pronouns are so 
 used ; and as these piinciples, together with ample illus- 
 trations by 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- 
 tyiants is cruel, and are also notoriously as ignorant as 
 brutes." We must use is in both places, or are in both 
 places. 
 
 245. In lookmg for the nominative of a sentence, take 
 care that the relative pronoun be not a stumbling-block, 
 for relatives have no changes to denote number or person; 
 and though they may sometimes appear to be of them- 
 selves nominatives, they never can be such. " The men 
 who are here, the man who is here ; the cocks that crow, 
 the cock that croios^ Now, if the relative be the nomi- 
 native, why do the Verbs change, seeing that here is no 
 change in the relative f No : the Verb, in pursuit of its 
 nominative, runs through the relatives to come at then* 
 
 7*
 
 154 Syntax, 
 
 antecedents, men, man, cocJcs, cock. Bishop Lowtli says, 
 however, that "the relative is the nominative when no 
 other nominative comes between it and the Verb ; " and 
 2Hr. Miuray has very faithfully copied this erroneous 
 observation. '■'■Who is in the house? ^Vho are in the 
 house? Who strikes the ii'on? 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 continually 
 varying. Why does it vary? Because it disregards the 
 relative and goes and finds the antecedent, and accommo- 
 dates its number to that antecedent. The antecedents 
 are, in these mstances, understood : " "WTiat person is in 
 the house ? What 2)erso7is are in the house ? What person 
 strikes the iron? What persons strike the iron? What 
 persbti \oas in the street? What persons were in the 
 street ? " The Bishop seems to have had a misgiving in 
 his mind, when he gave this account of the nominative 
 functions of the relative ; for he adds, "the relative is of 
 the satne persoii as the antecedent ; and the Verb agrees 
 wii/i i< accoi-dingly."' Oh! oh! but the relative is a/^oays 
 the same, and is of any and of every numher and joerso/i. 
 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 
 like the preposition, no changes to denote number ; but 
 the danger is that in certain instances the relative may be 
 danger is that in certain instances the relative may be 
 taken for a nominative, without yom' looking after the 
 antecedent, which is the real nominative, and that thus, 
 not having the number and person of the antecedent 
 clearly in your mind, you may give to the Verb a wi*ong 
 number or person. It is very seldom that those who 
 lay down erroneous rules fin'nish us with examples by 
 the means of which we ai'e enabled to detect the error of 
 these rules; yet, Mr. Mttrray has, in the present case,
 
 As Melating to Verbs. 155 
 
 done this most amply. For in another pait 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 antecedent as well as the relative are 
 precisely the same ; the order of the words is the same ; 
 and yet the words ai'e different. Why? Because, in the 
 first example, the pronoun I is the nominative, and in the 
 second, the noun general. The first means, " 7", who am 
 the general here, gii^e 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 nominative case, I mean that they relate to nouns 
 or to persofial pro7iouns which are in that case. The 
 same observation ajDplies to the other cases. 
 
 I am strougly iacliued to thiuk that Cobbett is iu error here. 
 The relative pronoun must have person, number, gender, and case, 
 like any other pronoun; and who is undoubtedly always of the 
 came person and number as the word to which it relates. Let us 
 put it directly after all the three persons, singular and plural : 
 
 It is I who speak, or It is I who am speaking. 
 
 It is thou who speakest, " It is thou who art speaking. 
 It 13 he who speaks, " It is he who is speaking. 
 
 It is we who speak, '' It is we who are speaking. 
 
 It is you who speak, " It is you who are speaking. 
 
 It is they who speak, " It is they who are speaking. 
 
 Now here each who is of the same person as the pronoun or word 
 to which it relates, and consequently the verb agrees with it. 
 Strangely enough, the relative pronoun may, as Cobbett says, be 
 of any person; but that does not prevent it from agreeing with its 
 antecedent. I used to think that who was always of the third 
 person, referring always to somebody spoken of; but now I see 
 that it may be of the first person, referring to somebody who is 
 Bpeaking. Nevertheless, we do sometimes hear, It is I who speaks 
 German; it is you who speaks Spanish; it is you that speaks
 
 156 Syntax, 
 
 French. This may be explained by supposing that the full meaning 
 of the words is : It is I who am the person that speaks German ; 
 it is you who are the person that speaks Spanish. And here again 
 each who is of the same person as the antecedent. 
 
 246. "We are sometimes embarrassed tc fix precisely on 
 the nominative, when a sort of addition is made to it by 
 words expressing persons or things that accompany it ; 
 AS, " The Tyrant, with the Spy, have brought Peter to the 
 block." We hesitate to determine whether the Tyrant 
 alone is in the nominative, or whether the nominative 
 includes the Spy; and of coui-se 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 Tyi-ant himself, 
 and that the Spy has been a mere involuntary agent, then 
 we ought to use the singulai* ; but if we believe that the 
 Spy has been a co-operator; an associate; an accomplice; 
 then we must use the j)lural of the Verb. "The Tyi-ant 
 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. 
 Oive the sentence a turn: "The Tyi'ant has produced 
 great oppression and flagi'ant 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 
 find caiTots, 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 siDeaking of the goodness 
 of a leg of mutton and these vegetables taken 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 pltn-al Verb must be used. "ZTe, 
 with his bare hand, takes up hot ii'on." Not, "he, with 
 his bare hand, take up." "He, with his brothers, are
 
 ^6' Relating t<> Verbs. 167 
 
 able to do much." Not, ''Hs able to do much." If the 
 J ronoun be used instead of brothers, it will be in the 
 objective case: "He, with them, are able to do much." 
 But this is no impediment to the including of the noun 
 (represented by them) in the nominative. With, which 
 is a preposition, takes the objective case after it; but if 
 the persons or things represented by the words coming 
 after the preposition form pait of the actors in a sen- 
 tence, the understood nouns make part of the nominatives. 
 " The bag, with the guineas and dollars in it, were stolen." 
 For if we say was stolen, it is jyossible for us to mean 
 that the hag 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-tyi'anny, 
 Viith the paper-money makers, have produced misery and 
 starvation." And not has • for we mean that the two 
 \iduNQ 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. 
 
 The grammarians are now unanimous in declaring that a phrase 
 beginning witli the preposition with, coming directly after tlie 
 subject, does not affect tlie verb, or predicate ; as, The vessel, with 
 her crew, was lost; the regiment, with its officers, x^as captured; 
 the house, with its contents, lias been sold; the minister, with his 
 cabinet, has resigned; the emperor, with his family, has been 
 assassinated; Cobbett, with his Grammar, lias done much good. 
 Therefore, it is correct to say, The tyrant, with the spy, has 
 brought Peter to the block; he, with his brothers, has done much; 
 the bag, with the guineas and dollars in it, Avas stolen; zeal, with 
 discretion, does much. Because, in these instances, "with the 
 spy" and "with his brothers" indicate, like the plirase xoith his 
 proclamation, merely instruments ; and the sentence about the bag 
 of money means simply that the bag was stolen with what it 
 contained. The sentence aljout sobriety means that this virtue, 
 employed or combined with other qualities, enables a man to
 
 168 Syntax, 
 
 perform great deeds ; and that about zeal with discretion must be 
 regarded in the same way. Besides, the preposition with puts the 
 spy and the brothers, the guineas and the dollars, the industry ami 
 the talent, in the objective case; and how can any thing in the 
 objective case be the subject, which is always in the nominative case ? 
 What Cobbett says about the sentence, "He, with his brothers, 
 are able to do much," is about as good an example of sophistry as 
 any thing I know. For an expression of this kind, see Cobbett's 
 account of the sand-hill as an educator. Life, page 261. 
 
 The same is the case with sentences in which the phrase as well as 
 occurs. Clay, as well as Webster, was a great orator; Charles, as 
 well as his brother, was successful in business ; the father, as well 
 as his son, is in fault ; the minutest insect, as well as the largest 
 quadruped, deinves its life from the same Omnipotent Source. 
 
 247. The Verb to he sometimes comes between two 
 nouns of different numbers. "The great evil is the 
 borough- debt." In this sentence there is nothing to 
 embarrass us ; because evil and borough-debt are both in 
 the singula!'. But, "the great evil is the taxes,'"' is not so 
 clear of embarrassment. The embaiTassment is the same, 
 when there is a singular noun on one side, and two oi' 
 more singulais or plm^als on the other side; as, "The 
 ciuse of the country is the profligacy, the rapacity, the 
 corruption of the law-makers, the base subserviency of 
 the administrators of the law, and the frauds of the 
 makers of paper-money.' Now, we mean, here, that these 
 things constitute, ox form, or make up, a curse. We mean 
 that the ciu'se 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 evil ; but we cannot say, 
 "the evil are the taxes ; " nor can we say, that the "curse 
 are these things." Avoid, then, the use of the Verb to be 
 in all such cases. Say, the cui'se of the country consists 
 of, or aiises from^ or is produced by. Dr. Blaik, in his 
 19th Lecture, says: "A feeble, a harsh, or an obscure 
 style, are always faults.'''' The or required the singulai* 
 Verb is ; but faults required are. If he had put is and 
 faulty, there would have been no doubt of his being
 
 As Relating to Verbs. 15J> 
 
 correct. But as tLe sentence now stands, there ia 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 mean a want of good- 
 ness in a parL Feebleness, harshness, obscurity, are 
 faulty. But to call the style itself, to call the whole thing 
 n. fault, is more than the Doctor meant. The style may 
 be faulty, and yet it may not be a fault. The Doctor's 
 Avork is faulty; but, surely, the work is not a. fault! 
 
 248. Lest you should be, in certain instances, puzzled 
 to find your nominative case, which, as you now see, con- 
 stitutes the main spring and regulator of every sentence, 
 1 wiU here point out to you some instances wherein there 
 is used, apparently, neither Verb nor nominative, "/n 
 general I dislike to drink wine." This in general is no 
 more, in fact, than one word. It means generally. But 
 sometimes there is a Verb comes in : "generally speaking." 
 Thus: "The borough- tyrants, generally si^eaking, are 
 great fools as well as rogues." That is to say, "when we 
 sjjeak generally;" oi*, "if 'x'e are speaking generally;" or, 
 "when men or j^eople sjeak generally." For observe that 
 there never can he a sentence without a Verb, expressed 
 or understood, and that there never can he a Verb without 
 ft nominative case, expressed or understood. 
 
 249. Sometimes not only two or more nouns, or pro- 
 nouns, may be the nominative of a sentence, but many 
 other words along with them may assist in making a 
 nominative ; as, " Pitt, Bose, Steele, and their associates, 
 giving to Walter a sum of the pubHc money, as a reward 
 for Hbelling the sons of the king, toas extremely profligate 
 and base." That is to say, this act of Pitt and his asso- 
 ciates was extremely 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.
 
 160 ISryiitax^ 
 
 I doubt very much whether this sentence be correct. FoUowing^ 
 Cobbett's own instructions, let us shorten the sentence, and see 
 how it will look then: " Pitt giving Walter a sum of money was 
 extremely base." I think this neither looks nor sounds correct. 
 It was hh act, PiWa act, which was base ; and therefore it should 
 be, "Pitt's giving Walter a sum of money was extremely base;" 
 that is to say, Pitt's acting was base ; for we cannot say, Pitt act 
 ing was base. We say, "Bacon's drawing up charges against 
 Essex was extremely base; John Chinaman's working for low 
 wages is the head and front of his offense ;" and not. Bacon draw- 
 ing up, etc. — By-the-bye, such sentences as, "The great evil is 
 the taxes," are perfectly correct; for the subject is "the evil," 
 which is singular, and it makes little matter wliat the attribute 
 may be, for it has nothing to do with the verb. It is precisely the 
 same form of expression which we use when we say. It is we; it 
 is you ; it is they ; it is the boys; it is the rich; it is the wicked; 
 it is the Italians ; and so on. 
 
 250. You must take care that tbere be a nominative, 
 and that it be cleai'ly expressed or vuiderstood. "The 
 Attorney-General Gibbs, whose malignity induced him to 
 be extremely violent, and was listened to by the Judges." 
 The fiist 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 cannot, therefore, tell what or who it was that 
 was Hstened to ; whether the malignity of Gibbs, or Gihos 
 himself. It should have been, and v:ho, or, and he, wfvS 
 listened to ; and then we should have known that it was 
 Gibbs himself that was listened to. The omitting of the 
 nominative, five hundred instances of which I could di'aw 
 from Judge Blackstone and Doctor Johnson, aiises very 
 often from a desii-e to avoid a repetition of the noun or 
 pi-onouns ; but repetition is always to be prefeiTcd before 
 obscuiity. 
 
 251. Now, my dear James, I hope that I have explained 
 to you, sufficiently, not only what the nominative is, but 
 what aie its powers in every sentence, and that I have 
 imprinted deeply on your mind the necessity of keeping
 
 As JRelating to Verbs. 161 
 
 the nominative constantly in your eye. For want of doing 
 this. Judge Blackstone has, in Book IV, Chap. 17, com- 
 mitted some most ludicrous errors. " Our ancient Saxon 
 laws nominally punished theft with death, if above the 
 value of twelve-pence ; but the criminal was permitted to 
 redeem his hfe by a pecuniaiy ransom ; as among their 
 German ancestors."' What confusion is here? "Whose 
 ancestors ? Theirs. Who are they f Why the criminal. 
 Theirs., if it retate to anything, must relate to laws ,' and 
 then the laivs have ancestors. Then, v^hat is it that was 
 to be of above the value of twelve-pence ? The death, or 
 the theft? By, ^'^ if above the value of twelve-pence," the 
 Judge, without doubt, meant, "?y the thing stolen were 
 above the value of twelve-pence;" but he says no such 
 thing ; and the meaning of the words is, if the death were 
 above the value of twelve-pence. The sentence should 
 have stood thus: "Our ancient Saxon laws nominally 
 punished theft with death, if the thing stolen were above 
 the value of twelve-pence; but the criminals were per- 
 mitted to redeem their Hves by a pecuniary ransom ; as 
 among their German ancestors." I could quote, from the 
 same author, hundreds of examples of similar errors ; but 
 were there only this one to be found in a work which is 
 composed of matter which was read, in the way of Lec- 
 tures, by a professor of law, to students in the University 
 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 oui' subject. 
 
 252. As to the objective case, it has nothing to do with 
 Verbs ; because a noun which is not in the nominative 
 
 must be in the objective ; and because Verbs do never 
 vai'y then- endings to make themselves agree with the 
 objective. This case has been sufficiently explained under 
 the head of personal pronouns, which have endings to 
 denote it. 
 
 253. The possessive case, likewise, has nothing to do
 
 162 Syntax, 
 
 "with Verbs, only jou must take care that you do not, in 
 any instance, look upon it as a nominative. " The quality 
 of the apples were good." No ; it must be was ; for qual- 
 ity is the nominative and apples the possessive. "The 
 vv^ant of learning, talent, and sense are more ^dsible in 
 the two houses of Parliament than in any other jDart of 
 the nation." Take care upon all such occasions. Such 
 sentences are, as to grammatical construction, very deceiv- 
 ing. It should be " is more visible ;" for want is the nomi- 
 native ; and learning, talent, and sense are in the posses- 
 sive. The want of learning, and so on. 
 
 254. You now know all about the person and 7iuniber 
 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 2'imes there is very little to be said here. All 
 the fanciful distinctions of perfect present, more past, and 
 'tnore perfect jxist, and numerous others, only tend to 
 bewilder, confuse, and disgust the learner. There can 
 be but three times, the present, the past, the future/ and, 
 for the expressing of these, our language provides us 
 with words and terminations the most suitable that can 
 possibly be conceived. In some languages, which contain 
 no little words such as oui' signs, will, shall, may, and so 
 on, the Verbs themselves change then- form in order to 
 express what we express by the help of these signs. 
 In French, for instance, there are two past times. I will 
 give you an example in order to explain this matter. 
 " The working men, every day, gave money to the tyrants, 
 who, in retui'n, gave the working men dungeons and 
 axes." Now here is our word gave, which is the past 
 time of the Verb to give. It is the same word, you see, 
 in both instances; but you will see it different in the 
 French. "Tous les jours, les ouvriers donnaient de
 
 As Relating to Verbs. 163 
 
 I'aigent aux tyrauts, qui, en retour, donnerent aux ouvriers 
 des cachots et des liaclies." You see that, in one place, 
 our give is translated by donjiaie/it, and in the other 
 place, by donnerent. One of these is called, in French, 
 the past imperfect, and the other the past perfect. This 
 distinction is necessary in the French; but similar dis- 
 tinctions 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 auxihary Verb to have. And they have 
 as many changes, or different endings, as are requii'ed to 
 express all those various circumstances of time which we 
 express by work, worked, shall work, may icork, might 
 work, have loorked, had worked, shall have worked, m,ay 
 have worked, might have worked, and so on. It is, there- 
 fore, necessary for the Latins to have distinct appellations 
 to suit these various ch'cumstances of time, or states of 
 an 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 pmpose. In om' compound times, that is to say, such 
 as 1 have worked, there is the Verb to have, which be- 
 comes had, or shall have, and so on. 
 
 257. Why, then, shoiild we perplex ourselves with a 
 multitude of ai'tificial 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 
 cither unable to divest themselves 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 people, they have endeavored to 
 make our simple language turn and twist itself so as 
 to become as complex in its piinciples as the Latin lan- 
 guage is.
 
 164 Syntax, 
 
 258. There are, however, some few remarks to be made 
 with regard to the times of Verbs ; but before I make 
 them, I must speak of the participles. Just cast your eye 
 again on Letter VIII, paragraphs 97 and 102. Look at 
 the 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 titnes. I 
 need not tell you that / was working means the same as 
 I worked, only that the former supposes that sometliing 
 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 of existence col- 
 lateral with my workiny ; as, "I was working lohen he 
 came; I ivas 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 
 J do work is the same as J work, only the former ex- 
 presses the action more positively, and adds some de- 
 gree of force to the assertion ; and that did work is the 
 same as worked, only the former is, in the past time, of 
 the same use as do is in the present. I need not dwell 
 here on the uses of icill, shall, may, might, should, would, 
 can, could, and must; which vises, various as they arc, 
 are as well known to us all as the uses of oiu- teeth and 
 our noses ; and to misapply which words argues not only a 
 deficiency in the reasoning faculties, but also a deficiency 
 in instinctive discrimination. I will not, my dear James, 
 in imitation of the learned doctors, jDester you with 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 instantly put you right. Of 
 all these little words I have said quite enough before; 
 but when the Verbs to have and to be are used as auxili- 
 aries to principal Verbs, and, especially, when the sen- 
 tences are long, errors of great consequence may be com-
 
 As Helating to Verbs. 165 
 
 mitted ; and, therefore, against these it will be proper to 
 guard you. 
 
 And yet, here in the United States, there is no more common 
 error than the confounding of shall and will. If you can stick the 
 following rule fast in your mind, it will save you from making 
 many mistakes in the use of these words : — I sJiall, you icill, he will, 
 are the forms of the future, and merely fohetell what will take 
 place ; / will, you shall, he shall, arc the forms of the potential, 
 and express will or determination on the part of the speaker. 
 The latter are equal to the German ich will, du sollst, er soil. 
 Now try to repeat this rule without looking at the book. Turn it 
 over in your mind, and try it in sentences of your own formatior.. 
 In addressing other people, politeness often requires will instead of 
 shall ; as, " You will mark the packages 1, 2, 3 ; " not " You shall," 
 which would be equal to a command. 
 
 An English nobleman, SirE. W. Head, has written a whole book 
 on these two mighty little words, " Shall and Will," from which the 
 following "admirable statement of the true distinction between 
 these auxiliaries"* is taken 
 
 " Will in the first person expresses a resolution or a promise: ^ I 
 will not go ' = it is my resolution not to go. * I will give it you ' = 
 I promise to give it you. Will in the second Tparson foretells : *If 
 you come at six o'clock, you will find me at home.' Will in the 
 second person, in questions, anticipates a wish or an intention: 
 Will you go to-morrow?' = Is it your wish or intention to go 
 to-morrow V Will in the third person foretells, generally implying 
 an intention at the same time, when the nominative is a rational 
 creature ; ' He will come to-morrow,' signifies what is to take place, 
 and that it is the intention of the person mentioned to come. ' I 
 think it will snow to-day,' intimates what is, probably, to take 
 place. Will must never be used in questions with nominative cases 
 of the first person : 'Will we come to-morrow?' = Is it our inten- 
 tion or desire to come to-morrow f which is an absurd question. We 
 must say. Shall wc come to-morrow? 
 
 " Would is subject to the same rules as ipill. Would followed by 
 that is frequently used (the nominative being expressed or under- 
 stood) to express a wish: ' Would that he had died before this dis- 
 grace befell him I' = I wish that he had died before this disgrace befell 
 him. Would have, followed by an infinitive, signifies a desire to do 
 or to make ; ' I would have you think of these things ' = / ioish to 
 make you think of tliese things. Would is often used to express a 
 
 ♦A. S. Hill's Rhetoric, in which I found the above rule and this quotation.
 
 166 iS'i/ntaXj 
 
 custom: 'He would often talk about these things' = 'It was his 
 custom to talk of these things. 
 
 "Shall in the first -person f&retells, simply expressing wAai is to 
 take place: 'I shall go to-morrow.' Notice that no intention or 
 desire is expressed by shall. Shall, in the first person, in questions, 
 asks permission : ' Shall I read ?' = Do you wish me, or will you per- 
 mit me to read? Shall in the second and third persons expresses 
 a promise, a command, or a threat: 'You shall have these books 
 to-morrow' = / promise to let you have these books to-morrow. 
 ' Thou shalt not steal ' — / command thee not to steal. ' He shall 
 he punished for this' = / threaten to punish him for this offense. 
 
 '^ SJiould is subject to the same rules as shall. Should frequently 
 expresses duty: ' You should not do so ' = It is your duty not to do 
 no. Should often signifies a plan: ' 1 should not do so ' = It would 
 not be my plan to do so. Should often expresses supposition: 
 ' Should they not agree to the proposals, what must I do ?' = Sup- 
 pose that it happen that they will not agree to the proposals." 
 
 If you wish any more on this Head, read any play of Shake- 
 speare's, and take down every sentence with will or sliall, would or 
 should, and learn them by heart. Mr. White, speaking of this very 
 matter, says admirably, "The best way is, to give yourself no 
 trouble at all about your grammar. Read the best authors, con- 
 verse with the best speak(;rs, and know what you mean to say, 
 and you will speak and write good English, and may let grammar 
 go to its own place!" Jacob said to the angel, "I will not let thee 
 go till thou hast blessed me." You would say to your servant, "I 
 shall let you go if you do your duty." Consider the difference in 
 meaning between these two. 
 
 259. Ti7ne is so plain a matter ; it must be so well 
 known to us, whetlier it be the 2^>"esent, the jDas^, or the 
 future., that we mean to express, that we shall hai'dly 
 say, " We loork,'''' when we are speaking of our having 
 worked last year. But you have seen in Letter XVI, 
 pai'agraph 171 (look at it again), that Doctor Blair could 
 make a mistake in describing the time of an action. 
 Doctor Blair makes use of "it had been better omitted." 
 Meaning that it would have been better to omit it. This 
 is a sheer vulgarism, like, "I had as lief be killed as 
 enslaved." Which ought to be, "I tcowZr? as lief." But 
 the most common error is the using of the Verb to have
 
 As Melating to Verbs. 1«)7 
 
 with the passive participle, when the past time, simpl}-, 
 or the injinitive of the Verb ought to be used. " ]\L-. 
 Speaker, I expected from the former language and posi- 
 tive promises of the Noble Lord and the Right Honorable 
 the Chancellor of the Exchequer, to have seen the Bank 
 paying in gold and silver." This is House-of-Commons 
 language. Avoid it as you would avoid all the rest of 
 theu" doings. I expected to see, to be sure, and not have 
 seen, because the have seen carries your act of seeing/ 
 back beyo7id the period within which it is supposed to 
 have been expected to take place. " I expected to have 
 ploughed my land last Monday'' 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 called on him and wished t<> 
 have submitted my manuscript to him." Five hundi'ed 
 such errors are to be found in Dr. Goldsmith's works. 
 "I wished, then and there, to subtnit 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 ti77ies be attended to, and that you do not, by misap- 
 plication, make confusion and nonsense. " I had not the 
 pleasure of hearing his sentiments when I verote that 
 letter." It should be of having heard / because the hear- 
 i7ig must be suj)posed to ha,veheen wanted previous to 
 the act of writing. This word wanted, and the word 
 wanting, are fi'equently misused. " All that was zoanting 
 was honesty." It should be xoanted. " The Bank is 
 weighed in the balance, and found wanting," and not 
 wanted. Found to be wanting, or in want; in want of 
 money to pay its notes. 
 
 261. I will not fatigue youi* memory with more examples 
 relating to the times of Verbs. Consider well what you
 
 168 ' Syntax^ 
 
 mean ; what you wish to say. Examine well into the 
 true meaning of your words, and you will never make a 
 mistake as to the times. "7" thought to have heard the 
 Noble Lord produce something like proof." No! my 
 dear James will never fall into the use of such senseless 
 gabble! You would think of hearing something; you 
 would expect to hear, not to have heard. You would be 
 waiting to hear, and not, like these men, be waiting to 
 have heard. "/ 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 laborers to dig holes one day and fill them 
 up the next. 
 
 262. It is erroneous to confound the^-^s^ time with the 
 passive participle of the Verb. But noAv, 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 tcorking is the active 
 participle, and icorked the passive participle. We shall 
 speak fully of the active by-and-by. The passive parti- 
 ciple and the Verb to be, or some pai't of that Verb, make 
 what is called the passive Verb. This is not a Verb which, 
 in its origiii, differs from an active Verb, in like manner 
 as a 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 passive; that is to say, 
 does nothing. "John smites; John is smitten.''' Thus, 
 then, the passive Verb is no other than the passive parti- 
 ciple 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 pai'agTaph.
 
 As Helating to Verbs. 169 
 
 When the Verb is regular^ there can be no eiTor of this 
 sort ; because the past time and the passive participle are 
 wiitten in the same manner; as, "John xoorked ; 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.'" Tliis is gross. It offends the ear; but when a 
 company, consisting of men who have been enabled, by 
 the favor of the late William Pitt, to plunder and insult 
 the people, meet under the name of a Pitt Club, to cele- 
 brate the birthday 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 
 Inegular Verbs, in Letter VIII, the differences between 
 the past times and the passive pai'ticiples are all clearly 
 shown. You often hear people say, and see them write, 
 "We have spoke; it urns spoke in my heai'ing;" but "we 
 have came; it 'was did,'' are just as correct. 
 
 It may be well to notice that most of tliese verbs, like tlie German 
 verbs from whicii they are derived, change the i to a in the past 
 tense, and to u in the past participle. Say, therefore, I sing, sang, 
 have sung; I spring, sprang, have sprung; I ring, rang, have 
 rung; 1 swim, swam, have swum; 1 sink, sank, have sunk; and 
 so on. But there are a few exceptions; as, to fling, to cling, to 
 v.'i ing, to sting, whicli change the i to u in both the past tense and 
 the past participle. 
 
 264. Done is the passive pai'ticiple 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 vnshed, or was wishing, to speak. 
 8
 
 170 Syntax, 
 
 Therefore, the sentence should be, "I did not speak yes- 
 terday so well as I wished to do.'" That is to say, 'so 
 well as I wished to do it;" that is to say, to do, or to 
 perform, the act of speaking. 
 
 265. Take great care not to be too free in your use of 
 the Verb to do in any of its times or modes. It is a nice 
 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, therefore, it never can, 
 in any of its parts, supply the place of a neuter Verb. 
 Yet, to employ it for this pui-pose is very common. Dr. 
 Blair, in his 23rd Lecture, says : " It is somewhat unfor- 
 tunate that this Number of the Spectator did not ejid, as 
 it might very well have done, with the former beautiful 
 period." That is to say, "done t7." And, then, we ask: 
 done what? Not the act of ending ; because, in this 
 case, there is 7io actio7i 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 e)id 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 endhig. But the Number of the Spectator was 
 no actor/ it was expected to perform nothing ; it was, by 
 the Doctor, wished to have ceased to proceed. " Did not 
 end as it very well might have ended. . . ." This would 
 have been correct ; but the Doctor wished to avoid the 
 repetitiofi, and thus he fell into bad grammar. "IVIr. 
 Speaker, I do not feel so well satisfied as I should have 
 done, if the Right Honorable gentleman had explained 
 the matter more fully." Tou constantly hear talk hke 
 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 ex- 
 pression ; and to supply its place, when it is, as in this 
 case, a neuter Verb, by to do, is as senseless. Done what /
 
 As Relating to Verbs. 171 
 
 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!"' What incomprehensible words! Very be- 
 . coming in the creatures of coiTuption, but ridiculous in 
 any other persons in the world. 
 
 266. But do not misunderstand me. Do not confound 
 do and did.^ as parts of a principal Verb, with the same 
 words, as parts of an auxiliary. Read again Letter VIII, 
 paragraph 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 auxiliaiy. 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 interrogative, 
 do and did express time ; as, "You do not sleep ; did 
 you JxoifeelT'' But they do not here supply the place of 
 other Verbs; they merely help; and their assistance is 
 useful only as to the circumstance of time ; for we may 
 say, " You sleep not ; felt you not"?" And if in answer to 
 this question, I say, "I did,'"' the word/l'e^ is understood; 
 ''IdidfeeV 
 
 You will sometimes hear even Wall-street millionaires say, " I 
 done it ; he seen him ; he is dead broke ;" which is confounding the 
 past participle and the past tense. You mustsa3% I did it; I saw 
 him ; he is dead broken ; or, rather, completely ruined. But hen; 
 is a very important matter; something which Cobbett doe.n 
 not touch ; something of prime importance. What is the differ- 
 ence between " 1 did it" and " I have done it?" between " I was 
 in New Y'ork" and "I have been in NewY'ork?" between "1 
 wrote the letter" and " I have written the letter?" When do you 
 use the one and when the other? Think for a moment. Give 
 your own explanation before reading mine. These two forms are
 
 172 Syntax, 
 
 termed the past tense and the present perfect tense. Those who 
 are "native and to the manner born" seldom confound these 
 tenses, but foreigners constantly do. The distinction between 
 them, however, is exceedingly plain. We use the past tense when 
 speaking of anything that has happened in a completely past tvne; 
 as, I did it yesterday; I was in New York last week ; I wrote a 
 letter last Thursday. We use the present perfect tense when 
 speaking of anything that has happened in a time not yet entirely 
 past, or in an indefinite past time: I have done it to-day; I have 
 been in New York this week ; I have written many letters ; I have 
 been in Paris. Both the Germans and the French can, in their 
 languages, use either form for the same time; so that they can 
 say, which we cannot, "I have been in New York yesterday: I 
 have written a letter last week." 
 
 The past perfect, / had done, I had written, I had been, is used 
 when speaking of something happening at a time farther back 
 than or anterior to a given past time. For instance : While I am 
 telling you of what happened to me in 18G8 in London, and of my 
 doing something there at that time, and of my writing a letter to 
 somebody in that year, I suddenly inform you, for the better 
 understanding of my narrative, that I had been in London before 
 that year; that I had done something there before that time, and 
 that I had written to somebody before writing at that time. This, 
 3'ou see, is past perfect time ; it is going behind the past time of 
 our narrative ; and it is called the perfectly past time. 
 
 268. "Well, then, I think, that as far as relates to the 
 active Verb, the passive Verb, and the passive participle, 
 enough has now been said. You have seen, too, some- 
 thing 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 latter. A neuter Verb 
 cannot have a noun or a pronoun in the objective case 
 immediately after it; for though we say, "I dream a 
 dream,'''' it is understood that my mind has been engaged 
 in a dream. " I live a good life,''' means that I am living 
 in a good manner. " I walk my horse about," means that 
 I lead or conduct my horse in the pace called a walk. 
 Nor can a neuter Verb become 2^assive/ because a passive 
 Verb is no other than a Vei-b describing an action received
 
 As Relating to Verbs. 173 
 
 or endured. "The iioble earl, on retiu-ning 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 toas eloped means 
 that somebody had eloped the countess; it means that she 
 had received or endured., from some actor, the act of elop- 
 ing., whereas, she is the actress, and the act is confined to 
 herself. The Verb is called neuter because the action 
 does not pass over to anything. There are Verbs which 
 are inactive; such as, to sit, to sleejy, to exist. These are 
 also neuter Verbs, of coui'se. But inactivity is not neces- 
 sary 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. 
 
 These inactive verbs are the real neuter ones ; for, in the use of 
 them, the nominative is neither acting nor acted on. But we now 
 set down the whole batch, neuter and intransitive, as intransitive 
 verbs; and Cobbett simply shows, by this verb to elope, that we 
 cannot use an intransitive verb in the passive voice ; we can no 
 more say I am eloped than we can say I am sitted, lam slept, or / 
 am existed. There are a few intransitive verbs that seem an excep- 
 tion to this rule ; but they are not. I mean the verbs to come, to 
 arnve, to go, to return, to fall, to rise, and some others. Let me 
 set tliem down in the two ways in which they are used : 
 
 He has come, He is come. 
 
 He has arrived, He is arrived. 
 
 He has gone, He is gone. 
 
 He has returned. He is returned. 
 
 He has fallen, He is fallen. 
 
 He has risen, He is risen. 
 
 In the second form, He is come, etc., the words come, arrived, gone, 
 returned, fallen, risen, are not really participles, but adjectives, 
 indicating state.; so this form is not at all a passive form of the 
 verb; it is simply neuter; for the subject is neither acting nor 
 acted on. In the first form. He has come, etc., these words are 
 participles, and the sentences indicate action completed. But I 
 find I am anticipating; Cobbett says the same thing in the next 
 paragraph but one. Just keep in mind that what he calls neuter
 
 174 Syntax, 
 
 we now call intransitive; and that what he calls active, we now 
 call transitive. 
 
 269. In the instance just mentioned, the error is fla- 
 grant: '■'■was eloped,^'' is what few persons would put 
 down in writing ; yet anybody might do it upon the au- 
 thority of Dr. Johnson; for he says in his Dictionary 
 that to elope is an active Verb, though he says that it iu 
 synonymous with to run away, which, in the same Dic- 
 tionary, 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 was 
 eloped." 
 
 270. The danger of error, ia 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 sus- 
 tain, 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 paiu 
 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 crum- 
 bled, 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 participle of the Verb to go; it is merely an adjective, 
 meaning absent. If we put any word after it, which gives 
 it a verbal signification, it becomes eiToneous. " He fovmd 
 that the countess loas gone out of the house."' That is to
 
 As Relathifj to Verh.^. 175 
 
 say, was absent out of the house; and thi^ is iiousense. 
 It must, in this case be, "He found that the countess 
 had gone out of the housed 
 
 271. Much more might be said upon this part of my 
 subject; many niceties might be stated and discussed; 
 but I have said quite enough on it to answer every useful 
 ])ui-pose. Here, as everywhere else, take time to think. 
 There is a reason for the right use of every word. Have 
 your meaning clear in yoiu* mind ; know the meaning of 
 all the words you employ : and then you will seldom com- 
 mit eiTors. 
 
 272. There remains to be noticed the use of the active 
 participle, and then we shall have a few, and only a few, 
 words to say upon the subject of the modes of Verbs. 
 As to the active participle, paragraph 97, in Letter VIII, 
 will have told you nearly all that is necessary. We know 
 well that I am working means that / loork, and so on. 
 There is great nicety in distinguishing the cu'cumstancea 
 which call for the use of the one from those which call 
 for the other : but, Hke many other things, though very 
 difficult to explain by words, these cu'cumstances are per- 
 fectly well understood, and scrupulously attended to, by 
 even the most illiterate persons. The active participle is, 
 you know, sometimes a nou7i in its functions ; as, " Work- 
 ing is good for oui- health." Here it is the nominative 
 case to the Verb is. Sometimes it is an adjective; as, 
 ^'■ih.Q working people." As a nomi 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 work'ing of the mines ; the workings 
 of corruption." Of course it requites articles and j)repo- 
 sitions as nouns require them. More need not be said 
 about it ; and, indeed, my chief pnrpose in mentioning the 
 active pai'ticiple in this place is to remind you that it may 
 bo a nominative case in a sentence. 
 
 273. The modes have boen explained in Letter Vm,
 
 176 Syntax, 
 
 paragraphs 92, 93, 94, 95, and 96. Read those pai-agraphs 
 again. The injinitive mode has, in almost all respects, 
 the power of a noun. '■'■To work is good for our health." 
 Here it is the nominative of the sentence. " To eat, to 
 drink, and to sleep, are necessary." It cannot become a 
 plmal; but it may be, and frequently is, in the objective 
 case ; as, "/ want to eat." The to is, in some few cases, 
 omitted when the infinitive is in the objective case; as, 
 '■'■I dare write.'''' But, "I daie to write," is just as neat, 
 and more proper. The to is omitted by the use of the 
 ellipsis,' as, "I like to shoot, hunt, and course." But 
 care must be taken not to leave out the to, if you thereby 
 make the meaning doubtful. Repetition is sometimes 
 disagreeable, and tends to enfeeble language; but it is 
 always preferable to obscvu'ity. 
 
 Here is a little difficulty. Cobbett has repeatedly said that the 
 nominative always follows the verb to be; and so it does ; but it is 
 not always so with the infinitive of this verb. Look at these two 
 sentences : 
 
 I supposed it to be him. 
 I am supposed to be he. 
 In the first instance, the grammarians say that we must say to be 
 Mm, because it follows a word in the objective case (it), and is the 
 complement of that word; and in the second case we must say 
 to be he, because it follows a word in the nominative case (I), and 
 is the complement of that word. Observe that in the second 
 example it is as if I said, " I am supposed to be existing ;''' and in 
 the first, as if I said, " I supposed something.'''' 
 
 274. If you cast your eye once more on the conjugation 
 of the Verb to %vork, in Letter VIII, you will see that I 
 have there set down the three other modes with all their 
 persons, numbers, and times. The iraperative mode I 
 despatched 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 oiu' Verbs undergo in order 
 to make them suit then* forms to the differences of mode.
 
 As Relatmg to Verbs. 177 
 
 The indicative mode is that manner of using the Verb 
 which is apphed when we are speaking of an action with- 
 out any other action being at all connected with it, so as 
 to make the one a cwiditioa or consequence of the other. 
 " He works every day ; he rides out ; " and so on. But, 
 there may be a condition or a consequence dependent on 
 this working and riding; and in that case these Verbs 
 must be in the subjunctive mode ; because the action they 
 express depends on something else, going before or coming 
 after. " If he %ciork every day, he shall be paid every day ; 
 if he ride out, he will not be at home by supper time." 
 The s is di'opped 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 
 icork; if he should ride out." So that, after all, the Verb 
 has, in reality, no change of termination to denote xchat is 
 called mode. And all the fuss which grammaiians have 
 made about the potential mode, and other fanciful dis- 
 tinctions of the kind, serve only 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 
 ii?)ie of the i7idicative and in that of the subjunctive, in 
 all the persons, save the second and third person singular. 
 Thus, we say, in the present of the indicative, I work, 
 we work, you work, they work; and in the subjunctive the 
 same. But we say, in the former, thou workest, he works; 
 while, in the subjunctive, we say, thou work, he work; 
 that is to say, thou mayst work, or mightst, or shouldst 
 (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 has more vai'iation than 
 any other Verb. All other Verbs have the same form in 
 their indicative present time as in their infinitive inode, 
 8*
 
 178 Syntax, 
 
 with the trifling exception of the st and s added to the 
 second and thu'd person singulai- ; as, to have, to write, to 
 work, to run; I haoe, I tor it e, I work, I run. But the 
 Verb to he becomes, in the present time of its indicative, 
 I am, thou art, he is, we are, you are, they are; which 
 are great changes. Therefore, as the 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 cleai'ly ; for, instead of I am, thou ai't, he is, we are, 
 the subjunctive requires, I be, thou be, he be, we be; that 
 is to say, 1 7nay 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 imj)ortant Verb, to be, has 
 a form in some of its persons aj^propriated to the sub- 
 junctive mode. This is a matter of consequence. Dis- 
 tiDctions, without differences in the things distinguished, 
 are fanciful, and, at best, useless. Here is a real difference ; 
 a practical difference ; a difference in the form of the word. 
 Here is a. past time of the subjunctive ; a past time distin- 
 guished, in some of its j^ersons, by a different manner of 
 spelling or writing the word. If I be; if I were; if he 
 were; and not if I was, if he icas. 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 other- 
 wise. If I icorked, if I smote, if I had. Here the Verba 
 ju'e the same as in I worked, I smote, I had; but in the 
 case of the Verb to be, v>e must say, in the past of the 
 indicative, I loas, and in that of the subjunctive, if I were. 
 
 211. The question, then, is this: What are the cases in 
 which we ought to use the subjunctive form? Bishop 
 Lowth, and, on liis authority, IVIr. Lmdley MuiTay, have 
 said, that some conjunctions have a gooer)ime)it of verbs; 
 that is to say, make than or force them to be in the sub- 
 junctive mode. And then these gentlemen mention par-
 
 As lielatlitj to Verbs. 179 
 
 ticularly the conjunctions, if, though, unless, and some 
 others. But (aud these gentlemen allow it), the Verbs 
 which follow these conjunctions 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 conjunction 
 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, "i/' it be dark, do not come 
 home. 7/^ eating is necessary to man, he 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 tha subject. And if the sentence 
 were filled up, it wovdd stand thus: "If it should be dark, 
 do not come home." But in the second sentence there 
 exists no such uncertainty. We know, and all the world 
 knows, that eating is necessary to man. We jould not 
 fill up the sentence with should; and, therefore, we make 
 use of is. Thus, then, the conjunction if, which you see 
 is employed in both cases, has nothing at all to do with 
 the government of the verb. It is the sense which 
 governs. 
 
 It is worth while, however, to notice the conjunctions that are 
 said to govern the subjunctive : though, although, unless, lest, until, 
 till, whether, provided Oiat, on condition that, — because, when used, 
 they generally Indicate some uncertainty. When they do not do 
 this, then the indicative must be used. Here is an example that 
 will illustrate this. If I were speaking of the possibilities in the 
 future career of a young man, I should naturally say: "Unless 
 he be honest, he will never, though he be rich as Croesus, be happy." 
 But if I were speaking of a real person, who is actually rich as 
 Croesus, I should naturally say, "Though he is rich as Croesus, he is 
 not happy." Again : "Do not admit him, unless he has a ticket." 
 Here we say lias, because we anticipate something as fact. But, 
 where there is a doubt, we use the subjunctive. "Do not give him 
 the money, unless he return you the goods." When, therefore, 
 anything is spoken of as actuxilfact, or as in absolute existence, the 
 Indicative is used. Those who have studied French will remember
 
 180 Syntax, 
 
 that the French have also a number of words that govern the sub- 
 junctive, and in many, if not most, of the cases where they use the 
 subjunctive, we do so too. Though he be a giant; unless he be 
 attentive ; lest he hiu"t you ; provided that he pay you ; on condi- 
 tion that he reward you ; wait until he come. The French use the 
 subjunctive in all these cases. They also use it after certain verbs, 
 as we do too; as, '"Be sure that he lay no hand on you; mind 
 that he do not touch you." You have doubtless noticed this use of 
 the subjunctive in such sentences as that of Cobbett himself in 
 paragraph 250: " You must take care that there be a nominative, 
 and that it be clearly expressed or understood." Some writers 
 think that the subjunctive mode is fast passing out of use, and 
 that it will soon be altogether obsolete. I can only say that if it 
 do go out of use, we shall lose the means of indicating different 
 shades of meaning in the words we use. I suppose one reason 
 why it is going out of use is because the great army of newspaper- 
 writers know nothing of it ; they are obliged to write with such 
 extraordinary rapidity and in such haste that they can't take time 
 to consider flne shades or differences of meaning in the words they 
 employ. — Notice that the difference between the indicative and the 
 subjunctive, in all verbs except the verb to be, is simply this, that 
 in the subjunctive the endings are all cut off. Cast your eye 
 over the conjugations of to work and to be worked. 
 
 278. There is a great necessity for cai'e as to this 
 matter; for the meaning of what we write is very much 
 affected when we make use of the modes indiscriminately. 
 Let us take an instance. " Though her chastity be right 
 and becoming, it gives her no claim to praise ; because she 
 would be criminal if she icere net chaste." Now, by em- 
 ploying the subjiuictive, in the first member of the sen- 
 tence, we leave it uncertain whether it be right or not for 
 her to be chaste ; and by employing it in the second, we 
 express a doubt as to the fact of her chastity. We mean 
 neither of these ; and, therefore, notwithstanding here are 
 a though and an if, both the Verbs ought to be in the 
 indicative. " Though her chastity is right and becoming, 
 it gives her no claim to praise; because she would be 
 crimLaal if she was not chaste." Fill up with the signs. 
 "Though her chastity may be right; if she should not be
 
 As Melating to Verbs. 181 
 
 chaste ; " and then you see, at once, what a difference there 
 is in the meaning. 
 
 279. The subjunctive is necessarily always used where 
 a sign is left out; as, "Take care that he come to-morrow, 
 that you be ready to receive him, that he be well received, 
 and that all things be duly prepared for his entertain- 
 ment." Fill up with the signs, and you will see the reason 
 for what you write. 
 
 280. The Verb to be is sometimes used thus : " Were fie 
 rich, I should not like him the better. Were it not dark, 
 I would go." That is to say, if he %oere; if it were. '■'•It 
 tcere a jest, indeed, to consider a set of seat-sellers and 
 seat-buyers as a lawful legislative body. It were to violate 
 every principle of moraUty to consider honesty as a virtue, 
 when not to be honest is a crime which the law punishes." 
 The it stands for a gi-eat deal here. " Ridiculous, 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 unaccountable/ and I never like to slur things 
 over. Those expressions for the using of which we cannot 
 give a reason ought not to be used at all. 
 
 There is another use of the verb to be, unnoticed by Cobbett, 
 which may be spoken of here. It has long been a matter of con- 
 troversy whether we should say, "the bridge is building," or "the 
 bridge is being built;" "preparations are making," or "prepara- 
 tions are being made." Mr. White maintains that the former is 
 the only proper form, and that the latter form is contrary to the 
 genius of our language. And other critics are of the same opinion. 
 Well, there is no use in talking of it now; it is too late to alter itj 
 for this manner of speaking is now used by almost everybody that 
 speaks or writes English. Every newspaper in the United States 
 uses this form; and the truth ts, it has become a necessity, for 
 there are some cases in which no other form can be used without 
 changing the meaning of the sentence. We can say, The house is 
 buildmg, the book is printing, the play is acting, the bread is 
 baking, the clothes are making, and so on, in many other instances ; 
 but we cannot say, "The boy is whipping" or "The girl is
 
 182 Syntax, 
 
 ruining" to signify that "The boy is being whipped" or "The 
 girl is being ruined." No; it is no use trying to change this now; 
 there are certain cases where we mxist use- " is being ;" it is in the 
 very life-blood of the language ; it is every-day English ; and there 
 is no taking it out. It is like the word execute, which originally 
 meant, and still properly means, to put a sentence into force ; but 
 row it is used every day, in print and in conversation, to signify 
 putting a person to death. And there is no doubt but it will con- 
 tinue to be so used to the end of time ; for no dictum of the critics 
 can change it. 
 
 It is worth while remarking, that in sentences like " The house 
 is building," "the corn is thrashing," the words building and 
 thrashing are not verbs, but nouns; for the original form was "in 
 building," "in thrashing." The Germans have an entirely different 
 verb for such expressions; for "The house is building" they say 
 Das Haus wird gebaut, and not Das Haus ist gebaut, which latter 
 means The house is built. 
 
 281. As to instances in whicli authors have violated the 
 principles of grammar, with respect to the use of the 
 modes, I could easily fill a book much larger than this 
 with instances of this kind from Judge Blackstone and 
 Doctor Johnson. One only shall suffice. I take it from 
 the Judge's fii'st Book. " Therefore, if the king purchases 
 lands of the natvu'e of gavel-kind, where all the sons inherit 
 equally; yet, upon the king's demise, his eldest son shall 
 succeed to these lands alone''' Here is fine confusion, 
 not to say something inclining towards high treason ; for, 
 if the king's son be to inherit these lands alone, he, of 
 course, is not to inherit the croion. But it is the Verb 
 purchases with which we have to do at present. Now, it 
 is notorious that the king does not pui'chase lands in 
 gavel-kind, or any other lands ; whereas, from the form of 
 the Verb, it is taken for granted that he does it. It should 
 have been, " If the king purchase lands ; " that is to say, 
 if he were to jjiirchase, or if he shoxdd 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
 
 As Melating to Verbs. 183 
 
 its meaning ought to be well weighed in your mind ; but 
 always recollect that, in the using of Verbs, that which 
 requii-es your fii'st and most earnest care is the ascertain- 
 ing of the nominative of the sentence ; for, out of every 
 hundi'ed grammatical errors, full fifty, I believe, ai'e com- 
 mitted for want of due attention to this matter. 
 
 Let me say a word here which will make clear to you what the 
 Germans meau by what they call genetic teaching ; that is, unfold- 
 ing a subject in such a way as to show how it originates and grows 
 up to completion. The shortest possible sentence must have a sub- 
 ject and a predicate (nominative and verb) ; for although the one 
 word, "Love!" is a sentence, the subject is understood: "Love 
 thou ! " The next step is the object : ' ' Love thou me ! " A sentence 
 may, therefore, consist of merely subject and predicate, or of sub- 
 ject, predicate, and object. 
 
 The last is an imperative sentence ; let us take a declarative one. 
 "Men love." This is a sentence ; it contains subject and predicate, 
 and makes complete sense. "Men love women." This has sub- 
 ject, predicate, and object. Now we may go on adding words, 
 phrases, and clauses, modifying each of these chief parts of the 
 sentence, until we stretch it out into a compoimd or complex sen- 
 tence. For a sentence, like a house, is just built up by successive 
 additions. These additions are often called adjuncts ; they consist 
 of single words, of phrases and clauses. I shall add all I can to the 
 separate words of this sentence; first modifying the subject by 
 various single words, then by a phrase, then by a clause ; and then 
 I shall endeavor to do the same to the predicate and the object. 
 Now observe, and you will see how a sentence grows : 
 
 Men love women. 
 
 The men love women. < 
 
 The worthy men love women. 
 
 The very worthy men love women. 
 
 The very worthy men in this city love women. 
 
 The very worthy men in this city, who are noted for their excellent char- 
 acter, love women. 
 
 Here we have modified the subject, first by the definite article, 
 then by an adjective, then we have modified the adjective by an 
 adverb, then we have modified or limited the subject by a phrase, 
 and finally by a clause. Now let us try and do the same thing to 
 the predicate and the object :
 
 184 Syntax, as Melating to Adverbs, 
 
 Men love women. 
 
 Men love the women. 
 
 Men love the good women. 
 
 Men love the very good women. 
 
 Men love dearly the very good women. 
 
 Men love dearly the very good women of this city. 
 
 Men love dearly the very good women of this city, who are respected by 
 
 all the world. 
 
 The whole sentence will therefore be ; " The very worthy men in 
 this city, who are noted for their excellent character, love dearly 
 the very good women of this city, who are respected by all the 
 world." This, therefore, has now become a complex sentence, 
 of which the chief clause is, "Men love women," and all the rest 
 modifies the subject, the predicate, and the object of this clause. 
 Of course, it might be extended much farther; but this will do to 
 show you how a sentence grows; or, if you please, how it is 
 built up. Should you ever be requested to give a trial lesson in 
 English grammar, in a class of scholars who have learned some- 
 thing of the subject, you cannot do better than show them, in 
 this manner, liow a sentence is formed. 
 
 LETTER XX. 
 
 SYNTAX, AS RELATING TO ADVERBS, PREPOSITIONS, AND CON- 
 JUNCTIONS. 
 
 283. After what lias been said, my dear James, on the 
 subject of the Verb, there remains little to be added. The 
 Adverbs, J^repositloiis, and Conjunctions, are all words 
 which never vary their endings. Theu' 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 contain specimens oi 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, hai-dly possible for you not 
 to understand. 
 
 284. Some grammai-ians have given lists of Adverbs,
 
 JPrepositions, and Oonjunctiona. 185 
 
 Prepositiotis, and Conjunctions. For what reason I know 
 not, seeing that they have not attempted to give lists of 
 the "words of other pai'ts 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 connection be- 
 tween words, and the manner of using words properly. 
 The sole cause of this dwelling upon these parts of speech 
 appears to me to have been a notion that they would seem 
 to be neglected, unless a certain number of j^ages of the 
 book were allotted to each. To be siu-e each of them is a 
 part of speech, as completely as the little finger is a part 
 of the body ; but few persons will thmk that, because we 
 descant very frequently, and at great length, ui^on the 
 qualities of the head and heart, we ought to do the same 
 with regard to the qualities of the little finger. 
 
 ^85. I omitted, in the Letter on Verbs, to notice th« 
 ^se of the word thing; and I am not sorry that I tua, »«*- 
 cause by my noticing it in this concluding pai'agraph, tUf 
 matter may make a deeper impression on yovu- mind. 
 Thing is, of course, a noun. A. pen is a thing, and every 
 animal, or creatine, animate or inanimate, is a thing. We 
 apply it to the representing of every creatuie in the uni- 
 verse, except to men, women, and children ; and a creature 
 :s 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 di'unk is a beastly thing.'' Here is neither human 
 being, u'rational animal, nor inanimate creatui-e. 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 yionn. " 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 refusal."
 
 186 Syntax. 
 
 The meaning is, that the whole of these measiires or trans- 
 actions constituted a most atrocious deed or thing. 
 
 Cobbett despatches the syntax of adverbs in half-a-dozen lines ; 
 and yet there is one little matter connected with the use of these 
 words that has, perhaps, caused more uncertainty, perplexing 
 uncertainty, than anything connected with grammar. We say, 
 rightly, that he fights bravely and she sings finely ; but shall I say 
 that he looks bravely and that her voice sounds finely ? I may say 
 that he dances smoothly and that she plays sweetly; but shall 
 I say that his coat feels smoothly and that she looks sweetly? If 
 not, how am I to know when to use the adverb and when the 
 adjective? 
 
 This, as I have said, is a matter which has puzzled many a stu- 
 dent of grammar, and caused anxiety to many a young writer. Here 
 is a rule which I have never seen in any grammar, but which, I think, 
 will cover the majority of such cases, and is easily understood 
 and remembered : After all the verbs referring to the five senses, 
 the adjective, and not the adverb, is to be used : as. It tastes good; 
 it smells nke; it sounds harsh; it feels smooth; it looks handsome. 
 Expressed in a larger and more comprehensive manner, the rule 
 might stand thus : Wherever manner is to be expressed, use the 
 adverb; wherever quality is to be expressed, use the adjective. 
 Cobbett repeatedly uses the expression " talks /«.e;" meaning, of 
 course, fine talk, and not the inanner of speaking. In the same 
 way, we must say, " I arrived here safe and sound," and not, safely 
 and soundly; for it is not the manner of arriving, but the state in 
 which he arrived, that is meant. 
 
 I thought that Cobbett explained somewhere in this grammar 
 the diflference between so and such; but I cannot find it. Jlr. 
 Swintonsays; 'VSc has sometimes a pronominal use; as, 'Whether 
 he is a genius or not, he is considered so ' — (a genius)." I think 
 this is an error; so is used adjectively and adverbially, not pro- 
 nominally ; su/:h is used pronominally ; as. Whether he be a genius 
 or not, he is considered jsmc/j; whetlier he be rich or not, he is 
 considered so. (See paragraph 143.) 
 
 By the way, I ought to have stated in another place that it is 
 correct to say, "Two and two isio\\r\ five times five is twenty- 
 five," for these are abstract numbers, and are looked upon as 
 one sum. But if you make the numbers concrete or denominate, 
 then you must use the verb in the plural; as, "Two horses and 
 two horses are four horses, five times five horses are twenty-five 
 horses."
 
 Specimens of F'alse Gi-ammar. 187 
 
 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 construc- 
 tion of your sentences. Wlien you see writers like Dr. 
 Johnson and Dr. Watts committing grammatical eiTors, 
 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 dictionaiy 
 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 cai'e and caution are necessary to prevent you from 
 committing not only similar, but much greater, errors. 
 
 Another object, in the producing of these specimens, is 
 to convince you that a knowledge of the Latin and Greek 
 languages does not prevent men from writing bad EngUsli. 
 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 ai"e false, and, of course, 
 they lead to false conclusions. Learning^ as a noim, 
 means knowledge, and learned means knoiciyig, or pos- 
 sessed of knowledge. Leai'ning is, then, to be acquired 
 by conception y' and, it is shown in Judgment, in reasoning^ 
 and in the various modes of employuig it. What, then, 
 can learning have to do with any particulai' tongue! 
 Good grannnar, for instance, written in Welsh, or in the 
 language of the Chippewa savages, is more learned than 
 bad grammar wiitten in Greek. The leai*ning is in tlie
 
 188 Specimens of liaise Grammar. 
 
 mind and not in tlie tongue; learning consists of ideas 
 and not of the noise that is made by the mouth. If, for 
 instance, the Reports dj^-awn 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? 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 falsehood written in Enghsh 
 would have been truth if written in Latin; and as well 
 may we say that a certain handwriting is a leai'ned hand- 
 writing, 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 then* teaching, very large estates 
 in house and land., which are public property, but which 
 ai-e now used for the sole benefit of those teachers, who 
 are, in general, the relations or dependents of the aristoc- 
 racy. In order to give a color of reasonableness to this 
 species of appropriation, the languages taught by the 
 possessors ai-e 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 snug possessors 
 of the proj^erty against the consequences of the people's 
 understanding the matter. 
 
 It is cui'ions enough that this appellation of " learned 
 languages " is confined to the English nation and the 
 American, which inherits it from the English. Neither 
 in Prance, in Spain, in Italy, nor in Germany, is this false
 
 Specimens of False Grammar. 189 
 
 and absui'd appellation in use. The same motives have 
 not existed in those countries. There the monks and 
 other priests have inherited from the founders. They 
 had not any occasion to resort to this species of imposition- 
 But in England the thing required to be glossed over. 
 There was something or other requu'ed in that countiy 
 as an apology for taking many millions a year from the 
 public to keep men to do no apparently useful thing. 
 
 Seeing themselves unable to maintain the position that 
 the Latin and Greek are more '■'■learned languages" thaai 
 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 leai'ned than others: 
 but that, to possess a knowledge 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 lan- 
 guages does not prevent men from committing numerous 
 grammatical errors when they write in their native lan- 
 guage. 
 
 I have, for this jpui-pose, 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 aie respectively the most celebrated; the 
 Rambler of Doctor Johnson, and the Logic of Doctor 
 Watts. These are works of very great learning. The 
 Bambler, though its general tendency is to spread a 
 gloom over life, and to damp all enterprise, piivate as 
 well as public, displays a vast frmd 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
 
 190 i^ecime?is of liaise Grammar. 
 
 self-evident propositious from amongst those, many of 
 •which great numbers of men think not to be self-evident, 
 is a 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 revised 
 with great cai-e : 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 ex- 
 tracts under the names of the parts of speech to which 
 the erroneous words respectively belong. 
 
 ARTICLES. 
 
 " I invited her to spend the day in viewing a seat and 
 gardens.^' — R. No. 34 
 
 "For all our speculative acquaintance with things 
 should be made subservient to our better conduct in the 
 civil and religious life." — L. Introduction. 
 
 The indefinite article a cannot, you know, be put before 
 & 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 gai'dens." '■'■Civil and religious life,'''' in the 
 second extract are general and indefinite. The article, 
 therefore, was unnecessary, and is improperly used. Look 
 back at the use of Ai'ticles, Letter IV. 
 
 NOUNS. 
 
 "Among the innumerable historical authors, who fill 
 every nation with accounts of their ancestors, or under- 
 take to transmit to futurity the events of their own time.
 
 Specimens of False Gratmnar. 191 
 
 the greater pait, when fashion and novelty have ceased to 
 recommend thexi., ai'e of no other use than chronological 
 memorials, which necessity may sometimes require to be 
 consulted."— E. No. 122. 
 
 This is all confusion. Whose ancestors'? The jiatiori's 
 ancestors are meant ; but the a uihors' are expressed. The 
 two theirs and the them clearly apply to the sam,e Noun. 
 How easily all this confusion would have been avoided 
 by considering the niition as a singular, and saying its 
 ancestors I In the latter part of the sentence, the authors 
 are called chronological tnemorials; and though we may, 
 in some cases, use the word author for author^ s work; 
 yet, in a case like this, where we are spealdng of the 
 authors as actors, we cannot take such a hberty. 
 
 " Each of these classes of the human race has desires, 
 fears, and conversation pecuhar to itself; cai'es which 
 another cannot feel, and pleasvu'es which he cannot par- 
 take."— R. No. 160. 
 
 The noun of mviltitude, classes, being preceded by each^ 
 has the prouoim itself properly put after it ; but the he 
 does not correspond with these. It should have been it. 
 "With regard to these two extracts, see paragraph 181. 
 
 " His great ambition was to shoot flying, and he, there- 
 fore, spent whole days in the woods, pursuing game, 
 which, before he was near enough to see them, his ap- 
 proach flighted away." — R. No. 66. 
 
 Game is not a noun of inultitude, like mob, or Souse 
 of Commons. There ai'e different games or pastimes; 
 but this word, as api)lied to the describing of wild ani- 
 mals, has no plural ; and, therefore, cannot have a plural 
 pronoun to stand for it. 
 
 "The obvious duties of piety towards God and love 
 towai'ds man, with the governments of all our inclinations 
 and passions." — L. Pai"t 4. 
 
 This plui-al is so clearly wrong that I need not shov? 
 tohy it is wi'ong.
 
 192 Specimens of F'alse Grammar. 
 
 "And by this mean they will better judge what to 
 choose." — L. Part 4. 
 
 Meati, as a nouB, 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 pliu-al pronouns 
 and articles or not. Doctor Watts, in other instances, 
 says, this means. 
 
 It is curious enough that we have several plural words like this, 
 used 111 a singular manner. We not only say this means, but this 
 news, this series, and this species. We say, "Great pains is taken , 
 he has taken muc?i pains;" because, in this sense, pains means 
 exertion, trouble; while in the plural it means bodili/ pains. Mean., 
 means, are properly used in the singular and plural when applied 
 to the terms used in proportion. When you are speaking of 
 vax'ious disti?ict things or operations, you ought to say, "By these 
 means;" but when you are speaking of things or circumstances in 
 &mass, you must say, "By this means.'''' Such sentences as, "This 
 is one means of gaining 3'our end," and " The best means is by fair 
 play," are perfectly correct. 
 
 " 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 rchose 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 whose use." See Syntax of Nouns, Letter 
 XVI, paragi-aphs 170, 171. 
 
 PRONOUNS. 
 
 " Had the opinion of my censurers been unanimous, it 
 might have overset my resolutions ; but, since I find them 
 at variance with each other, I can, without scruple, neg- 
 lect them, and follow my own imagination." — R. No. 23. 
 
 You see the Doctor has, in the last member of the sen- 
 tence, the censurers in his eye, and he forgets his nomina-
 
 Specimens of False Ghramrnar. 193 
 
 tive, opinion. It is the opinion that was not unanimous, 
 and not the censurers who were not unanimous ; for they 
 were unanimous in censiu'ing. 
 
 " 7%ey that frequent the chambers of the sick will gen- 
 erally find the sharpest pains and most stubborn mala- 
 dies among them whom confidence in the force of natui'e 
 formerly betrayed to negligence or irregularity ; and that 
 superfluity of strength, which was at once their boast and 
 their snaie, has often, to the end, no other effect than 
 that it continues them long in impotence and anguish." — 
 R. No. 38. 
 
 The they and the first them ought to be those; the to 
 ought to be into. The two theirs and the last them ai'e 
 not absolutely faulty, but they do not cleai'ly enough re- 
 late to their antecedent. --~7 
 
 " Metissa brought with her an old maid, recommended 
 by her mother, who taught her all the arts of domestic , 
 management, and was, on every occasion, her chief agent I 
 and directress. They 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 with! 
 some brought from my wife's family." — R. No. 35. I 
 
 Here is perfect confusion and pell-mell! Which of thej 
 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 j 
 three? And who supplied the places of the servants? j 
 The meaning of the toords cleai-ly is that the servants j 
 themselves supplied the places. It is very rarely that we j 
 meet with so bad a sentence as this. J 
 
 " I shall not trouble you with a history of the strata- 
 gems practised upon my judgment, or the allvu'ements 
 tried upon my heai't, which, if you have, in any part of 
 your life, been acquainted with rural politics, you will 
 9
 
 194 Specimens of False Grammar. 
 
 easily conceive. Their arts have no great variety, they 
 think nothing worth their care but money." — R. No. 35. 
 
 "Their arts;" but?oAo.se arts? There is no antecedent, 
 except " rural politics f and thus, all this last sentence is 
 perfect nonsense. 
 
 " But the fear of not being approved as just copiers of 
 human manners is not the most important concern that 
 an author of this sort ought to have before him.^'' — R. 
 No. 4. 
 
 An author cannot be said to fear not to be approved 
 as just copiers. The word 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 man to 
 think he instructs him!" — R. No. 188. 
 
 Which of the txoo is allowed? The scholar or the no 
 man ? "Which of the two does he relate to ? Which of 
 the two does the hi^n relate to ? By a little reflection we 
 may come at the Doctor's meaning ; but if we 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 
 afifector of gi'eat excellencies, is that of a small cottage of 
 stone, to the palace raised with ice by the Empress of 
 Russia; it was, for a time, splendid and luminous, but 
 the first sunshine melted it to nothing." — R. No. 22. 
 
 ^Vhich, instead of it, would have made cleai' that which 
 is now dubious, for it may relate to cottage as well as to 
 palace ; or it may I'elate to state. 
 
 We do not now say excellencies, but excellences, for the singular is 
 excellence. Excellencies is the phiral of excellency, which is now sel- 
 dom used except as a t'tle of honor. It is the same kind of error 
 as Castlereagh's indulgencies, which you will see by-and-by. 
 
 " The love of retirement has, in all ages, adhered closely 
 to those minds which have been most enlarged by knowl-
 
 Specimens of FaUe Crratnmar. 195 
 
 ed^e, 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 lohat f The love of retirement, or everything ? 
 The Doctor means ha2)inness, but his words do not mean it. 
 
 "Those who enjoyed" ought to be "Those who have enjoyed ;" 
 because no particular time is mentioned. (See paragraph 261.) 
 
 " Yet there is a certain race of men that make it their 
 duty to hinder the reception of every woi-k of learning or 
 genius, who stand as sentinels in the avenues of fame, 
 and value themselves upon giving ignorance and envy the 
 first notice of a prey."" — R. No. 3. 
 
 That, or viho, may, as we have seen, be the relative of 
 a noun, which is the name of a rational being or beings; 
 but both cannot be used, applicable to the same noun in 
 the same sentence. Nor is " a prey " proper. I^rey has 
 no plural. It is Yikefat, meat, grease, garbage, and many 
 other words of that description. 
 
 " For, among all the animals upon which natui'e has 
 impressed deformity and horror, there was none xohom 
 he diu'st not encounter rather than a beetle." — R. No. 126. 
 
 Here ai*e tchom and v^hich 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 creatiu'es only. '■'■Horror'''' 
 is not a thing that can be impressed upon another thing 
 so as to be seen. HoiTor is 'a feeling of the mind; for, 
 though we say " horror was visible on his countenance,^^ 
 we clearly mean that the outward signs of honor were 
 visible. "We cannot see hoiTor as we can defor7>dty. It 
 should have been '•'•deformity and hideousness.'" 
 
 " To cull from the mass of mankind those individuals 
 upon which the attention ought to be most employed.'' — • 
 R. No. 4. 
 
 The antecedent belongs to rational beings, and, there- 
 fore, the lohich should have been whom.
 
 196 /Specimens of liaise Grammar. 
 
 " This determination led me to Metissa, the daughter 
 of Chrisophilus, ichose person was at least without de- 
 formity."— R. No. 35. 
 
 The person of ichich 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, that 
 all are equally vicious, is not to awaken judgment." — R. 
 No. 119. 
 
 Those persons 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 
 endeavor to deceive from them who are deceived." — 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, a 
 nominative. The antecedent, as you have seen, must be 
 taken into view. This antecedent, must be the persons, 
 understood; and then we have them persons are deceived. 
 
 " Reason, as to the power and principles of it, is the 
 common gift of God to man." — L. Introduction. 
 
 The it may relate to poxoer as well as to reason. There- 
 fore, it would have been better to say, " Reason, as to its 
 power and piinciples ;" for if clearness is always neces- 
 sary, how necessary must it be in the teaching of logic f 
 
 "All the prudence that any man exerts in his common 
 concerns of life." — L. Introduction. 
 
 Any m,an means, here, the same as 7nen in general, and 
 the concerns mean the concerns common to men in gen- 
 eral ; and therefore the article the should have been used 
 instead of the pronoun his.
 
 Specimens of False Grammar. 197 
 
 " It gives pain to the mind and memory, and exposes 
 the unskillful hearer to mingle the superior and inferior 
 particulai's together ; it leads them into a thick wood in- 
 stead of open daylight, and places them in a labyi'inth 
 instead of a plain path.'' — L. Pai't 4, Chap 2. 
 
 The grammar is clearly bad ; and the rhet07'ic is not 
 quite free from fault. Labyrinth is the opposite of plain 
 path, but open daylight is not the opposite of a thick 
 wood. Open plain would have been better than open 
 daylight; for open dayhght may exist along with a thick 
 wood. 
 
 VERBS. 
 
 " There ai'e many things which we every day see others 
 unable to perform, and, perhaps, have even miscarried 
 ourselves in attempting ; and yet can hardly allow 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. "^-n 
 
 "A man's eagerness to do that good, to tohich he is not 
 called, will betray him into crimes." — R. No. 8. 
 
 The man is not called to the good, but to do the good. 
 It is not my business, at this time, to criticise the opiniofis 
 of Doctor Johnson; but I cannot refrain from just re- 
 marking upon this sentence, that it contains the sum 
 total of passive obedience and nonresistaiice. It con- 
 demns all disinterested zeal and everything worthy of the 
 name of patriotism. 1 
 
 " We aie not compelled to toil through half a folio to 
 be convmced that the author has broke his promise." — R. 
 No. 1. 
 
 "The Muses, when they sung before the tin-one of 
 Jupiter."— R. No. 3. 
 
 In the first of these, the past time is used where the
 
 198 /Specimens of False Grammar. 
 
 passive participle ought to have been used ; and in the 
 second, the passive participle is used in the place of the 
 past time. Broken and sang were the proper words. 
 
 " My purpose was., after ten months more spent in com- 
 merce, to haue withdrawn my wealth to a safer country.'' 
 -^R. No. 120. 
 
 The purpose was present, and therefore it was his pur- 
 pose to xoithdraw 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 ed in praise, he must suffer in reproach.''^ 
 — R. No. 20. 
 
 Here is a complete confounding of times. Instead of 
 should, it should be ought to; and instead of enjoyed, it 
 should be may have enjoyed. The sense is bad, too ; for 
 how can a man suffer in reproach what he has enjoyed in 
 praise? 
 
 "He had taught himself to think riches more valua- 
 ble than natui-e designed them, and to expect from them 
 "— R. No. 20. 
 
 "I could prudently adventure an inseparable union.^^ — 
 R. No. 119. 
 
 "I propose to endeavor the entertainment of my coun- 
 trymen." — R. No. 1. 
 
 " 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 [transitive] verb given to it. De- 
 signed them to be; adventm'e on; endeavor to entertain; 
 attending to." To design a thing is to di'aw it; to 
 attend a thing is to wait on it. No case occui's to me, 
 at present, wherein adventure and endeavor can be active 
 [transitive] verbs; but, at any rate, they ought not to 
 have assumed the active office here. 
 
 "jT was not condemned in my youth to solitude, either
 
 /Specimens of liaise Graintnar. 199 
 
 by indigence or deformity, nor passed the earlier paxt of 
 life without the flattery of courtship." — 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. 
 
 "Anthea loas co7itent to call a. coach, and crossed the 
 brook."— R. No. 34. 
 
 It should be '■'■she crossed the brook." 
 
 "He will be welcomed with ardor, sinless he destroys 
 those recommendations by his faults." — R. No. 160. 
 
 "7/" he thinks his own iudgment not sufficiently en- 
 lightened, he may rectify his opinions." — R. No. 1. 
 
 '■'■If he finds, with all his industry, and all his artifices, 
 that he cannot deserve regai'd, or cannot obtain it, he may 
 let the design fall."— R. No. 1. 
 
 The subjunctive mode ought to be used in all these 
 three sentences. In the first, the meaning is, "unless he 
 shoidd destroy." In the last two, the Doctor is speaking 
 of his own undertaking ; and he means, " the author, if 
 he should think, if he shoidd find; may then rectify his 
 opinions; may then let fall his design." He therefore 
 should have wiitten, "if he think/ if he^fitid." > 
 
 "Follow solid argument wherever it leads you"' — 
 L. Part 3. 
 
 Wherever it may lead you, shall lead you, is meant; 
 and, therefore, the subjunctive mode was necessary. It 
 should have been, "wherever it lead you." 
 
 "See, therefore, that your general definitions, or de- 
 scriptions, are as accurate as the nature of the thing will 
 bear ; see that your general divisions and distributions be 
 just and exact; see that yom* axioms be sufficiently evi- 
 dent ; see that your principles be well drawn." — L. Part 4. 
 
 All these members are coirect, except the first, where 
 the verb is put in the indicative mode instead of the sitb- 
 junctive. All the four have the same turn ; they are all 
 in the same mode, or manner ; they should, therefore, all
 
 200 /Specimens of False Grammar. 
 
 have had the verb in the sam,e form,. They all required 
 the subjunctive form. 
 
 PARTICIPLES. 
 
 "Or, it is the drawing a conclusion, which was before 
 either unknown or dark." — L. Introduction. 
 
 It should be "the drawing of o. conclusion;" for, in 
 this case, the active participle becomes a noun. "The 
 acl of drawing " is meant, and clearly understood ; and we 
 cannot say, "the act draioing a conclusion." When the 
 article comes before, there must be the preposition after 
 the participle. To omit the preposition in such cases is 
 an error very common, and therefore I have noticed the 
 error in this instance, in order to put you on your guard. 
 
 ADVERBS. 
 
 "For thoughts are only criminal when they are first 
 chosen, and then voluntarily continued.'''' — R. N. 8. 
 
 The station, or place, of the adverb is a great matter. 
 The Doctor does not mean here that which his worlds 
 mean. He means that "thoughts are criminal, only when 
 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; 
 how that is possible; and also how we can continue a 
 thought, or how we can discontinue a thought at our vyill. 
 The science here is so very profound that we cannot see 
 the bottom of it. Swift says, " whatever is dark is deep. 
 Stir a puddle, and it is deeper than a well." Doctor 
 Johnson deals too much in this kind of profundity. 
 
 There is no word in our language more frequently misused than 
 this word oniy. People eonstantl)' write and speak such sentences
 
 Specimens of F'ulse Grammar. 201 
 
 as these ; "1 have only received ten dolhirs. He onlj^ sells leather. 
 He only speaks French;" and so on. The w^ord only must be 
 placed next to the vs^ord wluch it modifies : I have received only 
 ten dollars ; he sells only leather, or leather only ; he speaks only 
 French. As the sentences stand in the first instance, they do not 
 mean what they are intended to mean : the first means, only 
 received not spent or lost ; the second, only sells leather, never 
 buys any ; the third only speaks French, never writes it. 
 
 " I have heard hov) some critics have been pacified with 
 claret aud a supper, and others laid asleep with the soft 
 notes of flattery." — R. No. 1. 
 
 How means the manner in lohlch. As, '■'■JIow do you 
 do?" That is, '•/« what manner do you carry yourself 
 on"^ " But the Doctor tells us here, in other words, the 
 precise manner in which the critics were pacified. The 
 hoio, therefore, should have been that. 
 
 "I hope not much to tu'e those whom I shall not happen 
 to please." — R. No. 1. 
 
 He did not mean that he did not much hope, but that 
 he hoped not to tire much. "I hope I shall not much 
 tire those whom 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 ]xo^y far 
 to proceed in it and ichen to stop." — L. Part 4. 
 
 Doctor Watts is speaking here of writing. In such a 
 case an adverb, like how far, expressive of longitudinal 
 space, introduces a rhetorical figure; for the plain mean- 
 ing is, that judgment will dictate how much to icrite on it, 
 and not hoiofar to jjroceed in it. The figure, however, is 
 very proper, and much better than the literal words. 
 But when a figure is begun it should be carried on 
 throughout, which is not the case here; for the Doctor 
 begins with a figure of longitudinal space, and ends with 
 a figure of time. It should have been ^'- where to stop." 
 Or, "how long to px'oceed in it and %ohen 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 diflferent 
 9*
 
 202 Specimens of False Grammar. 
 
 t hin g from telling him hovi Jar he is to go and cohere he 
 is to stop. I have dwelt thus on this distinction, for the 
 purpose of putting you on the watch, and guarding you 
 against confounding figures. The less you use them the 
 better, till you understand more about them. 
 
 "jTn 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 multitude of circumstances, con- 
 curring to bear witness to it.'" — L. Part 3. 
 
 The adverb here is wholly unnecessary, and it does 
 harm. But what shall we say of the of it, and the to it ? 
 What is the antecedent of the it? Is matters of fact the 
 antecedent? Then them, 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! 
 Mind, my dear James, this sentence is taken from a 
 treatise on logic ! How necessary it is, then, for you to 
 be careful in the use of this powerful little word it! 
 
 PREPOSITIONS. 
 
 "And, as this practice is a commodious subject of rail- 
 lery to the gay, and of declamation to the serious, it has 
 
 been ridiculed " — R. No. 123. 
 
 With the gay ; for to the gay means that the raillery 
 is addressed to the gay, which was not the author's 
 meaning. 
 
 *' When I was deliberating to what new qualifications I 
 should aspiie." — R. No. 123. 
 
 With regard to, it ought to have been; for we cannot 
 deliberate a thing nor to a thing. 
 
 "If I am not commended /'o/" the beauty of my works, 
 I may hope to be pardoned ^br their brevity." — R. No. 1-
 
 iSpecimenit of liaise Gravmiar. 203 
 
 We may commend him for the beauty of his works 
 and we vaaj pardon himybr theii* 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 a little the antithesis; it would have unsettled 
 a little of the balance of that see-saio in which Dr. Johnson 
 so much delighted, and which, falling into the hands of 
 novel-writers and of Members of Parliament, has, by 
 moving unencumbered with any of the Doctor's reason or 
 sense, lulled so many thousands asleep! Dr. Johnson 
 created a race of writers and speakers. "Mi*. 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 hke this, be 
 sure that the person who speaks or writes it has been 
 reading Dr. Johnson, or some of his imitators. But, ob- 
 serve, these imitators go no further than the frame of the 
 sentence. They, in general, take special cai"e not to imi- 
 tate the Doctor in knowledge and reasoning. 
 
 I have now lying on the table before me forty-eight 
 errors, by Doctor Watts, in the use or omission of Prep- 
 ositions. I will notice but two of them ; the first is an 
 error of commission, the second of omission. 
 
 " When we would prove the importance of any scrip- 
 tural doctrine or duty, the multitude of texts wherein it 
 is repeated and inculcated upon the reader seems natu- 
 rally to insti'uct us that it is a matter of greater import- 
 ance than other things which aie but sUghtly or singly 
 mentioned in the Bible." — L. Part 3. 
 
 The words repeated and inculcated both apply to upon; 
 but we cannot repeat a thing ujion a reader, and the 
 words here used mean this. When several verbs or par- 
 ticiples are joined together by a copulative conjunction,
 
 204 Specimens of False Grammar. 
 
 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 manner, or for the purpose, or 
 on the object, designated by the other words of the sen- 
 tence. 
 
 The other instance of error in the use of the Preposi- 
 tion occurs in the yerjjirst sentence in the Treatise on 
 Logic. 
 
 " Logic is the art of using reason well in our inquiries 
 after truth, and the communication of it to others " — L. 
 Introduction. 
 
 The meaning of the words is this: that '■'■Logie is the 
 ai-t of using reason well in our inquiries 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 inqviiries after truth, and in the 
 communication of it to others ;" but, sui'ely, in a case like 
 this, no room for doubt, or for hesitation, ought to have 
 been left. Nor is "using reason welV a well-chosen 
 phrase. It may mean treating it xcell ; not ill-treating 
 it. '- Using reason properly or employing 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 unac- 
 quainted with that thing ; for as to those acquainted with 
 it, no definition was wanted. Clearness, everywhere de- 
 sirable, 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, there- 
 fore, thought those wiiters friends to human happiness 
 who endeavor to excite in either sex a general contempt 
 or suspicion of the other." — R. No. 149.
 
 Specimens of False Grammar. 205 
 
 The as is unnecessary ; or the therefore is unnecessary. 
 
 " But the happy historian has no other labor than of 
 gathering what tradition pours down before him." — R. 
 No. 122. 
 
 "Some have advanced, without due attention to the 
 consequences of this notion, that certain virtues have 
 their correspondent faults, and therefore to exhibit either 
 aj)art is to deviate from probability." — -R. No. 4. 
 
 "But if the power of example is so gieat 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 
 lohich is likely to operate so strongly should not be mis- 
 chievous or vmcertain 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 Doc- 
 tor wished to avoid putting tico 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, a useful thing, when we have a funda- 
 mental truth, we use the synthetic method to explain it." 
 — L. Part 4. 
 
 It should have been that we use, or to 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 words may be the 
 proper words to be used uj)on the occasion ; and yet, by 
 a misplaci7ig 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
 
 206 J^ecimens of liaise Grrammar. 
 
 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, hoviever uneasy, he could 
 not then escape, hy a kind introduction of the only sub- 
 ject on which I believed him to be able to speak with 
 propriety."— R. No. 126. 
 
 This is a very bad sentence altogether. ^^Hoioever uti- 
 easy,'^ appUes to assembly, and not to gentleman. Only 
 observe how easily this might have been avoided. " From 
 which he, hoicever uneasy, could not then escape." After 
 this we have "Ae could not then escape, by a kind int7\>- 
 dtcctiony 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 beUeved 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, fronx 
 which he, however uneasy, could not then escape," 
 
 " Reason is the glory of human nature, and one of the 
 chief eminences whereby we are raised above oui' fellow- 
 creatuies, the brutes, in this lower worlds — L. Introduc- 
 tion. 
 
 1 have before showed an error in i\iQjirst sentence of 
 Doctor Watt's work. This is the second sentence. The 
 words, " in this lower world,'"' are not words misplaced 
 only; they are wholly unnecessary, and they do great 
 harm; for they do these two things: first, they imply 
 that there are brutes in the higher world; and, second, 
 they excite a doubt, whether %ce are raised above those 
 brutes. 
 
 I might, my dear James, greatly extend the number of 
 my extracts from both these authors ; but, these, I ti'ust, 
 are enough. I had noted down about two hundred errors 
 in Doctor Johnson's Lives of the Poets ; but afterwards
 
 /Specimens of liaise Q-rammar. 207 
 
 perceiving that he had revised aud corrected the Kambleb 
 with extraordinary care, I chose to make my extracts 
 from that work rather thau fi'om the Lives of the Poets. 
 
 DOUBLE-NEGATIVE AND ELLIPSIS. 
 
 Before I dismiss the si)ecimens o£ bad grammar, I wiU 
 just take, from Tull, a seuteuce nvhich contains striking 
 instances of the misapplication of Negatives, and of the 
 J^llipsis. In our language two negatives applied to the 
 same verhy or to the same words of any sort, amount to an 
 affinnative; as, " J)o not give him none of jour money." 
 That is to say, ^^Glne him some of your money," though 
 the contrary is meant. It should be, "Z>o not give him 
 any of yom* 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 requu'ed ; as, '•'■Neither Rich- 
 ai'd 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, ap- 
 plied to the same verb, destroy the negative eifect of each 
 other. "I will noi ?«eyer write." This is the contrary of 
 "I xcill never write." 
 
 The Ellipsis, of which I spoke in Letter XIX, paragraph 
 227, ought to be used with great care. Read that para- 
 graph again ; and then attend to the following sentence of 
 Mr. Tull, which I select in order to show you that vei-y 
 fine thoughts may be greatly marred by a too free use of 
 the EUipsis. 
 
 "It is strange that no author should neoer have wi-itten 
 fidly of the fabric of ploughs ! Men of greatest learning 
 have spent their time in contriving instruments to measure
 
 208 ^ecimens of Kalse Grammar. 
 
 the immense distance of the stars, and in finding out the 
 dimensions and even weight of the planets. They think 
 it more eligible to study the art of ploughing the sea 
 with ships than of tilling the land with ploughs. They 
 bestow the utmost of theu' 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 ai'm death with new 
 engines of horror, and inventing an infinite variety of 
 slaughter; but think it beneath men of learnmg (who 
 only are capable of doing it) to employ their learned 
 labors in the invention of new, or even improving the 
 old, instruments ^/br increasing of bread." 
 
 You see the never ought to be ever. You see that the 
 the is left out before the word greatest, and again before 
 weight, and, in this last-mentioned instance, the leaving 
 of it out makes the words mean the '''■even weight;" that 
 IS to say, not the odd weight ; instead of " even the 
 weight," as the author meant. The pronoun that is left 
 out before "of tilling ;" before destruction, the article 
 the IS again omitted i in is left out before inventing, and 
 also before improving; and, at the close, the is left out 
 before increasing. To see so fine a sentence marred in 
 this way is, I hope, quite enough to guai'd you against 
 the frequent commission of similar errors. 
 
 We of tea see the word alone wrongly used for only; as, "To 
 which 1 am not alone bound by honor, but by law ;" but Mr. Tull 
 OSes only instead of alone. He should have said, "who alone are 
 capable of doing it."
 
 Errors and Nonsense, etc. 209 
 
 LETTER XXII. 
 
 ERRORS AND NONSENSE IN A KING's SPEECH. 
 
 My dear James: 
 
 In my fii'st Letter, I obsei'ved to you that to the func- 
 tions of statesmen and legislators was due the highest 
 respect which could be shown by man to anything human ; 
 but I, at the same time, observed that, as the degree and 
 quality of our respect rose in proportion to the influence 
 which the different branches of knowledge natui'ally had 
 in the affairs and on the conditions of men, so, in cases of 
 imperfection in knowledge, or of negligence in the appli- 
 cation of it, or of its perversion to bad pm-poses, all the 
 feelings opposite to that of respect rose in the same pro- 
 portion ; and to one of these cases I have now to direct 
 your attention 
 
 The speeches of the king are read by him to the Parlia- 
 ment. They are composed by his ministers or select 
 councillors. They are documents of great importance, 
 treating of none but weighty matters; they are always 
 Btyled Most Gracious, and ai"e heard and answered witk 
 the most profound respect. 
 
 The persons who settle upon what shall be the topics 
 of these speeches, and who diaw the speeches up, are a 
 Lord High Chancellor, a First Lord of the Treasury, a 
 Lord President of the Council, thi'ee Secretaries of State, 
 a Fii'st Lord of the Admii-alty, a Master Genenal of the 
 Ordnance, a Chancellor of the Exchequer, and perhaps 
 one or two besides. These persons ai'e called, when 
 spoken of in a body, the Ministri/. They are all members 
 ot the kings constitutional coimcil, 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
 
 210 Errors and Nonsense 
 
 "a nohle^ honorable, 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 some- 
 thing very near to perfection in point of judgment and of 
 practical talent. 
 
 How destitute of judgment and of practical talent these 
 persons have been, in the capacity of statesmen and of 
 legislators, the present miserable and perilous state of 
 England amply demonstrates; and I am now about to 
 show you that they are equally destitute in the capacity 
 of writers. There is some poet who says, 
 
 " Of all the arts in wliich the learn'd excel, 
 The first in rank is that of loriting well. " * 
 
 And though a man may possess great knowledge, as a 
 statesman and as a legislator, without being able to per- 
 form what this poet would call writing well; yet, surely, 
 we have a right to expect in a minister the capacity of 
 being able to write grammatically ; the capacity of put- 
 ting his own meaning clearly down upon paper. But, in 
 the composing of a king's speech, it is not one man, but 
 nine men, whose judgment and practical talent are em- 
 ployed. A king's speech is, too, a very short piece of 
 writing. The to^Dics aie all distinct. Very little is said 
 upon each. There is no reasoning. It is all plain matter 
 of fact, or of simple observation. The thing is done with 
 all the 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 obsen^e upon; and 
 when no one has anything 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 perfection can 
 be expected, we have a right to expect it in a king's 
 
 • Of all those arts in which the wise excel, 
 Nature's chief ma.sterpiece is writing well. 
 
 Sheffield, Earl of Bitckinghamshire.
 
 Jn a King's Speech. 211 
 
 speech. You shall now see, then, what pretty stuff is 
 put together, and delivered to the Parliament, under the 
 name of king's speeches. 
 
 The speech which I am about to examine is, indeed, a 
 speech of the regent ; but I might take«any other of these 
 speeches. I choose tbis 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. 
 
 *• My Lords and Gentlemen : It is with deep regret that 
 / am again obliged to announce the continuance of his 
 majesty's lamented indisposition." 
 
 Even in this short sentence there is something equiv- 
 ocal; for it 7nay be that the prince's regret aiises from 
 his being obliged to announce, and not from the thing 
 annoimced. If he had said, "With deep regret I an- 
 nounce," 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 give7i me great satisfaction to have been 
 enabled to communicate to you the termination of the war 
 between this country and the United States of America." 
 
 The double compound times of the verbs, in the first 
 part of the sentence, make the wo^^ds mean that it would, 
 before the prince came to the House, have given him gi'eat 
 satisfaction to be enabled to communicate; whereas he 
 meant, " It would now have given me great satisfaction to 
 be enabled to communicate." In the latter pai't of the 
 sentence we have a httle nonsense. What does termina- 
 tion mean? It means, in this case, end or conclusioii; 
 and thus the prince wished to communicate an end to the 
 wise men by whom he was siuTounded ! To communicate 
 is to impart to another any thing that we have in our 
 possession or within our power. And so, the prince 
 wished to impart the end to the noble lords and honorable 
 gentlemen. He might wish to impart, or communicate
 
 212 Errors and Nonsense 
 
 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 termination of a battle, and carried it 
 to Carlton House and communicated it to the prince? 
 We should laugh at our informant's ignorance of gram- 
 mar, 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 neighbors ? To act thus would bee my dear son, a 
 base abandonment of our reason, which is, to use the 
 words of Dr. Watts, the common gift of God to man. 
 
 ^'^ Although this war originated in the most unprovoked 
 aggression on tlie part of the Government of the United 
 States, and was calculated to promote the designs of the 
 common enemy of Europe against the rights and inde- 
 pendence of all other nations, I never have ceased to 
 entertain a sincere desire to bring it to a conclusion on 
 Just atid honorable terms.'''' 
 
 The the most would lead us to suppose that there had 
 been more than one aggression, and that the war origi- 
 nated in the most vmprovoked of them; whereas the 
 prince's meaning was that the aggi*ession was an unpro- 
 voked one, unprovoked in the superlative degree; and 
 that, therefore, it was a tnost 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 wanting to make peace on unjust and dis- 
 honorable terms because the enemy had been the ag- 
 gressor? He might, indeed, wish to make it on terms
 
 In a King's Speech. 213 
 
 dishouorable, aiid 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 unpro- 
 voked, would give him a right to do injustice? Yet, if 
 he do not mean this, what does he mean ? Perhaps (for 
 there is no certainty) he may mean that he wishes to 
 bring the war to a conclusion as soon as he can get just 
 and honorable terms from the enemy y' but, then, what is 
 he to do with the although? Let us try this: "I am 
 ready," say you, "to make peace, if you loill give me just 
 terms, although you are the aggressor.''' To be sure you 
 are, whether J be the aggressor or not! All that you can 
 possibly have the face to ask of me is justice; and, there- 
 fore, why do you connect your wish for peace with this 
 althottgh? Either you mean that my aggression gives 
 you a right to demand of me more than justice, or you 
 talk nonsense. Nor must we overlook the word " govern- 
 ment" which is introduced here. In the sentence before, 
 the prmce wished to communicate the end of the war 
 between '''•this country and the United States;''"' but in. 
 this sentence we ai'e at war with "the Government of the 
 United States." This was a poor trick of sophistry, and 
 as such we will let it pass; only observing that such 
 low trickery is not very becoming in men selected from 
 "a noble, honorable, and reverend assembly." 
 
 "I am still engaged in negotiations for this purpose." 
 
 That is, the purpose of bringing the war to a conclusion. 
 A very good pui-pose; but why still? He had not told 
 his nobles and his boroughmen that he had been engaged 
 in negotiations. Even this short, simple sentence covdd 
 not be made without fault. 
 
 "The success of them must, however, depend on my 
 disposition being met with corresponding sentiments on 
 the part of the enemy." 
 
 Now, suppose I were to say, " My wagon was met with 
 Mr. Tredw ell's coach." Would you not tliink that some-
 
 214 Errors and Nonsense 
 
 body liad met the wagon and coach, both going together 
 the same way? To be sure you would. But if I were to 
 say, "My wagon was met by Mr. Tredwell's coach," you 
 would think that they had approached each other from 
 different spots. And, therefore, the prince should have 
 Baid, "met 6y." This sentence, however, short as it hap- 
 jjUy is, is too long to be content with one en'or. Dispo- 
 sition, in this sense of the word, means state, or bent, or 
 temper, of mind; and the word sentiments means thoughts, 
 or opifiions. So, here we have a temper of mind met by 
 thoughts. Thoughts may correspond or agree with a tem- 
 per of mind ; but how are they to meet it ? If the prince 
 had said, " My disposition being met by a coiTCsponding 
 disposition on the part of the enemy," he would have 
 uttered plain and dignified language. 
 
 "The operations of his majesty's forces by sea a7id 
 land in the Chesapeake, in the course of the present year, 
 have been attended with most brilHant and successful 
 results." 
 
 Were there only the bad placing of the different mem- 
 bers of this sentence, the fault would be sufficient. But 
 we do not know whether the prince means operations by 
 sea and land, ov forces by sea and land. 
 
 It seems to me there is another en"or here. The prince speaks 
 of operations of "forces by sea and land in the Chesapeake." The 
 Chesapeake is a bay. How can there be operations of forces by 
 land in tlie Chesapeake? Does he mean the operations of the forces 
 when they got to the bottom of the bay ? 
 
 " The flotilla of the enemy in the Patuxent has been 
 destroyed. The signal defeat of their land forces enabled 
 a detachment of his majesty's army to take possession ot 
 the city of Washington ; and the spii'it of enterprise, which 
 has characterized all the movements in this quarter, has 
 produced on the inhabitants a deep and sensible impres- 
 sion of the calamities of a war in which they have been so 
 wantonly involved."
 
 In a King's Speech. 215 
 
 Enemy is not a noun of multitude, like gang or Iloust 
 of Commona, or den of thieves; and, therefore, when used 
 in the singular, must have singular pronouns and verbs 
 to agree with it. Their, in the second of these sentences, 
 should have been his. A sensible impression is an impres- 
 sion felt; a deep impression is one more felt. Therefore 
 it was "a sensible and deejy impression." But, mdeed, 
 sensible had no business there ; for an impression that is 
 deep must be sensible. What would you think of a man 
 who should say, " I have not only been stabbed, but my 
 skin, has been cut f Why, you would thiak, to be sure, 
 that he must be a man selected from the noble, honorable, 
 and reverend assembly at Whitehall ! 
 
 . " The expedition directed fi"om Halifax to the northern 
 coast of the United States has terminated in a manner 
 not less satisfactory."' 
 
 Than what? The prince has told us, before this, of 
 nothing that has terminated satisfactorily. He has talked 
 of a brilliant result, and of an impression made on the 
 inhabitants; but of no termination has he talked; nor 
 has he said a word about satisfaction. W^e must always 
 take care how we use, in one sentence, words which refer 
 to anything said in former sentences. 
 
 " The successful coui-se of this operation has been fol- 
 lowed by the immediate submission of the extensive and 
 important district east of the Penobscot river to his maj- 
 esty's arm:<.'''' 
 
 This sentence is a disgrace even to a ministry Avith a 
 Jenkinson at its head. "S^Tiat do they mean by a course 
 hemg followed by a submission? And then, '•'■ has been 
 followed by the immediate submission"?" One would 
 think that some French emigrant priest was employed to 
 wiite this speech. He, indeed, would say, "a ete suivie 
 par la soumission immediate." But when we make use 
 of any word Hke immediate, which carries us back to the 
 time and scene of action, we must use the past tinie of
 
 216 071 Putting Sentences l^ogether, 
 
 the verb, and say, '■'■was followed by the immediate sub- 
 luission." That is to say, was then followed by the then 
 immediate ; and not has now been followed by the then 
 immediate submission. The close of this sentence exhibits 
 a fine instance of want of skill in the placing of the parts 
 of a sentence. Could these noble and reverend persons 
 find no place but the end for " to his majesty^ s arms V 
 There was, but they could not see it, a place made on 
 purpose, after the word submission. 
 
 It is unnecessary, my dear James, for me to proceed 
 fm-ther with an exposui-e 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 
 A\ill you be at all siu'prised at this, if ever you should 
 hear those persons uttering their oton speeches in those 
 places which, when you were a naughty little boy, you 
 used to call the '■'Thieves' Houses.'" If you should ever 
 hear them there, stammering and repeating and putting 
 forth then- nonsense, your wonder will be, not that they 
 Avrote a king's speech so badly, but that they contrived to 
 put upon paper sentences sufficiently grammatical to en- 
 able us to guess at the meaning. 
 
 LETTER XXIII. 
 
 on putting sentences togethek, and on figurative 
 language. 
 My dear James: 
 
 I have now done with the subject of grammai', which, 
 as you know, teaches us to use words in a proper manner. 
 But though you now, I hope, understand how to avoid 
 eiTor in the forming of sentences, I think it right not to 
 conclude my instructions without saying a few words 
 upon the subject of adding sentence to sentence, and on 
 the subject of figurative language.
 
 and on Figurative Language 217 
 
 Language is made use of for one of three pui-posea; 
 namely, to iufoi-m, to convince, or to persuade. The 
 first, requii'ing merely the talent of telling what we know, 
 is a matter of little difficulty. The second demands rea- 
 soning. The third, besides reasoning, demands all the 
 aid that we can obtain from the use of figures of speech, 
 or, as they are sometimes called, figures of rhetoric, which 
 last word means the power of persuasion. 
 
 Whatever may be the pm-pose for which we use lan- 
 guage, it seldom can happen that we do not stand in 
 need of more than one sentence; and, therefore, others 
 must be added. There is no precise rule; there can be 
 no precise rule, with regard to the manner of doing this. 
 WTien 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 cai-e, that if any words in a 
 sentence relate, in any way, to words that have gone be- 
 fore, 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 youi" thoughts. Sit down to write what you have 
 thought, and not to think ichat you shall write. Use the 
 first words that occur to you, and never attempt to alter 
 a thought; for that which has come of itself into yom* 
 mind is likely to pass into that of another more readily 
 aaid with more effect than anything which you can, by 
 reflection, invent. 
 
 Never stop to make choice of words. Put down your 
 thought in words just as they come. Follow the order 
 which yoTir 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 the order 
 of their coming is, in almost every case, the best possible 
 10
 
 218 On Putting Sentences Together, 
 
 order that they can have on paper; yet, if you have 
 several in youi* mind, rising above each other in point of 
 force, the most forcible will natui'ally come the last upon 
 paper. 
 
 Mr. Lindley MvuTay gives rides about long sentences 
 and short sentences, and about a due mixture of long and 
 short; and he also gives i-ules about the letters that sen- 
 tences should begin with, and the syllables that they 
 should €7id with. Such rules might be very well if we 
 were to sing om- wiiting; but when the use of writing 
 is to infortn, to convince., or to persuade, what can it 
 have to do with such rules ? 
 
 There are certain connecting words which it is of im- 
 portance 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 im- 
 properly 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 then* strictly literal sense. 
 For example: "Well, then, I will not do it." llieii, 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 "//?- that case." You 
 have only to accustom yom-self a little to rellect on the 
 meaning of these words; for that will soon teach you 
 never to employ them improperly. 
 
 A writmg, or written discourse, is generally broken into 
 paragraphs. When a new paragraph should begin, the 
 nature of your thoughts must tell you. The proj)riety of 
 it will be pointed out to you by the difference between 
 the thoughts that are coming and those which have gone
 
 and on Figurative Language. 211) 
 
 before. It is impossible to frame rules for regulating 
 such divisions. "Wlien 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, Avhen he comes to write, he has no other guide for 
 the distribution of his matter into sentences and para- 
 graphs 
 
 Never xcrite about any matter that you do not well 
 understand. If you cleai'ly 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 speak- 
 ing is this : the using of many words to say little. In 
 order to guai'd yourself against this fault, inquire what 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 most likely 
 find that the amount is very small; but, at any rate, when 
 you get it, you will then be able to examine it, and to tell 
 what it is worth. A very few examinations of this sort 
 will so frighten you, that you will be forever after upon 
 yoTir guaid against talking a great deal and saying little. 
 
 Figurative language is very fine when properly em- 
 ployed; but figvu'es of rhetoric ai'e edge-tools, and two- 
 edged tools, too. Take care how you touch them ! They 
 are called Jigxires., because they represent other things 
 than the words in their literal meaning stand for. For 
 instance: "The tyiants oppress and starve the people. 
 The people would live amidst abundance, if those cormo- 
 rants did not" devour ih.Q fruit of their labor." I shall 
 only observe to you, upon this subject, that, if you use 
 figru-es of rhetoric, you ought to take care that they do 
 not make nonsense of what you say; nor excite the ridi- 
 cule of those to whom you write. ]\Ir. Murray, in an 
 address to his students, tells them " that he is about to 
 ofi"er them some advice with retrard to their future walks
 
 220 On Puttiug Sentences Together, 
 
 ill 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 shajie, and such a walk is wider than a 
 path. He, in another part of this addi'ess, tells them 
 that they are in the morning of life, anc" that that is the 
 season for exertion. The morniag, my dear James, is not 
 a season. The year, indeed, has seasons, but the day has 
 none. If he had said the sjyring of hfe, 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, ariived at the last paragraph 
 of my treatise, and I hope that, when you arrive at it, 
 you will understand grammar sufficiently to enable you 
 to write without committing frequent and glaring errors. 
 I shall now leave you, for about four months, to read and 
 write English ; to jjractise 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 lan- 
 guage 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 
 resoirrce 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 piu"se-proud man of yes- 
 terday a crawling sycophant to-day. Health, without 
 which Ufe is not worth having, you will hardly fail to 
 secure by early rising, exercise, sobriety, and abstemious- 
 ness as to food. Happmess, or misery, is in the mind. 
 It is the mind that lives ; and the length of life ought to 
 be measui-ed by the number and importance of our ideas, 
 and not by the number of our days. JNever, therefore, 
 esteem men merely on account of their riches or theii 
 station. Respect goodness, find it where you may. 
 Honor talent wherever you behold it unassociated with 
 Tice ; but honor it most when accompanied with exertion.
 
 and OH Figurative Language. 221 
 
 aiid especially when exerted in the cause of truth and 
 justice ; and, above all things, hold it in honor when it 
 steps forward to protect defenceless innocence against 
 the attacks of powerful guilt. 
 
 It is true that figures are edge-tools; but even edge-tools are 
 perfectly safe in the hands of those who know how to use them. 
 And with a little care and attention, anybody of common under- 
 standing may learn how to use the ordinary figures of rhetoric, 
 which are powerful auxiliaries in rendering speech effective. 
 There is nothing that impresses like figures. They are edge-tools 
 in another sense ; for they cut like swords and wound like daggers. 
 Daniel O'Connell once silenced a troublesome opponent by sud- 
 denly turning on him and exclaiming : "Sit down, you pestiferous 
 ramcat I " Lord Chatham finely designates the corrupt govern- 
 ment contractor and jobber as ''that blood-sucker, that muck- 
 worm that calls itself 'the friend of government.'" "One 
 should never take a vacation till the sexton gives him one,'' 
 is far more forcible than "One should never cease working till 
 death." Instead of saying that one must not express high, noble 
 thoughts before low, vulgar people, how much more expressive it 
 is to say, "Do not cast pearls before swine." When Daniel Webster 
 said of Alexander Hamilton, " lie smote the rock of the national 
 resources, and abundant streams of revenue burst forth; he 
 touched the dead corpse of public credit, and it sprang upon its 
 feet!" he uttered something far more impressive, far more forcible 
 and beautiful, than if he had merely declared that Hamilton had 
 improved the finances and strengthened the public credit of the 
 country. Everybody, the most illiterate as well as the most 
 learned, uses figures. The illiterate man uses them unconsciously; 
 and so does the learned man in the ardor of speech ; in fact, most 
 people use them, and ought to use them, unconsciously; that is, 
 without thinking that they are using figures. When a person 
 exclaims, on seeing a large, fat man coming along, " Here comes 
 Jumbo!" he never thinks that he is using a figure; and I have no 
 doubt that even Cobljett himself, when he said that figures are 
 edge-tools, never suspected that he was using a figure. Our 
 greatest writers, especially the poets, are full of figures. Shakes- 
 peare bristles with them ; his works have more figures, and more 
 happily-used figures, than perhaps those of any other author. In 
 Macbeth alone there are figures of almost every description. Just 
 count the fiarures in the murder scene and in the interview between
 
 222 On Putting Sentences Together, 
 
 Macbeth and his wife after the murder, and you will be amazed 
 at their number and variety. 
 
 Of course, I do not pretend, in these few words at the end of the 
 book, to teach you all about figures of rhetoric; but I wish to give 
 you an idea of what they are, that you may not be entirely ignorant 
 of the matter. 
 
 Though rhetoricians give names to a great number of deviations 
 from the ordinaiy mode of expression, there are just about a dozen 
 figures of rhetoric whose nature and use are worth studying. The 
 others are common turnings and v/indings in language, in which 
 nobody ever makes a mistake ; but which, closely regarded, are 
 made out to be figures, and dubbed with hard Greek names, the 
 knowledge of which is of no possible use. Hence Butler's famous 
 couplet . 
 
 " For all a rhetorician's rules 
 Teach nothing but to name his tools." 
 
 Of these dozen figures, the most common are the metaphor and 
 the SIMILE. Definitions are hard, and sometimes very unsatisfac- 
 tory, but when I say that the sentence " Doctor Johnson was a 
 gnarled oak" contains a metaphor, and that the sentence " Doctor 
 Johnson was like a gnarled oak " contains a simile, you will see 
 at once what both are. "He is a lion," contains a metaphor; 
 "he is like a lion" contains a simile. The metaphor is sometimes 
 called an abridged simile, for it is putting one thing for another 
 which it resembles, instead of saying it is like it. The simile is 
 always introduced by the words like, or so, or words of similar 
 import. "Charity, like the sun, brightens all it shines upon. A 
 metaphor, like a beam of light, brightens and enlivens its object 
 whenever it is used." When somebody cried out at the battle of 
 Quebec, "They fly! they fly!" and General Wolff asked, "Who 
 fly?" both used a figure; for men can only flee, not flj'. When a 
 little boy calls out, " Look at that frog! I will let this stone fly at 
 his head!" he uses a figure; so that, long before he knows what 
 metaphors are, he learns to use them rightly enough. Look at 
 Coleridge's sentences about Cobbett, on page 210 of the Life, and 
 you will find quite a number of metaphors. 
 
 There is another figure, called metonymy, which looks, at first 
 sight, like the metaphor; but which, on closer inspection, will be 
 found to be essentially different. While the metaphor is really a 
 departure from the ordinary form of speech, metonymy, which is 
 termed a change of names, is one of the most ordinary expressions. 
 " The kettle boOs ; the lamp burns; he smokes his pipe." Now, is
 
 and on Figurative Langttage. 223 
 
 it the kettle that boils, or the ^r>ater in it? the lamp that burns, or 
 the oil? We use these expressions witlioul ever thinlcing tliat we 
 are using figurative language, for it is not a departure from the 
 ordinary form of speecli, it is everyday speech, everyday and 
 common language. But, when we say, "Experience Is the lamp 
 by which my feet are guided;" or " We shall never light the pipe 
 of peace until our riglits are restored;" or "This was the rock on 
 which he split;" the language rises at once in force and impress- 
 ivcness, and we feel that there is a deviation from the common 
 mode of expression. The former is metonymy, and the latter 
 metaphor. "He is fond of his bottle; he drank three glasses ; he 
 keeps a good table ;" these, you see, are merely a change of names. 
 "The gin-palace is the recruiting-shop for the penitentiary ; Senator 
 Conkling sawed off the limb on which he sat; the politicians are 
 hungry for office, for they have been fasting for twenty years;" 
 these are metaphors, and you see they convey a picture to the 
 mind which no other words can convey so well. 
 
 An ALLEGORY is a sort of continued metaphor, by which an 
 imaginary'' history with a veiled meaning maj' be told. Macaulay 
 says Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress is the finest allegory which has 
 been produced in two thousand years. For another fine example, 
 see 80th Psalm. 
 
 Pebsonifioation is the giving of L'fe to inanimate things, or the 
 giving of speech and reason to objects, insects, and animals, as in 
 fables. Cobbett's story of the quarrel in the pot-shop has good 
 examples of this figure. To personify is to speak, for instance, of 
 winter and war as of a man ; of spring and peace as of a woman. 
 " Lol steel-clad War his gorgeous standard rears !" 
 
 " How sleep the brave, who sink to rest 
 By all their country's wishes blest I 
 When Spring, with dewy fingers cold, 
 Returns to deck their hallowed mould. 
 She there shall dress a sweeter sod 
 Than Fancy's feet have ever trod." 
 
 There is another form of personification, a lower form, in which 
 we give the qualities of beings to inanimate objects : we sometimes 
 speak of a raging storm, a cruel disease, a remorseless sword, a 
 scornful lip, a dying lamp, the smiling harvest, the thirsty ground, 
 & fearless pen, the babbling brook. 
 
 Syitecdoche is taking a part for the whole, or the whole for a 
 part; as. He has a keen eye; he has seen eighty winters; all the 
 world runs after him. 
 
 Intkrkogation is asking a question which does not need an
 
 224 On 'Putting Sentences Together, 
 
 answer; as, Can any man count the stars? Will not the Judge of 
 all the earth do right? This is a favorite figure in oratory. 
 
 Exclamation is the uttering of some expression of surprise, or of 
 some emotion of the mind , as. What a piece of work is man ! how 
 noble in reason ! how infinite in faculties! Would that some good 
 angel had put Cobbett's grammar into that boy's hands! 
 
 Irony is saying the opposite of what one means; as, Cobbett 
 was remarkable for his meekness and humility! John Bull's Ad- 
 dress to Brother Jonathan (par. 214) is a good example. See also 
 page 193 of the Life. Here is another example : 
 
 " So goes the world ;-if wealthy, you may call 
 
 T7iis, friend ; t/iat, brother;— friends and brothers all. 
 
 Though you are worthless, witless : never mind it : 
 
 You may have been a stable-boy— what then i 
 
 'Tis wealth, good sir, makes honorable men."'' 
 
 Antithesis is the comparing or placing in contrast of opposite 
 qualities : as. Though poor, yet proud ; though submissive, gay. 
 Tlie prodigal robs his heir, the miser robs himself. Antithesis is 
 closely allied to epigram, which is a short, pithy saying; aa, 
 When you liave nothing to say, say it. Wendell Phillips is noted 
 for his epigrammatic style. 
 
 Hyperbole is some extravagant expression, employed to heighten 
 the impression conveyed. Macbeth says that the great ocean will 
 not wash his hand clean from the blood-stains on it, but that his 
 hand will rather incarnadine the great ocean ; while Lady Macbeth 
 says that "all the sweets of Arabia will not sweeten this little 
 hand." Antony's declaration that if he were an orator like 
 Brutus, he would "make the stones of Rome rise in mutiny," is 
 another good example. " Rivers of waters run down mine eyes," 
 13 the Psalmist's fine figure. 
 
 Apostrophe is a sudden turning off from the subject of dis- 
 course to address some absent or dead person or thing as present. 
 When the news of Lord Byron's death came to England, John Jay, 
 the famous preacher, spoke of him and his works in his pulpit; 
 then he suddenly turned and addressed him as if he were present : 
 *'0 Byron, hadst thou listened to the words of soberness and 
 truth; hadst thou followed the counsels of the wise and good; 
 hadst thou repressed thy passions, formed nobler aims and pursued 
 a nobler ideal of life, what a different tale we would have had to 
 tell! what a different example, for all generations, thy life would 
 have afforded!" His apostrophe was something like this; it is 
 twenty-five years since I read it, I give it as I remember it; I
 
 and on Figurative Language. 225 
 
 only know it made a deep impression on me at the time. And 
 Byron himself, ni his wonderful Childe Harold, gives us perhaps 
 the finest apostrophe in our language. He is speaking of the 
 ocean, when he suddenly turns and addresses it in those noble 
 lines beginning : 
 
 . ' Roll on, thou deep and dark blue Ocean— roll I 
 Ten thousand fleets sweep over thee in vain. 
 Man marks the earth with ruin— his control 
 Stops with the shore." 
 
 Climax is rising from one point to another till the highest 
 is reached, or descending from one point to another till the 
 lowest is reached. I have read somewhere this capital example, 
 which is said to be from a sermon on Christian progress by a 
 negro preacher : "If you cannot fly, run ; if you cannot run, walk; 
 if you cannot walk, crawl; if you cannot crawl, loorm it along!" 
 
 Alliteeation is the repeating of the same letter at the beginning 
 of each of two or more words in the same line or sentence. 
 
 " Begot hy butchers and by bishops bred, 
 How high his highness holds his haughty head." 
 
 "An Austrian army, awfully arrayed. 
 Boldly by battery besiege Belgrade." 
 
 Besides these, there are figures of etymology and figures of 
 SYNTAX. The former are hardly worth mentioning, being simply 
 such changes in words as o'er for oner, tho' for thmigh, 'gainst for 
 against, His for it is, withouten for without, enchain for cliain, and a 
 few similar ones, all of which are called by the hardest of Greek 
 names. These figures are simply deviations from the usual orthog- 
 raphy of words, and are sometimes called figures of orthography. 
 The figures of syntax are four in number: ellipsis, pleonasm, 
 ENALLAGE, and HYPERBATON. The first, which has already been 
 explained, consists, you will remember, in leaving understood 
 some word or words; as, "This is the man I mean," instead of 
 "whom I mean." Pleonasm is the opposite of this; that is, the 
 using of superfluous words ; and the most common example of it 
 is in the use of the word got. ' ' What have you got ? I have got 
 a book; you have got a horse." These ^'f^ may all be left out. 
 The Bible is full of this figure, as indeed of all figures; as, " There 
 shall not be left one stone upon another that shall not be thrown 
 down. Oh ye inhabitants of the world, and dwellers on the earth !" 
 Enallage may be said to be the name given to the grammatical 
 mistakes which the poets are allowed to make, on account of the 
 shackles in which they are obliged to walk. In Leigh Hunt's 
 poem, " The Glove and the Lions," occur these lines: 
 10*
 
 226 On Putting Sentences Together, 
 
 " De Lorge's love o'erheard the king, a beauteous, lively dame. 
 With dark bright eyes, which always seemed the same" 
 
 Now, according to the rules of grammar, these lines declare that 
 the king was a beauteous, lively dame ; but the poet was obliged 
 to write thus for the sake of the rhyme. This is called enallage. 
 Milton's ' ' Beelzebub than whom " may also be called enallage. 
 HjTjerbaton is somewhat similar to inversion, which latter con- 
 sists in placing the predicate or the object before the subject ; as, 
 In came the king ; down fell the supplicant ; him I adore. Inver- 
 sion is used to give force and emphasis to an expression; but 
 hyperbaton is simply the transposition of a word or words for the 
 sake of the measure; as, "While its song rolls the woods along," 
 instead of "While its song rolls along the woods." 
 
 There is no better example of an awkward blunder in the use of 
 figures than that of the man who prayed that ' ' the word which had 
 been preached might be like a nail driven in a sure place, sending 
 its roots downward and its branches upward, spreading itself like a 
 green bay-tree, fair as the moon, clear as the sun, and terrible as an 
 army with banners 1 " A wonderful nail, indeed, this would be. 
 Lord Cockburn, in his Memoirs, tells of a man who, on being asked 
 at a public dinner to give a toast, exclaimed: " Here's to the moon, 
 shining on the calm bosom of a lake ! " The man thought, no 
 doubt, that he was saving something figurative and fine. Franklin, 
 in a toast he gave at a diplomatic dinner at Versailles, made use of 
 the sun and moon in a very different manner. The British minister 
 began witli : " George III, who, like the sun in his meridian, spreads 
 a luster throughout and enlightens the world." The French minister 
 followed with : "Louis XVI, wlio, like the moon, sheds his mild and 
 benignant rays on and influences the globe." Then our American 
 Franklin gave : " George Washington, commander of the American 
 army, who, like Joshua of old, commanded the sun and the moon 
 to stand still, and they obeyed him I " Never were simile and meta- 
 phor more happily combined. 
 
 I cannot help thinking that, when Cobbett called figm-es double- 
 edged tools, he had in mind the mischief which some of his own 
 figures had played with himself on certain occasions. His likening 
 of Doctor Rush to Doctor Sangrado cost him $5,000 ; his declara- 
 tion that the appointment of Lord Hardwicke to the vice-royalty of 
 Ireland was "putting the surgeon's apprentice to bleeding the hos- 
 pital patients," cost him £500; and his comparison of Castlereagh's 
 discipline of British troops to Napoleon's discipline of his con- 
 scripts, cost him £1,000 and an imprisonment of two years. Dog-
 
 and on Figurative Language. 227 
 
 berry found comparisons "odorous;" Cobbett found them very 
 expensive and very injurious. Defoe's figures served him even still 
 worse ; for his sarcastic irony in "The Shortest Way w^ith the Dis- 
 senters" cost him his ears, exposure in the pillory, and the loss 
 of his liberty for two years. The remorseless metaphor which 
 Brougham applied to Canning, that he was guilty of the "most 
 monstrous tergiversation [shuffling, shifting, twisting, turning] for 
 office," caused that statesman, it is said, to take to his bed, and 
 never to rise from it. 
 
 VERSIFICATION. 
 
 Now comes that mysterious matter, which I promised, at the 
 beginning of the book, to give you an account of, versification. 
 I said it is a simple matter; so it is; and yet many persons look 
 upon it as something very complicated, far too difficult for com- 
 mon people to learn, and never studied by anybody but poets. 
 
 Verse is of two kinds, rhyme and blank verse. Rhyme con- 
 sists of measured lines, every two of which ending with words or 
 syllables of a similar sound; blank verse consists of lines with 
 measure but no rhyme. Shakespeare's tragedies and Milton's 
 Paradise Lost are in blank verse ; Butler's Hudibras and Pope's 
 translation of the Iliad— indeed almost all Pope's poems — are in 
 rhyme. Blank verse gives the poet much more freedom and ease 
 in the expression of his thoughts tlian rhjine ; consequently our 
 noblest poetry is in this form. 
 
 Although there are many kinds of measure or meter, there are 
 rarely to be found in English poetry more than four kinds. These 
 four are: the iambic, trochaic, anapestic, and dactylic measures; 
 all hard names, but meaning easy things. Now, what makes these 
 measures easy to learn is, that they go in pairs, and each one in 
 each pair is the contrary or the opposite of the otlier. 
 
 Each line of poetry consists of a certain number of feet — and 
 you may have them from one foot up to ten feet — and each foot 
 consists of either two or three syllables. A foot in iambic measure 
 is called an iambus ; in trochaic measure, a trocliee ; in anapestic 
 measure, an anapest; in dactylic measure, a dactyl. Now the 
 iambus and the trochee are feet of two syllables, and the anapest 
 and the dactyl are feet of three syllables. The two syllables of the 
 iambus are short-long; as, re-call', at-tend'. The two syllables of 
 the trochee are long-short; as, ho'-ly, cy'-press. Therefore you 
 see that the one is the opposite of the other. Counting the feet in 
 a line of poetry, or pausing after eacli foot as you go along, is
 
 228 On Putting Sentences Together, 
 
 called scanning. Now scan me the following verse, and tell me 
 whether it is in iambic or trochaic measure : 
 
 The cur | few tolls | the knell | of part | ing day ; 
 
 The low I ing h«rd ! winds slow | ly o'er | the lea ; 
 The plough 1 man home | ward plods | his wea | ry way, 
 
 And leaves | the world | to dark | ness and | to me. 
 
 Gray^s Elegy in a Country Churchyard. 
 
 And tell me if the following stanza is in the same measure • 
 
 Once up I on a I mid-night | drea-ry, 
 
 While 1 1 pon-der'd | weak and | wea-ry 
 
 O-ver I many a | quaint and | cu-rious | vol-ume 
 
 Of for I got-ten | lore. 
 
 While 1 1 nod-ded | near-ly 1 nap-ping, 
 
 Sud-den | ly there I came a I tap-ping. 
 
 As of I some one | gent-ly | rap-ping. 
 
 Rap-ping | at my I cham-ber 1 door.— Po«'s Baven. 
 
 You see that in the first stanza the tone falls always on the second 
 syllable, while in the second the tone falls always on the fiist. 
 The first stanza, therefore, is in the iambic measure, and the second 
 in the trochaic. 
 
 Now the other two measures are also opposites. Mark the fol- 
 lowing verse, and tell me whether it is made up of short-short-long 
 feet (anapestic), or long-short-short feet (dactylic) : 
 
 The As-syr | ian came down | like the wolf I on the fold, 
 And his co | horts were gleam | ing in pur | pie and gold ; 
 And the sheen | of their spears | was like stars | on the sea 
 When the blue | wave rolls night | ly on deep | Ga-li-lee. 
 
 Byron''8 Destruction of Sennacherib, 
 
 Now observe that the feet in the foUovdng verse are the opposite 
 or the reverse of the preceding : 
 
 Bird of the | wil-der-ness. 
 
 Blithe-some and | cum-ber-less. 
 Sweet be thy | ma-tln o'er | moor-land and | lea 1 
 
 Em-blem of | hap-pi-ness. 
 
 Blest is thy I dwell-ing place — 
 Oh to a I bide in the | des-ert with I thee ! 
 
 The Lark, by James Hogg. 
 
 The first of these last two stanzas is, therefore, in anapestic 
 measure, and the second in dactylic. So that the four verses 
 represent the iambic, the trochaic, the anapestic, and the dactylic 
 measure; and you should learn all four by heart, as a guide in 
 enabling you to determine the measure of other poems. Some- 
 thing that will help you to remember the dactylic measure is the 
 derivation of the word dactyl, which is a Greek word signifying-
 
 and on Figurative Language. 229 
 
 finger. Now look at your forefinger, and see if it does not con- 
 sist of one long joint and two short ones (curnHber-less). So that I 
 may say — although it sounds like an Irish bull — that this foot is so 
 called because it is like a. finger. 
 
 Of all the poems in the English language, nine out of ten are in 
 the iambic measure, which is no doubt because that measure is 
 most suited to the nature of our language. Poor Lord Surrey — 
 who seems to have been a noble, chivalric character, something 
 like Sidney; beheaded in the flower of his age by the brutal 
 Henry VIII. — was the first to write in this measure. Nearly aU 
 our dramatic and epic poetry, in fact nearly all our great poems, 
 are in this measure. All Shakespeare's blank-verse plays, Milton's 
 Paradise Lost, Pope's Homer, Spenser's Faery Queene, Butler's 
 Hudibras, and Bryant's Thanatopsis are in iambic measure. There 
 is only one thing more to be said, and that is, that you will some- 
 times find a mixture of these various measures in one and the same 
 poem ; but some one measure is, however, usually so predominant 
 as to give a character to the verse. Verse means poetry in gen- 
 eral, but one single line of poetry is also called a verse.
 
 230 iSix Lessons 
 
 THE SIX LESSONS. 
 
 LETTER XXIV. 
 
 SIX LESSONS, INTENDED TO PREVENT STATESMEN FROM USING 
 FALSE GRAMMAR, AND FROM WRITING IN AN AWKWARD MANNER. 
 
 Harpenden, Hertfordshire, June 23, 1822. 
 My DEAR James: 
 
 In my first Letter, I observed that it was of the great- 
 est importance that statesmen, above all others, should 
 be able to ^crite veil. It happens, however, but too fre- 
 quently, 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 gi'eat and lasting importance ; a thing to which I knew 
 I should frequently have to recur with satisfaction — I 
 wTote on the anniversary of the day on which, in the year 
 1810, I was sentenced to be imprisoned for two yeai's, to 
 jDay a fine of a thousand pounds, and to be held in bonds 
 of five thousand pounds for seven years, for having pub- 
 licly, and in print, expressed my indignation at the flog- 
 ging of English local-militia men in the town of Ely, 
 under a guai'd 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 w4th so unsparing a hand. For writiag 
 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
 
 Introduction. 231 
 
 York! Let this teJl my persecutors that you have made 
 me more than amends for all the losses, all the fatigue, 
 all the dangers, and all the anxieties attendmg that exile 
 of which their baseness and injustice were the cause. 
 
 The bad wi'iting, on which I am about to remai'k, I do 
 not pretend to look on as the cause of the present pubhc 
 calamities, or of any part of them ; but it is a proof of a 
 deficiency in that sort of talent which appeal's to me to 
 be necessary in men intnisted with great affahs. He who 
 writes badly thinks badly. Confusedness in words can 
 proceed fi'om 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 an importance not easily to be described. 
 
 The pieces of writing that I am about to comment on I 
 deem had xoriting; and, as you will see, the writing may 
 be bad, though there may be no grammatical en'or in it. 
 The best writing is that which is best calculated to secui'e 
 the object of the wiiter; 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 con- 
 sider any wi'iting. 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 gieat abilities merely because he receives great 
 sums of the pubHc money. 
 
 The specimens, that I shall give, consist of papers that 
 relate to measm-es and events of the very first importance. 
 The fii'st is the speech of the Speaker of the House of 
 Commons to the regent, at the close of the fii'st session 
 of 1819, dxu-ing which IVIr. 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.
 
 232 Six Lessons 
 
 In Letter XXII, I gave the reasons why we had a right to 
 expect perfection in writings of this description. I there 
 described the persons to whom the business of writing 
 king's speeches belongs. The Speaker of the House of 
 Commons is to be taken as the man of the greatest talent 
 in that House. He is called the "First Commoner of 
 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 the 
 f^peaker at their head, gorgeously attked, with the mace 
 held beside him; figiu'e this scene to youi'self, and you 
 will almost think it sedition and blasphemy to suppose 
 it possible that the speech made to the king, or that his 
 majesty's answer, both prepared and written down long 
 beforehand, should be anything short of perfection. 
 Follow me, then, my deai* son, thi'ough this Letter ; and 
 you will see that we are not to judge of men's talents by 
 the di'esses they weai', by the offices they fill, or by the 
 power they possess. 
 
 After these two papers, I shall take some papers wiitten 
 by Lord Castlereagh, by the Duke of Wellington, 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 natiu'al 
 consequences. How much more fit than other men they 
 were to be thus confided in ; how much more fit to have 
 the interest and honor of a great nation committed to 
 their hands, you will be able to judge when you shall 
 have read my remarks on those of their papers to which 
 I have here alluded. 
 
 In the making of my comments, I shall insert the several 
 papers, a paragraph or two, or more, at a time; and I 
 shall number the paragraphs for the pm-pose of more 
 easy reference.
 
 Speaker s Speech. 233 
 
 LESSON I. 
 
 Remarks on the Speech oj 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 
 which Session PeeVs Rill \oas 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 assembled, attend your 
 Royal Highness with our concluding Bill of Supply. 
 
 2. "The subjects which have occupied our attention have been 
 more numerous, more various and more important, than are usually 
 submitted to the consideration of Parliament in the same Session." 
 
 It is difficult to say what is meant, in Paragraph No. 2, 
 by the word various. The Speaker had ah-eady 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 comes the '^tha)i are,''' without a nominative case. 
 Chambermaids, indeed, write in this way, and, in such a 
 case, " the dear unintelligible scrawl " is, as the young rake 
 says in the play, "ten thousands times more charming" 
 than correct wiitmg ; but from a Speaker in his robes we 
 might have expected "than those lohich are usually sub- 
 mitted." 
 
 And what does the Speaker mean by "in the sam,e 
 Session ? " He may mean " in one and the same Session ; " 
 but what business had the word same there at all? Could 
 he not have said, "during one Session," or "during a 
 single Session?" 
 
 3. " Upon many of these subjects we have been engaged in long 
 and unwearied examinations; but such has been the pressure of
 
 234 '^ix Lessons. 
 
 other business, and particularly of that which ordinarily belongs 
 to a first Session of Parliament— and such the magnittuie and 
 intricacy of many of those inquiries, that the limits of the present 
 Session have not allowed of bringing them to a close." 
 
 There is bad taste, at least, in using the word examin- 
 ations in one pait of the sentence, and the word inquiries 
 in the other pai't, especially as the pronoun those was 
 used in the latter case. The verb "has'' agrees in num- 
 ber with the noun ^'pressure;'" but the Speaker, notwith- 
 standing the aid of his wig, was not able to perceive that 
 the same verb did not agree in number with the nouna 
 "magnitude and intricacy." " Such has been the pressure, 
 and such have been the magnitude atid intricacy. " 
 
 4. "But, Sir, of those measures which we have completed, the 
 most jyrominent, the most important, and, as we trust, in their 
 consequences, the most beneficial to the public, are the measures 
 which have grown out of the consideration of the present state of 
 Vie country — both in its currency and its finances." 
 
 There is not here any positive error in grammai*; but 
 there is something a great deal worse ; namely, unintelli- 
 gible words. The epithet '•'• prominent was wholly unnec- 
 essary, and only served to inflate the sentence. 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 pait of the 
 sentence? Here are measures growing out of the con- 
 sideration of the state of the country i7i its currency and 
 finances. What ! The state of the country 171 its currency '? 
 Or is it the consideration in its currency ? And what had 
 the word both to do there at all? The Speaker meant 
 that the measures had grown out of, or, which would have 
 been much more dignified, had been the result of a con- 
 sideration of the present state of the country, with regai'd 
 to its currency as well as with regai'd to its finances. 
 
 5. "Early, Sir, in the present Session, we instituted an inquiry 
 into the effects produced on the exchanges with foreign countries,
 
 Speaker's Speech. 235 
 
 and the state of the circulating medium, by the restriction on 
 payments in cash by the Bank. This inquiry was inost anxioudi/ 
 and niost deliberately conducted, and in its result led to the conclusion 
 that it was most desirable, quickly, but with due precautions, to 
 return to our ancient and healthful state of currency : — Tliat what- 
 ever might have been the expediency of the Acts for the suspension 
 of payments of cash at the different periods at which they were 
 enacted (and doubtless they were expedient), whilst the country was 
 involved in the most expensive contest that ever weighed down 
 the finances of any country — still that, the necessity for the con- 
 tinuance of these Acts having ceased, it became us with as little 
 delay as possible (avoiding carefully the convuldon of too rapid a 
 transition) to return to our ancient system; and that, if at any 
 period, and under any circumstances, this return could be effected 
 without national inconvenience, it was at the p?'esent, when this 
 mighty nation, with a proud retrospect of the past, after having 
 made the greatest efforts, and achieved the noblest objects, was 
 now repomig in a confident, and, as wefo/idly hope, a well-founded 
 expectation of a sound and lastitig peace." 
 
 Here, at the beginning of this long and most confused 
 paragraph, are two sentences, perfect rivals in all respects ; 
 each has 37 words in it; each has thi-ee blunders; and 
 the one is just as obscure as the other. To ^^ institute'" is 
 to settle, to Jix, to erect, to establish; and not to set about 
 or undertake, which was what was done here. If I were 
 to tell you that I have instituted an inquiiy into the quali- 
 ties 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 hito 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 meant 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 ai, instead
 
 236 Six Lessons. 
 
 of by, had happened to drop out of the wig, this part of 
 the sentence would have been free from enor. 
 
 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 loith inquietude; 
 and deliberately means coolly, slowly, warily, and the like. 
 The first implies a disturbed, the latter a tranquil, state 
 of the mind ; and a mixtui'e of these it was, it appears, 
 that produced Peel's Bill; this mixtui'e it was which "2/1 
 its residts, LED to the conclusion;''' that is to say, the 
 result led to the result; result being conclusion, and con- 
 clusion being result. But tautology is, you see, a favorite 
 with this son of the Aichbishop of Canterbm-y, more 
 proofs of which you have yet to witness. And why must 
 the king be compelled to hear the pkrase " healthful state 
 of the currency," threadbare as it had long before been 
 wtirn by Hokner and all his tribe of coxcombs of the Edin- 
 biu-gh Review? Would not '■'■our ancient currency '^ have 
 answered every purpose? And would it not have better 
 become the lips of a person in the high station of Speaker 
 of the House of Commons? 
 
 The remaining part of this paragraph is such a mass of 
 confusion that one hardly knows where or how to begin 
 upon it. The " that " after the colon and the dash seems 
 to connect it with what has gone before ; and yet what 
 connection is there? Immediately after this '■'■that'" 
 begins a parenthetical phrase, which is interrupted by a 
 jKtrenthesis, and then the parenthetical phi'ase 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 thaty Then, on goes the pai'enthetical 
 phrase again till you come to '■'■it became us.'''' Then 
 comes more parenthetical matter and another parenthesis; 
 and then comes " to return to our ancient systemy Take 
 out all the parenthetical matter, and the paragraph will 
 stand thus: "That it was desirable to return to our
 
 Speaker's Speech. 237 
 
 ancient and healthful state of currency : — that — still thaty 
 it became us to retui'n to our ancient system." 
 
 But only thmk of saying "whatever might have been 
 the expediency of the acts ; " and then to make a paren- 
 thesis directly afterwards for the express pui-pose of posi- 
 tively asserting that they '•'•xoere expedient! Only tlmik 
 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 ])ossible, and yet that 
 a convulsion teas to be apprehended from a too rapid 
 transition ; that is to say, from retm-ning to cash payments 
 sooner than possible ! 
 
 After this comes a doubt whether the thing can be done 
 at all ; for we are told that the Parliament, in its wisdom, 
 concluded that, if " at any period this return could be 
 effected without national inconvenience, it loas at the 
 present.''' And then follows that piece of sublime non- 
 sense about the nation's reposing in the fond (that is, 
 foolish) hope of, not only a lasting, but also a sound, 
 peace. A lasting peace would have been enough for a 
 common man ; but the son of an Archbishop must have it 
 sound as well as lasting, or else he would not give a far- 
 thing for it. 
 
 C. "In considering, Sir, the state of our finances, and in minutely 
 comparnig our income witli our expenditure, it appeared to us that 
 tlie e.\cess of our mcorae was wot 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 at least five 
 millions ought to be set apart for that object. 
 
 8. "This, Sir, has been effected by the additional imjMsition of 
 three millions of taxes." 
 
 The word '■'•fairly,'" in Paragraph No. 6, is a redun- 
 dancy; it is mere slang. "■ Adequate /br " ought to be 
 "adequate tof and ^'- applicahW" is inappUcahle to the 
 case; for the money was applicable to any jyurjwse. It 
 should have been, "the pui'pose (and not the jnirjxjses)
 
 238 Six Lessons. 
 
 for which it was intended;'' or, "the puipose to which 
 it was intended to be applied." 
 
 The 7th Paiagraph is a heap of redundant Treasui-y- 
 slang. Here we have sur2)lus; that is to say, an over- 
 quantity; but this is not enough for the Speaker, who 
 must have it cleai' also ; and not only clear, but available; 
 and then he must have it set apart into the bargain! 
 Leave out all the words in italics, and put purpose instead 
 of object at the end; and then you have something like 
 common sense as to the words, but still foolish enough as 
 to the political view of the matter. 
 
 Even the 8th Paragi'aph, a simple sentence of fourteen 
 words, could not be free from fault. What does the 
 Speaker mean by an ^'■additional imposition"? Did he 
 imagine that the king would be fool enough to believe 
 that the Pai'liament had imposed three millions of taxes 
 without making an addition to former impositions'? How 
 was the imposition to be other than " additional ? " ^Vhy, 
 therefore, cram in this word? 
 
 9. "Sir, in adopting this course, his Majesty's faithful Commons 
 did not conceal frcmi themselves that they were calling upon the 
 nation for a great exertion : but well knowing that honor, and ctMr- 
 acter, and independence have at all times been the first and dearest 
 objects of the hearts of Englishmen, we felt assured that there was 
 no difficulty that the country could not encounter, and no pressure 
 to which she would not willingly and cheerfully submit, to enable 
 her to maintain, pure and unimpaired, that which has never yet been 
 shaken or sullied — her public credit and her national good 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 themselves''' is an 
 importation from France, and from one of the worst manu- 
 factories too. What is national " honor " but national 
 *^ character?''' In what do they differ? 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
 
 Speaker's Speech. 289 
 
 tlie ^\first " object of Englishmeu's lieai'ts. "^^1lich was the 
 '■\first'' of the thi'ee? Or were tbey the first three? To 
 '■\feel assured " is another French phi'ase. In the former 
 part of the sentence, the Pai'hament are a they; m the 
 latter part they are a ^ve. But it is ihe figures of rhetoric 
 which are the gi-eat beauties here. First it is Engllsh- 
 r)ien who have such a high sense of honor and character 
 and independence. Next it is the country. And next the 
 country becomes a she; and in her character of female 
 will submit to any '■'■jyressure'''' to enable her to '■'•main- 
 tain'''' her purity; though scarcely anybody but the sons 
 of Ai'chbishops ever talk about maintaining purity, most 
 people thinking that, in such a case, preserving is better. 
 Hare, however, we have jyure and uninqyaired. Now, pure 
 applies to things Hable to receive stains and adulterations; 
 unimpaired, to things Kable to be undermined., dilapi- 
 dated^ demolished, or worn out. So the Speaker, in order 
 to make sure of his mark, takes them hotJi, 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 aiid 
 national good faith."' So that, leaving the word good to 
 go to the long account of redundancy, here is another 
 instance of vulgarly-false grammar; for the two nouns, 
 joined by the conjunction, require the verb have instead 
 of has. 
 
 10. "Thus, Sir, I have endeavoi-ed, shortly, and I am aware how 
 imperfectly, to notice the various duties wliicli have devolved upon 
 us, in one of tlie longest and most arduous sessions in tlie records 
 of Parliament." 
 
 11. "The Bill, Sir, which it is my duty to present to your Royal 
 Highness, is entitled, 'An Act for applying certain monicR therein 
 mentioned for the Service of the year 1819. and for further appro- 
 priatmg tlie sup])lies granted in this Session of Parliament ' To 
 which, with all iiumility, we pray his majesty's royal assent." 
 
 Even here, in these common-place sentences, there must 
 be something stupidly illiterate. The Speaker does not
 
 240 Six Lesso)}s. 
 
 mean that his " endeavor ■' was " shortly " made, or made 
 in a short manner^ but that his notice was made in a 
 short manner; and, therefore, it ought to have been, "^o 
 notice shortly." ii shortly ii must be; yet, surely phrase- 
 ology less grovelHng might have been used on such an 
 occasion. '■'■In the longest session," and " in the records 
 of Parliament," are colloquial, low and incorrect into the 
 bargain; and as for "mow^es" 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 
 Beai's. 
 
 There is, indeed, one phrase in this whole Speech (that 
 in which the Speaker acknowledges the imperfectness of 
 the manner in which he has performed his task) which 
 would receive ovu* 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 con- 
 fesses his deficiencies, and tell us that the confession is 
 one of those clumsy traps so often used with the hope of 
 catching unmerited applause. 
 
 LESSON II. 
 
 JRemarks on the /Sjjeech ichlch the Prince Regent made to 
 the Parliament on the occasion when the above /Speech 
 of the Speaker teas made. 
 
 "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 lamented indisposition. 
 
 13. "I cannot close this session of Parliament without expressing 
 the satisfaction that I have derived from the zeal and assiduity 
 with which you have applied yourselves to the s(!veral important 
 objects which have come under your consideration. 
 
 14. "Your patient and laborious investigation of the state of the
 
 King's Speech. 241 
 
 drculation and currency of the kingdom demands my warmest 
 acknowledgment; and I entertain a confident expectation that the 
 measures adopted, as the result of tlm iaqiUry, will be productive 
 of the most beneficial consequences." 
 
 The phrase pointed out by italics in the 12th Paragraph 
 is ambiguous ; and, as it is wholly superfluous, it has no 
 business there. The 13th Pai-agraph (for a wonder!) is 
 free from fault ; but, in the 14th, why does the king make 
 tico of the " circulation and currency " ? He means, doubt- 
 less, to speak of the thing, or things, in use as money. 
 This was the currency; and what, then, was the '■'■circu- 
 lation " ? 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 had a direct 
 application to what has gone before, was used, the word 
 investigation ought to have followed it, and not the word 
 inquiry; it bemg 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 devi;'e 
 is seen through, and the littleness of mind exposed. 
 
 Thejine word '•^adopted'''' is not nearly so good as the 
 plain word taken would have been. The Parliament did 
 not adopt the measui-es in question ; they were theu' oicn : 
 of their own invention ; and, if I were here writing ro- 
 marks on the measui-es, instead of remai'ks on the lan- 
 guage in which they were spoken of, we might have a 
 hearty laugh at the '■'■confident expectation''' which the 
 king entertained of the " most beneficial consequences " of 
 those measures, which were certainly the most fooHsh 
 and mischievous ever taken by any Parliament, or by any 
 legislative assembly, in the world. 
 
 "Gentlemen of the House of Commons: 
 
 15. " 1 thank you for the supplies which you have granted for 
 the service of the present year. 
 11
 
 242 Six Ijessons. 
 
 16. "I sincerely regret that the necessity should have existed of 
 making any additions to the burthens of the people ; but I antici- 
 pate the most important permanent advantages from the effort 
 waich you have thus made for meeting at once all the financial 
 diflBculties of the country ; and 1 derive mtich satisfaction from the 
 belief that the means which you have devised for this purpose are 
 calculated to press as lightly on all classes of the community as 
 could be expected when so great an effort was to be made." 
 
 Nobody, I presume, but kings say an " effort /or meet- 
 ing." Others say that they make an effort to meet. And 
 nobody, that I ever heard of before, except bill-brokers, 
 talks about meeting money demands. One cannot help 
 admii-ing the satisfaction, nay, the '■'■much satisfaction'''' 
 that the king derived from the belief that the new taxes 
 would pi'ess as lightly as 2)ossible on all classes of the 
 community. I do not like to call this vulgar nonsense, 
 because, thoi^gh written by the ministers, it is spoken by 
 tiie king. But, what is it? The additional load viust 
 fall xipon somebody; upon some class or classes; and 
 where, then, was the sense of expressing " much satisfac- 
 tion^'' that they would fall hghtly on all classes? The 
 words '■'■ as 2yossible^'' which come after likeh', do nothing 
 more than make an addition to the confusion of ideas. 
 
 ' ' My Lords and Gentlemen : 
 
 17. "I continue to receive from foreign powers the strongest 
 assurances of their friendly disposition towards this countr}-. 
 
 18. "I have observed with great concern the attempts which 
 have recently been made in some of the manufacturing districts to 
 take advantage of circumstances of local distress, to excite a spirit 
 of disaffection to the institutions and government of the country. 
 No object can be nearer my heart than to promote the welfare and 
 prosperity of all classes of his majesty's subjects ; but this cannot 
 be effected without the maintenance of public order and tran- 
 quillity. 
 
 18. "You may rely, therefore, upon my firm determination to 
 employ, for this purpose, the powers entrusted to me by law ; and 
 I have no doubt that, on your return to your several counties, you 
 will use your utmost endeavors, in co-operating with the magis-
 
 Khtg's Speecli. 243 
 
 traoy, to defeat the machinations of those whose 7>r(yVcfe, if suc- 
 cessful, could only aggravate the evils which it professed to remedy; 
 and who, under the pretence of Reform, have really no otlier object 
 hut the subversion of our happy Constitution." 
 
 Weak minds, feeble writers and sj)ealvers, delight in 
 sxiperlatives. They have big sound in them, and give the 
 appearance of force; but they very often betray those 
 who use them into absui'dities. The king, as m Paragraph 
 No. 17, might continue to receive strong assurances ; but 
 how could he receive "the strongesf^ more than once? 
 
 In the 18th Paragraph we have "welfare and pros- 
 perity." 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 beheve that one is really sought 
 for, I shall care little about the other. 
 
 I am, however, I must confess, not greatly encoui'aged 
 to hope for this, when I immediately afterwards hear of a 
 "firm determination " to emjDloy "powers,"''' the nature of 
 which is but too well understood. "Determination " can, 
 in grammar, receive no additional force from having j?rwi 
 placed before it ; but, in poHtical interpretation, the use 
 of this word cannot fail to be looked uj)on as evincing a 
 little more of ea-'jerness than one could wish to see ap- 
 parent in such a case. 
 
 In these speeches, nouns, verbs, adjectives, and adverbs 
 generally go, like crows and ravens, in j)au"s. Hence we 
 have, in the 18th Paragraph, " the institutions and ffov- 
 ernment'''' of the country. Now, though there may be 
 institutions of the country, which do not form a part of 
 its government; the government is, at any rate, am,ongst 
 the country's institutions. If every institution do not 
 form a part of the government, the government certainly 
 forms a pai't 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 siu to 
 part them just at the last.
 
 244 Six Lessons. 
 
 The gross grammatical errors in the latter part of the 
 last paragraph, where the singular pronoun it represents 
 the plural noun projects, and the verb profess is in the 
 past instead of the present time, one 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 con- 
 tinued to the end of the piece; for here we have "no 
 other object hut^'' instead of no other object than; and 
 the word " really " put into the mouth of a king, and on 
 such an occasion, is something so ■i^ery low that we can 
 hardly credit our eyes when we behold it. 
 
 INTRODUCTION 
 
 To the Four Lessons on the productions of Lord Castle- 
 reagh, the Luke of Wellington, the Marquis Wellesleyy 
 and the JBishop of Winchester. 
 
 From the literary productions of /Speakers and Minis- 
 ters, I come to those of Atnbassadors, Secretaries of StatCy 
 Viceroys, and JSishops. In these persons, even more fuUy 
 perhaps than in the former, we are entitled to expect 
 proofs of gi-eat capacity , as writers. I shall give you 
 specimens from the writings of four persons of this de- 
 scription, and these four, men who have been intrusted 
 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 Luke of 
 Wellington, the Marquis Wellesley, and the Bishop of 
 Winchester/ the first of whom has been called the greatest 
 statesman, 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 wiitings 
 of these persons are contained in state papers relating to 
 the Museums at Paris.
 
 lutroductioti, Etc. 245 
 
 And here, in order that you may be better able to judge 
 of the writings themselves, I ought to explain to you the 
 natxu'e of the matters to which they relate, and the cu-- 
 cumstances under which they were written. The Museums 
 at J^aris contained, in the year 1815, when the King of 
 France was escorted back to that city by the ai-mies of 
 the Allies, a great many statues and pictures, which Na- 
 poleon had, in his divers conquests and invasions, taken 
 from the collections of other countries, and carried to 
 France. "When, therefore, the Alhes had, by their ai'mies, 
 possession of Paris, at the time just mentioned, they rifled 
 these Museums, and took fi-om 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 1814, when the 
 AUies 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 contraiy to their own precedent of 1814, 
 but that it was to assume the character of enem,ies of 
 France, directly in the teeth of theu* own repeated declai*- 
 ations, in which they had called themselves friends and 
 even Allies of France; and in direct violation of their 
 Bolemn 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 poicer in then- hands ; 
 and the result was the stripping of the Museums. 
 
 To characterize this act committed by those who entered 
 France vmder the name of the Allies of the king and of 
 the great body of his people, and who took possession of 
 Paris in virtue of a convention which stipulated for the 
 security of all jmblic property; to -chai-acterize such an 
 act is unnecessaiy ; but we cannot help lamenting that 
 the Ministers of England' were open abettors, if not orig- 
 inal instigators, in this memorable transaction, which, of
 
 246 ^Si.r Lessons. 
 
 all the transactions of that time, seems to have created 
 the greatest portion of rancor in the minds of the people 
 of France. 
 
 That the English Ministers were the instigators appears 
 pretty cleai'ly fi'om the seizure (which v.as by force of 
 xirms) having been immediately preceded by a paper 
 (called a note) delivered by Lord Castlereagh in the name 
 of the Prince Kegent to the Ambassadors of the Alhes, 
 which paper was dated 11th Sept., 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 CastlereagKs Note of the Wth Sep- 
 tember, 1815, on the subject of the 3fuseum,s at Paris. 
 
 This Note sets out by saying, that representations, on 
 the subject of the Statues and Pictm-es, have been laid 
 before the Ambassadors of the Alhes, and that the writer 
 had received the commands of the Prince Regent to 
 submit, for the consideration of the Allies, that which 
 follows. After some fui'ther matter, amongst which we 
 find this "greatest statesman" tJ^^iing of "the indulgen- 
 cies " (instead of indulgences) to which the French had a 
 right " to aspire " (instead of to hojye for); after saying 
 that the purity of the friendship of the Alhes had been 
 " proved beyond a question " by thek last year's conduct, 
 and " still niore^' that is to say, farther than beyond^ by 
 then- this yeai-'s conduct; after talking about the '-'■ sub- 
 stantial integrity " 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 sat- 
 isfy what the Allies o%oe to the security of their own
 
 Lord Castlerea[)K s Note. 247 
 
 subjects;" after all this, and a great deal more of the 
 same description, we come to the paragraphs that I am 
 now going to remark on. Observe, I continue the num- 
 bering 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 desire, at the same time, to 
 retain the ornamental spoils of all other countries? Is it that there 
 can exist a doubt of the issue of the contest, or of the power of the 
 Allies to effectuate what justice and policy require? If not, upon 
 what principle deprive France of her late territorial acquisitions, 
 and preserve to her tiie spoliations appertaining to those territories 
 which all modern conquerors have invariably respected, as insepar- 
 able from the country to which they belonged? 
 
 21. "The Allied Sovereigns have perhaps something to atone for 
 to Europe, in consequence of the course pursued by them, when 
 at Paris, during the last year. It is true, they never did so far 
 make themselves parties in the criminality of this viass of plunder 
 as to sanction it by any stipulation in their treaties ; such a recog- 
 nition has been on their part uniformly refused -. but they certainly 
 did use tlieir influence to repress at that moment any agitation of 
 their claims, in the hope that France, not less subdued by their 
 generosity than by their arms, might be disposed to preserve 
 inviolate a peace which had been studiously framed to serve as a 
 bond of reconciliation between the nation and the king. They 
 had also reason to expect that his Majesty would be advised volun- 
 tarily to restore a considerable proportion, at least, of these spoils, 
 to their lawful owners. 
 
 22. ' ' But the question is a very different one now, and to pursue 
 the same course, under circumstances so essentially altered, would 
 be, in the judgment of the Prince Regent, equally unwise towards 
 France, and unjust tawards our Allies, who have a direct interest 
 in this question. 
 
 23. "His Royal Highness, in stating this opinion, feels it neces- 
 sary to guard against the possibility of misrepresentation. 
 
 24. "Whilst he deems it to be the duty of the Allied Sovereigns 
 not only not to obstruct, but facilitate, upon the present occasion, 
 the return of these objects to the places from whence they were torn, 
 it seems not less consistent with tJieir delicacy not to suffer the 
 position of their armies in France, or the removal of tlie^e works
 
 248 iSix Lessons. 
 
 from the Louvre, to become the means, either directly or indirectly, 
 of bringing within tfieir own dominions a single article which did 
 not of right, at the period of tlieir conquest, 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 such 
 exquisite specimens of the fine arts, if otherwise acquired, he has 
 no wish to become, possessed of them at the expense of France, or 
 rather of the countries to which they of a right belong, mo7'e espe- 
 cially/ by following up a principle in war which he considers as a 
 reproach to the nation by which it has been adopted, and so far 
 from wishing to take advantage of the occasion to purchase from 
 the rightful owners any articles they might, from pecuniary con- 
 Biderations, be disposed to part with, his Royal Highness would, on 
 the contrary, be disposed rather to afford the means of replacing 
 them in those very temples and galleries of which they were so 
 long the ornaments. 
 
 26. '■'Were it possible that his Royal Highness's sentiments 
 towards the person and cause of Louis XVIII. could be brought 
 into doubt, or that the position of his Most Christian Majesty was 
 likely to be injured in the eyes of his own people, the Prince Regent 
 would not come to this conclusion without the most painful re- 
 luctance ; but, on the contrary, his Royal Highness believes that 
 his Majesty will rise in the love and respect of his own subjects, 
 in proportion as he separates himself from these remembrances of 
 revolutionarj'^ warfare. These spoils, which impede a moral recon- 
 ciliation between France and the countries she has invaded, are 
 not necessary to record the exploits of her armies, which, notwith- 
 standing the cause in which they were achieved, must ever make 
 the arms of the nation respected abroad. But whilst these objects 
 remain at Paris, constituting as it were the title-deeds of the coun- 
 tries 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 itself 
 with the more limited existence assigned to the nation under the 
 Bourbons." 
 
 I shall say nothing of the logic of this passage; and 
 I would fain pass over the real and poorly-disguised 
 motive of the proceeding; but this must strike every 
 observer. 
 
 It is the mere writing, which, at present, is to be the
 
 Lord CastlereagWs Note. 249 
 
 principal object of our attention. To be sui-e, the senti- 
 ments, the very thoughts, in Paragraphs 24 and 25, which 
 speak the soul, as they are conveyed in the language, of 
 the sedentaiy and circumsj^ect keej^er of a huckster's 
 stand, or the more stui'dy perambulating bearer of a mis- 
 cellaneous pack, do, with voice almost imperious, demand 
 a portion of our notice ; while, with equal force, a similar 
 claim is urged by the suspicions in the former of these 
 pai-agraphs, and the protestations in the latter, which 
 present to the nations of Eui'ope, and esi^ecially to the 
 French nation, such a captivating picture of English 
 frankness and sincerity ! 
 
 But let us come to the loriting; and here, in Paragi-aph 
 20, we have spoliations appertaining to territories, though 
 spoliation means the act of despoiling, and never does 
 or can mean the thing of which one has been despoiled; 
 and next, we have the word tohic/i, relating to spoliation, 
 and then the subsequent part of the sentence tells us that 
 spoliations have invariably been respected. 
 
 In the 21st Paragraph, does the it relate to criminahty 
 or to mass of plruider? and what is meant 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 7nass of plunder, but the quiet p>ossession of the speci- 
 mens of ai't, by leaving, in 1814, that possession as they 
 found it. At the close of this paragraph, we have a pro- 
 portion, instead of a part, an error common enough with 
 country fellows when they begin to talk fine, 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 towai-ds the 
 AlUes," and '■'■equally''' too, is as pretty a specimen of 
 what is called tioattle as you will find ; while " the return " 
 11*
 
 250 Six Xessons. 
 
 of these ^^ objects,'''' the not ptu'loining of a *^ single article," 
 the not wishing to '■'•tahe advantage'''' and to '-'• purchase 
 any of the articles that the owners might wish to part 
 with^'' form as fine an instance of the powers of the plume 
 de crasse, or pen of mud, as you will be able to hunt out 
 of the history of a whole year's proceedings at the PoUce 
 Offices. 
 
 But, in Paragraph 24, we have '■'their conquest." The 
 conquest of whom or what? That of the Allies, that of 
 their dominions, or that of the " objects " f It is impossi- 
 ble to answer, except by guess ; but it comes out, at any 
 rate, that there was a conquest; and this "greatest 
 statesman " might have perceived that this one word was 
 a complete answer to all his assertions about plunder and 
 spoHation ; for that which is conquered is held of right; 
 and the only want of right in the Allies, forcibly to take 
 these " articles," ai'ose from their having entered France 
 as Allies of the King of France, and not as enemies and 
 conquerers. 
 
 And what, in Paragraph 25, is meant by "-following up 
 a principle in war^' ? The phi'ase, "follow up a prin- 
 ciple," is low as the diit ; 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 pm'chased the pic- 
 tures, be said to folloio tip a principle " in loar " ? The 
 meaning, doubtless, was that the regent had no wish to 
 become possessed of these things at the expense of 
 France, or, rather, at the expense of the countries 
 to which they belonged, especially as he could not 
 thus gratify his taste for the arts without acting 
 upon a principle which the French had acted on in 
 war. This meaning might, indeed, be suj)posed to be 
 contained in the above phrase of Lord Castlereagh; 
 but in a writing of this kind, ought anything be left to 
 supposition ? 
 
 The 26th Paragi'aph is an assemblage of all that is
 
 Lord GastlereaglC s Note. 251 
 
 incorrect, low, and ludicrous. The " was " after Christian 
 Majesty ought to be could he, that is, ^'•were it possible 
 that his position coidd he likely to be injured ; " and not 
 '■^icere it possible that his position was likely to be in- 
 jured," which is downright nonsense. And then only 
 think of an injured positiofi/ and of the king's position 
 being injured ^'i?i the eyes''"' of his people! "But, on the 
 contrary.'''' On the contrary of what? Look back, and 
 ■ see if it be possible to answer this question. Next comes 
 the intolerable fustian of the king's ^^ separating hhnself 
 from remenihrances; " and from this flight, down the 
 " greatest statesman " pitches, robs the attorney's office, 
 and calls the statues and pictures 'Hitle deeds, as it 
 were;" and this "as it tcere" is, perhaps, the choicest 
 phrase of the whole passage. But, in conclusion (for it is 
 time to have done with it), what do you say to " the se?iti- 
 tnents of re-uniting the countries to France"? And 
 what do you say, then, to the "genius'''' (that is, the dis- 
 position) " of the Fi'ench people associating itself with 
 the limited existence assigned to the nation under the 
 Bom'bons"? What do you say of the man who could 
 make use of these words, when his meaning was, " that, 
 as long as these statues and pictiires remained to remind 
 the French people of the late extent of the dominions of 
 France, then* minds would not be completely reconciled 
 to those more narrow limits, which had now been pre- 
 scribed to her"? What do you say of the man who, 
 having this j)lain j^i'oposition to state, could talk of the 
 genius of the people associating itself with the more • 
 limited existence of the nation, the nation being the '■ 
 people; and therefore his meaning, if there can be any ■ 
 sense in the words, being, that the people as a nation had, 
 under the Bourbons, had their existence, or length of life, 
 abridged? What do you say, what can you say of such 
 a man, but that natnre might have made him for a valet, 
 for a strolling player, and possibly for an auctioneer ; but
 
 252 Six Lessons. 
 
 never for a Secretary of State! Yet this man was edu- 
 cated at the University of Cambridge* 
 
 LESSON IV. 
 
 Remarks on a Dispatch of the Duke of Welli^igton 
 {called the greatest Captain of the age) relative to the 
 Museums at Paris. 
 
 Having, as far as relates to the Museums, taken a sufiB.- 
 cient view of the writing of the greatest States^nan of the 
 age, I now come to that of the '■^greatest Captain.'''' The 
 writing that I am now about to notice relates to the same 
 subject. The Caj^tain was one of the Commanders at 
 Paris, at the time above spoken of, and it is in that capa- 
 city that he writes. But we ought to observe, here, that 
 he is not only a great Captain, but a great Ambassador 
 also; and that he was Ambassador at the Congress of 
 Vienna just before the time we are speaking of; and that 
 he was formerly Secretary of State for Ireland. 
 
 The paper, from which I am about to make a quotation, 
 is a " dispatch " from the " greatest Captain " to Lord 
 Castlereagh, dated at Paris, 23rd September, 1815, soon 
 after the museums had been rifled. 
 
 I shall not take up much of yotu* time with the per- 
 formance of this gentleman ; a short specimen will suffice ; 
 
 * This Lesson was written in June, 1822. On the 12th of August, 
 1822, this same Lo>I Castlereagh (being still Secretary of State) 
 killed himself at North Cray, in Kent, by cutting his throat. A 
 Coroner's Jury pronounced him to have been insane; and, which is 
 very cirrious, a letter from the Duke of Wellington was produced to 
 prove that the deceased had been insane for some time. Though, 
 mind, he had been for some time, and was when he cut his throat, 
 actually entrusted with the care and powers of the two other Secre- 
 taries' offices (they being absent), as well as those of the office of 
 Foreign Affairs J
 
 The Duke of Wellington. 253 
 
 and that shall consist of the first three paragraphs of his 
 '■'■dispatch.'"'' 
 
 "My dear Lord : 
 
 27. "There has been a good deal of discussion here hitely respect- 
 ing the measures which I have been under the necessity of adopt- 
 ing, in order to get for the King of the Netherlands his pictures, 
 etc., from the museums; and lest these reports should reach the 
 Prince Regent, I wish to trouble you, for his Royal Highuess's in- 
 formation, witli the following statement of what has passed. 
 
 28. ' ' Shortly after the arrival of the sovereigns at Paris, the 
 minister of the Kiug of the Netherlands claimed the pictures, etc., 
 belonging to his sovereign, equally with those of other poioers; and, 
 as far as I could learn, never could get any satisfactory reply from 
 the French government. After several conversations with me, he 
 addressed your lordship an official note, whioh was laid before the 
 ministers of the allied sovereigns, assembled in conference; and 
 the subject was taken into consideration repeatedly, with a view 
 to discover a mode of doing justice to the claimants of the speci- 
 mens of the arts in the museums, without injuring the feelings of 
 the King of France. In the meantime the Prussians had obtained 
 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, etc., belonging to all the allies of his Prussian 
 majesty; andViie subject pressed for an early decision; and yonr 
 lordship wrote your note of the 11th instant, in which it was fully 
 discussed. 
 
 29. "The ministers of the King of the Netherlands still having 
 no satisfactory answer from the French government, appealed to 
 me, as the general-in-chief of the army of the King of the Nether- 
 lands, to know whether I had any objection to employ his majesty's 
 troops to obtain possession of what was his undoubted property, 
 I referred this application again to the ministers of the allied 
 courts, and no objection liaving been stated., I considered it my duty 
 to take the necessary measures to obtain what was his right." 
 
 The great characteristic of this writing (if writing it 
 ought to be called) is the thorough-paced vulgarity of it. 
 There is a meanness of manner as well as of expression, 
 and, indeed, a suitableness to the subject much too 
 natural in all its appearances, to have been the effect 
 of art.
 
 254 Six Lessons. 
 
 The writer, though addressing a minister of state, and 
 writing matter to be laid before a sovereign, begins ex- 
 actly in the manner of a quidnvmc talking to another that 
 he has just met in the street. " There has been a good 
 deal of discussion,^'' (that is to say, talk) '■'•heref that is 
 to say, at Pai'is, 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 himself in another part of this famous ^'■dispatch.'''' 
 
 But tohat are " these reports,"" of which the great Cap- 
 tain speaks in the latter part of this jDaragraph ? He had 
 spoken of no reports before. He had mentioned "cZ/s- 
 eussion,^^ and a '•'•good deaV of it; but had said not a 
 word about reports; and these reports pop out upon us 
 like "■these six men in buckram," in FalstalTs narrative 
 to the Prince. 
 
 The Captain's " wishing to trouble " Lord Castlereagh, 
 " for the regent's i) if or mat ion,'''' closes this paragraph in 
 a very suitable manner, and prepares the mind for the 
 next, where the regent would find trouble enough, if he 
 were compelled to find out the English of it. The Dutch 
 minister '■'■ claimed ih.Q 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 
 minister "newer could get any satisfactory reply;" for 
 it must have been a deal indeed that would have satisfied 
 him. 
 
 The jjhrase " he addressed your lordship an official 
 note " is in the counting-house style ; and then to say to 
 Lord Castlereagh, " yoiu" lordship wrote your note of the
 
 The Buke of Wellington. 255 
 
 11th of September," was so necessary, lest the latter 
 shovild imagine that somebody else had written the note ! 
 Nor are the four ands m this paragraph to be overlooked; 
 for never was this poor conjunction so worked before, 
 except, perhaps, in some narrative of a little girl to her 
 mother. 
 
 The nan-ative is, in the last-quoted pai-agraph, continued 
 with uni-elaxed spirit. The Dutch minister can still ob- 
 tain no satisfactory answer ; he asks the duke whether he 
 has any objection to use force, and asserts, at the same 
 time, that the goods in question are his master's ^^un- 
 doubted property. ''' Upon this the duke applies to the 
 other ministers, and, "?io 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 sui'ely a parcel of words before put 
 together by anybody in so clumsy a manner. In a sub- 
 sequent part of the " dispatch,''^ we have this : " I added, 
 that I had no instructions regarding the museum, tior no 
 grounds on which to form a judgment." In another place 
 we have "the King of the Netherlands s pictures." In 
 another place we have "that the property should be 
 retui'ned to their rightful owners." 
 
 But, to bestow criticism on such a shocking abuse of 
 letters is to disgrace it ; and nothing can apologize for 
 what I have done but the existence of a general knowl- 
 edge 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 nation's affaus com- 
 mitted to his management. There is in the nonsense of 
 Castlereagh a frivohty and a foppery that give it a sort 
 of liveliness, and that now and then ehcit a smile ; but in 
 the productions of his corresj^ondent there is nothing to 
 reheve ; all is vulgar, all clumsy, all dull, ail torpid inanity.
 
 256 Six Lessons. 
 
 LESSON V. 
 
 Remarks on a Note presented by Lord Castlereagh to the 
 Ambassadors of the Allies, at Paris, i?i Jidy, 1815, 
 relative to the slave trade. 
 
 80. " VisooTTNT Castlekeagh, his Britannic Majesty's principal 
 Secretary of State, etc. , in reference to the communication he has 
 made to tlie conference of the orders addressed to the admiralty to 
 suspend all hostilities against the coast of France, observes, that 
 there is reason to foresee that French ship-owners might be induced 
 to renew the slave trade, under the supposition of the 'peremptory 
 and total abolition decreed by Napoleon Bonaparte having ceased 
 with his power; that, 7ietiertheless, great and powerful considera- 
 tions, arising from motives of humanity and even regard for the 
 king's authority, require that no time should be lost to maintain in 
 France the entire and immediate abolition of the trafSc in slaves ,• 
 that if, at the time of tlie Treaty of Paris, the king's administration 
 could wish a final but gradual stop should be put to this trade, in 
 the space of five years, for the puipose 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 question assumss entirely a dif- 
 ferent shape, for if the king were to revoke the said prohibition, 
 he would give himself the di.'iadvantage of authorizing , in the interior 
 of France, the reproach which more than once has been thrown out 
 against his former government, of countenancing reactions, and, 
 at the same time, justifying, out of France, and particularly in 
 England, the belief of a systematic opposition to liberal ideas; that 
 accordingly the time seems to hnve arrived when the Allies cannot 
 hesitate formally to give weight in France to the immediate and 
 entire prohibition of the slave trade, a prohibition, the necessity of 
 which has been acknowledged, in principle, in the transactions of 
 the Congress at Vienna." 
 
 Now, I put this question to you : Do you understand 
 what this great statestnan means f 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 en-ors ; but it is the
 
 Ijord CnstlereagKs Note. 257 
 
 obscurity, the imintelligibleness of the note, that I think 
 constitutes its gi-eatest fault. One way of proving the 
 badness of this writing is to express the meaning of the 
 writer in a clear manner ; thus : 
 
 "Lord Castlereagh observes that thei*e is reason to 
 apprehend that the French ship-owners may be induced 
 to renew the slave trade, from a supposition that the 
 total abolition, recently decreed by Napoleon, has been 
 nullified by the cessation of his authority ; that motives 
 of humanity, as well as a desire to promote the estabhsh- 
 ment of the kmg's authority, suggest that no time should 
 be lost in taking eJ0&cient measures to maintain the decree 
 of aboHtion ; that at the time of the Treaty of Pai'is, 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 yeai-s ; that now, however, when the 
 abolition has been actually decreed, the matter assumes 
 an entirely difi'erent shape, seeing that it is not now an 
 aboHtion, but the refraining from revoking an aboHtion, 
 that is proposed to be suggested to the king ; 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 government, of countenancing the 
 work of undoing and overturning, and would, at the same 
 time, confirm foreign nations, and particulai-ly the EngHsh, 
 in the beHef that he had adopted a systematic opposition 
 to Hberal principles and views ; that, therefore, the inter- 
 ests of the king not less than those of humanity seem to 
 call upon the Allies to give, formally and without delay, 
 the weight of then* influence in favor, as far as relates to 
 France, of an enth-e and immediate abolition of the slave 
 trade, an aboHtion, the necessity of which has, in principle 
 at least, been acknowledged in the ti'ansactions of the 
 Congress of Vienna."
 
 258 Six lessons. 
 
 Now, as to the several faulty expressions in tlie note of 
 Castlereagh, tliough I have made great use of italics, I 
 have not pointed out one-half of the faults. "Whoever 
 before heard of a reason to foresee a thing 1 He meant 
 reason to believe that the thing would take place, and as 
 it v/as a thing to be wished not to take place, to apprehend 
 was the word ; because to apprehend means to think of 
 with some degi'ee of fear. Wishing to-moiTow to be a 
 fine day, what would you think of me if I were to say 
 that I had reason to foresee that it would rain? The 
 might is clearly wrong. If the abolition were total, what 
 had peremptory/ to do there? Could it be more than 
 total P 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 the in France, and then the immediate; alto- 
 gether there is such a mass 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 «/"," sets 
 all criticism at defiance. Look at the verbs could wish, 
 and should he! Look at of having. Then comes prohi- 
 bition for abolition, two very different things. To assume 
 entirely a different shape is very different from to assume 
 a7i entirely different shape. The latter is meant and the 
 former is said. Then what does the /or do there? What 
 consequence is he coming to? How was he going to 
 show that the shape was different ? He attempts to show 
 no such thing; but falls to work to foretell the evils 
 which will fall on the liing of France if he revoke Na- 
 poleon's decree. And here, Goddess of Grub-street, do 
 hear him talking of the King of France giving himself 
 the disadvantage of authorizing reproaches! If the 
 king's conduct would justify people in believing ill of 
 him, why should it justify the English in particular?
 
 Lord CastlereagKs Note. 259 
 
 They might, iudeed, be more reaihj to believe ill of him ; 
 but it could not be more just iu them than in othei-s. 
 An op2)osition to ideas is a pretty idea enough ; and so 
 i!5 the giving of %ccight in France to an immediate pro- 
 hibition ! 
 
 Never was there, sui-ely, such a piece of writing seen 
 before ! Fifty years hence, no man who shauld 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 miUions 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 woi'ds 
 iia which I have expressed it, it was a proper note for the 
 occasion. It was false iu professions; and it was, as 
 towai'ds 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 offensiA-e niamier ; and, at any rate, he might have 
 been spared the brutal taunt that we meet Avith towards 
 the close of this matchless specimen of diplomatic stu- 
 pidity. 
 
 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 
 j^arties to say that the abolition, which was thus extorted, 
 had eftect but for a very short time; and the French 
 nation never acknowledged it as binding; that at this 
 moment (June, 1822), complaints are made iu 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 traffic in African slaves ; that our ministers promise 
 to make remonstrance; but that they dare not talk of
 
 260 Six Lessons. 
 
 war; and that without declaring their readiness for war, 
 their remonstrances can have no effect. 
 
 LESSON VI. 
 
 RemarJcs on passages in Dispatches from the Makqitis 
 Wellesley, Jjord Lieutenant of Ireland, to Viscou?it 
 Sid7nouth, and to Mr. Peel, Secretaries of State; dated 
 Dublin Castle, from 3f? January to 12th June, 1822; 
 and also on the charge of the Bishop of Winchester, 
 delivered in Jxdy, 1822. 
 
 31. "Concluding that your lordship had been apprised, before my 
 arrival in Dublin, of every important circumstance respecting the 
 unhappy disturbances which have prevailed in this country, I pro- 
 ceed to submit to you, for his Majesty's consideration, such informa- 
 tion as I have received on that subject during the few days that I 
 have passed since my succession to this government. 
 
 82. * ' I propose to arrange this information with reference to each 
 county respectively, for the purpose of facilitating a comparison with 
 such statements as may already be in your lordship's possession, 
 and of enabling you to form a judgment of the relative state of each 
 particular district at the different /periods of tim^ 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 obsciu'e, 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 apprised before of distui-bances 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 aiTival, your lordship 
 was apprised of every important circumstance respecting 
 the unhappy disturbances prevailing in this country." 
 For the prevalence was still in existence. To submit is
 
 Marquis Wellesler/'s Dispatches. 261 
 
 to place at the disposal of, to put xmder the poioer of; 
 and, tbei'efore, transmit, or send, was the proper word; 
 for it is the king to whom the information is sxibmitted. 
 The mai'quis sent the information to Lord Sidmouth that 
 he might submit it to the king. 
 
 "/Successio?i 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 appointment; and he is 
 about to si^eak 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 obscuiity in meaning as ever 
 found its way upon paper ; and yet this was an occasion 
 for being particularly clear, seeing that the marquis was 
 here explaining the plan of his dispatch. With reference 
 to, means in relation to, as appertaining to, having a vieto 
 towards. The first is the best for the marquis : and that 
 is little short of nonsense ; for what is arranging infor- 
 mation in relation to each county? What does it mean? 
 Not what the marquis thought he was saying, which was 
 that he proposed to speak of the state of all the counties, 
 and that the information relating to each counts/ he 
 meant to place under a separate head. This was what he 
 meant ; but this he does not say. 
 
 And then again, what does respectively do here after 
 each? Respectively means particularly or relatively ; 
 and as he had before said, or meant to say, that he pro- 
 posed 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 
 heads, each head confining itself to the information relat- 
 ing to one county, was a very good way of facilitating a 
 comparison of this information with that which was 
 already in Lord Sidmouth's possession; but it was not 
 onough to say '■^facilitating a comparison with such
 
 262 >Slx Lassoiis. 
 
 statemeiits/'' and there appears, besides, to be no reason 
 to conclude that the information 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 arrangement of his matter was 
 new. 
 
 The latter part of the sentence is all confusion. The 
 marquis means that, by jolacuig his information as before 
 described, he shall enable Lord Sidmouth to form a judg- 
 ment of the state of each district, 7iotc, compared with 
 the state in which it was at the date of the former 
 information. The '■'■relative state of each particular dis- 
 trict " 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 periodvS of time speciued in one document; and 
 the main point that the marquis was diiving 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 akeady held in 
 his possession. 
 
 I have taken here the first two sentences of the dis- 
 patch. They are a fair specimen of the marquis's style, 
 the gi'eat characteristic of which is obscurity arising from 
 affectation. "What he meant was this: "I propose to 
 place the information relating to each county under a 
 distinct head, for the pui-pose of facilitating a comjDarison 
 of this information with that which yoiu' lordship may 
 already possess, and also for the purpose of enabling you 
 to form a judgment of the present state of each county, 
 compared with the state in which it was at the date of 
 former dispatches." And would it not have been better 
 to write thus than to put upon paper a parcel of words,
 
 Marquis Wellesley's Dispatches. 263 
 
 the meaning of which, even if you I'ead them a hundred 
 times over, must still remain a matter of uncertainty ? 
 
 But there is another fault here; and that is, all the 
 latter pai't of the sentence is a mere redundancy ; for of 
 what was Lord Sidmouth to "fonn a judgment?^'' A 
 judgment of the comparative state of the country at the 
 two periods? What could this be more than the making 
 of the compai'isou? Judgment, in this case, means 
 opinion; and if the marqms had said that his object 
 was to enable Lord Sidmouth to form a judgment as to 
 what ought to be done, for instance, h\ 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 maa'quis was talking about ; and the very act 
 of making the comparison was to discern, ox 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 atto/ck 
 made a few nights previously, on several very respectable houses 
 in the immediate vicinity of tliat town, by a numerous banditti, who 
 succeeded in obtaining arms from many; and the officer stationed 
 at Skibbereen states Ms opinion that the sphit of disaffection, which 
 had been confined to the northern baronies of the coimty, had spread 
 in an alarming measm-e through the whole of West Carbury; that 
 nightly meetings are held at various places on the coast, and that 
 bands of offenders assemble, consisting of not less than three hun- 
 dred in each band. 
 
 34. "It further appears, from various communications, that the 
 greater part of the population of the northern part of the county of 
 Cork had assembled in the mountains, and that they have in some 
 places made demonstrations of attack, and in others Jiave committed 
 outrages by day, with increased force and boldness." 
 
 ^'■Reports an attack " is of the slang military, and 
 should not have forced its way into this dispatch. ^States 
 his opinion that," is httle better. But it is to the strange
 
 264 Six Lessons. 
 
 confusion in the times of the verbs that I here wish to 
 direct your attention. Tliis is a fault the marquis very 
 frequently commits. 
 
 I cannot help drawing your attention to " a numerous banditti " 
 and "not less than three hundred men." Banditti is plural, and 
 therefore the a ought to be left out. Less is the comparative of 
 little, used with reference to quantity ; but tnen are not a quantity, 
 but a number, and the comparative of few, which is fewer, ought to 
 have been used here. 
 
 35. "The magistrates resident at Dunmanaway report that illegal 
 oaths have for a long time been administered in that neighborhood; 
 that nocturnal meetings have frequently been held; that in the 
 adjoining parishes, notices of an inflammatory description have 
 been posted ; and in one. parish, aims have been taken from the 
 peaceable inhabitants. 
 
 36. "The Rector of reports, on the 10th, that six houses of 
 
 his parishioners had been attacked on the 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 
 shot the assailant." 
 
 We do not know from the words '■'■have for a long time 
 been administered," whether the oaths were administered 
 a long time ago, or are now, and long have been adminis- 
 tering. The that should have been repeated between the 
 and and the in towards the close of paragraph 35 ; for 
 the want of it takes the last fact out of the report of the 
 magistrates, and makes it an assertion of the marquis. 
 The same remark applies to the 36th i:)aragraph, 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 attemj)t to assassinate the captain. An odd sort of 
 an attempt to assassinate, by-the-bye, seeing that it was 
 made by a 2^istol ojjenlg 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 assailafitf 
 But assassinate is become a fashionable word in such cases.
 
 Miirquis Wellesley's Dispatches. 265 
 
 oT. "On the evening of the same day a detachment of the 11th 
 Regiment was attacked, on its march from Macroom to Bandon, 
 by a party of sixty men, who followed it for three miles, and took 
 advantage of the inclosures to tire, and to retard the march of the 
 king^s troops." 
 
 The meaning is that the party of sixty men followed it 
 (the regiment), took advantage of the inclosures to fire on 
 it, and to retard its march ; but the marquis, from a de- 
 sire to write yi«e, leaves us in doubt whether the regiment 
 and the ktng''s troo2:>s be the same body of men ; and this 
 doubt is, indeed, countenanced by the almost incredible 
 cii'cumstance that a regnlar regiment should \>q followed 
 for thi'ee miles, and actually have its march retarded by 
 sixty men ! 
 
 38. "A countryman's house is also stated to liave been attacked 
 by forty men, well mounted and armed, who severely beat and 
 
 wounded him, and took his horse. reports an attack on the 
 
 house of Mr. Sweet, near Macroom, who, having received previous 
 intimation of the attack, and having prepared for defence, suc- 
 ceeded in repulsing the assailants, about two hundred in number, 
 with a loss of two killed, who were carried off by their associates, 
 although their horses were secured." 
 
 Here we have reports an attacJc again; but your atten- 
 tion is called to the latter pai't of the paragraph, where 
 it would appear that Mr. Stoeet sustaiaed a loss of two 
 killed; and yet these two dead men were carried off by 
 their assailants. If the marquis had stopped at the word 
 killed, it would have been impossible not to understand 
 him to mean that Mr. Sweet had two of his men killed. 
 
 39. "A magistrate communicates that information had been 
 received by him of several intended attacks upon houses in that 
 neighborhood, but that they had been prevented by tJie judicious 
 employment of the police, stationed at Sallans, under the Peace 
 Preservation Act." 
 
 By emjyloying the police in a judicious manner, the 
 marquis means ; but says quite another thing. 
 40 "The police magistrate at Westmeath reports the setting firs 
 12
 
 266 Six Tjessohs. 
 
 to a farmer's outhouses, which, togetlier with the cattle in them, 
 WAS consumed." 
 
 It should be " the setting of fire ;" and it should be 
 loere, and not was; for the deuce is in it if orit-houses, 
 together with the cattle in thevi, do not make up 2, plural. 
 
 41. "The result of the facts stated in tliis dispatch, and its inelos- 
 ures, seems Xo justify an opinion tliat, 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 I have resorted to additional measures of 
 precaution and military operation." 
 
 There should be an ioi between the a7id and the its. 
 But, it is not the result of the facts that seems to justify 
 the opinion ; it is the facts themselves that justify the 
 opinion, and the opinion is the result. Measures of 
 military operation, too, is an odd sort of phrase. This 
 paragraph is all bad, from beginning to end; but I am 
 merely pointing out prominent and gross errors. 
 
 42. ' ' Another magistrate reports sevei-al robbei'ies of arms in the 
 parishes of Skull and Kilmore, and the burning of a corn-store at 
 Crookhaven; and another, in representing the alarming state of 
 the country, adds, that the object of the insurgents, in one district 
 at least, has not been confined to the lowering of rents and tithes, 
 but extended to the refusal also of the priests dues." 
 
 To rob applies to the person or thing from whom or 
 which something is violently and vmlawfully 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, Avho, in other 
 places, talks of ^^ plundering axms from people," and who, 
 by saying '■^six hundred aiid seventy-six firearms^'' and 
 the hke, leaves us clearly to understand that he is at 
 liberty to use this noun in the singular, and, of covirse, 
 to say a fire-arm whenever ho may choose ; a liberty, 
 however, which I would, my dear James, earnestly recom- 
 mend to you never to think of taking.
 
 Marquis Wellesley's Dispatches. 267 
 
 To confine and extend an object does not seem to be 
 very clear sense ; and, at any rate, to say that the object 
 of loicering 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 pai't of the sentence downright nonsense. 
 
 43. ' ' No additional military force, no improvement nor augmen- 
 tation of the police, would now be effectual without the aid of the 
 Insurrection Act ; with that aid it appears to be rational to expect 
 that tranquillity may be maintained, confirmed, and extended 
 throughout Ireland. It is, therefore, my duty, in every view, to 
 request the renewal of the law, of which the operation forms the 
 subject of this dispatch." 
 
 Did any man, in any writing of any sort, ever before 
 meet with anything hke this? Suppose I were to say, 
 '■'■the writings of tchich the inaccuracies form the subject 
 of these remarks," what would the world think and say of 
 me? This is indeed "prose r^m mad.''^ 
 
 Cobbett means, of course, that we should say, "the writings, the 
 inaccuracies of which " ; but we can now say, ' ' the writings whose 
 inaccuracies," which sounds much more smooth and elegant. 
 
 44. "With respect to Westmeath, the chief magistrate of police 
 has stated the revival of those pai't^ feuds and personal conflicts in 
 the neighborhood of Mullingar, which are considered in this coun- 
 try to be indications of the return of public tranquillity, and from 
 which the magistrate expects the detection of past offences against 
 the state." 
 
 One loses sight of everything about language here, in 
 contemplating the shocking, the horrible fact ! For, what 
 is so horrible as the fact here officially stated, that party 
 feuds andpersotial conflicts are deemed indications/auor- 
 able 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 "-state the revivaV is 
 just as good Enghsh as it would be to say that the magis- 
 trate has stated the fine weather. The " the return " ought 
 to be "a return.''''
 
 268 Six Lessons. 
 
 45. " The early expiration of the Act would, at least, Mzard the 
 revival of that tyranny ; the restraints imposed on violence have not 
 yet been of sufficient duration to form any solid foundation of a 
 better and more disciplined disposition in the minds of the people. 
 Even now it is believed that arms are retained in the hope of the 
 expiration of the law on the 1st of August; and although a more 
 auspicious sentiment may exist in the hearts of some, even of the 
 guilty, it would be contrary to all prudent policy and provide7it wis- 
 dom, by a premature relaxation of the law, to afford facility to the 
 accomplishment 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 effect- 
 ually 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 tyranny was a thing that 
 ought not to be ptit in danger. The word hazard had no 
 business there. Another mode of expression ought to 
 have been used; such as, "exposed the country to the 
 danger of the revival of the tyranny." 
 
 The semicolon after tyranny ought to have been o, full- 
 point. " In the hope of the expiration " is bad enough ; 
 but it is the arrangement of this sentence, the placing 
 of the several p>arts 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 qx\.^ provident wisdom " would seem to 
 say that there are such things as imprudent pohcy and 
 improvident wisdom ; but, still, all the rest is inferior, in 
 point of importance, to the confusion which follows, and 
 which leaves you wholly in doubt as to the meaning of 
 the writer. Now, observe with what facihty this mass of 
 confusion is reduced to order, and that, too, without add- 
 ing to or taking from the marquis one single word. I 
 begin after the word wisdom: " to afford, by a prematiu'e 
 relaxation of the law, facility to the accompHshment of 
 the worst designs, and to weaken, before the spirit of 
 outrage had been effectually extinguished, the safeguards
 
 Bishop of Winchester's Charge. 269 
 
 which now secures the lives and properties of the loyal 
 and obedient." 
 
 How clear this is ! And how much more hai'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 insufficient to keep so great a man as tbe mar- 
 quis in countenance, I will here show that a bishop can 
 commit errors of the same sort and greater in degree. 
 
 Before passing to the bishop, let us consider for a moment wherein 
 lies the cause or the mainspring of the errors committed by these 
 high personages. It is plain that they did not, to recur to Mr. 
 White's phrase, " conform to the laws of reason," nor •' follow the 
 order which we call logical." Had they, then, never studied logic? 
 Undoubtedly they had ; for they had all received a classical educa- 
 tion, and logic forms a chief branch of such an education. How 
 came they, then, to think and write illogically? There are some 
 people who, notwithstanding their study of logic, cannot think or 
 write logically, and there are some people who, without ever 
 having studied logic, can think and write logically. Of the latter 
 the number is small, however. For grammar is a branch of logic ; 
 that branch of logic which teaches us to express thought clearly 
 and correctly ; and as these men never learned or mastered this 
 branch of logic, they were never able to express their thought 
 clearly and correctly. English grammar, by itself, they probably 
 never studied ; and all they knew of it was derived from their 
 study of Latin grammar, or of logic in general. Lord 
 Castlereagh had never been taught to see the proper relations 
 of things, and like Lord Dundreary, he "got things mixed." 
 When the Speaker of the House of Commons talks of the necessity 
 of returning to Cash Payments as soon as possible, and yet appre- 
 hends a convulsion from a too rapid transition, that is, from 
 returning to such Payments sooner than possible, he is illogical in 
 thought ; for what he declares in one breath as necessary, he fears 
 as dangerous in the next. And when Lord Castlereagh spoke 
 of the Allies making themselves "parties in the criminality of 
 this mass of plunder," he spoke about as logically as the child who 
 complained of the " wicked candy that made him sick." 
 
 I have before me " A Charge delivered to the Clergy of
 
 270 Six Lessons. 
 
 the Diocese of Winchester, at a primary visitation of 
 that diocese, by George Tomline, D.JD., J^ZH.S., Lord 
 Bishop of Winchester, I^relate of the most Noble Order 
 of the Garter.'''' We will not stop here to inquire what a 
 prelate'' s office may j-equire of him relative to an Order 
 which history tells us arose out of a favorite 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 honorable and of most importance to th-i 
 clergy! This bishoj?, whose name vms Pkettyman, 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 
 m,ost Noble Order of the Garter, and a Bishop of one of 
 the richest Sees in the xohole toorld, who, besides, is an 
 Historian, and was Tutor to a heaven-born minister. Let 
 us see then what sort of torlting comes from such a 
 soui'ce. I could take an incorr3ct 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 Jirst sentence of it. 
 
 46. "My reverend brethren, being called to preside over this 
 distinguished diocese, at a late period of life, 1 have tliought it 
 incumbent upon me not to delay the opportunity of becoming per- 
 sonally acquainted with my clergy longer than circumstances ren- 
 dered absolutely necessary." 
 
 There are t2co double meanings in this short sentence. 
 AVas he called at some foi-mer time, to preside over the 
 diocese tchen he should become old? or was he, wheii he 
 Jiad become old, called to preside over the diocese? But 
 •what follows is still worse. Does he mean that he thought 
 it incumbent on him to become acquainted with his clergy 
 as soon as possible, or in as short a time as possible f To 
 delay an opportunity is not very good ; and that which is 
 of a man's own appointment, and which proceeds purely
 
 Bishop of Winche-^ter's Charge. 271 
 
 fi'om his own wall, cannot strictly be called an opportuniiy. 
 But it is tlie double meaning, occasioned by the wrong- 
 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 Eeverend Brethren, being called, at a late period of 
 hfe, to preside over this distinguished diocese, I have 
 thought it incumbent on me not to delay, longer than 
 cu'cumstances rendered absolutely necessary, the oppor- 
 tunity of becoming personally acquainted with my clergy." 
 
 How easy it was to write thus! And yet this bishoj) 
 tlid not know how to do it. I dare say that he con-ected 
 and re-corrected every sentence of this charge. And yet 
 what hungllng work it is, after all! And these are youi" 
 college and university bred men ! These are the men who 
 aie called Doctors on accoimt of then" literary acquire- 
 ments, doctus being the Latin word for learned! Thus 
 it is that the mass of mankind have been imposed upon 
 by hig sounding na^nes, which, however, have seldom 
 failed to insui'e, to those who have assumed them, power, 
 ease, luxiu-y, and splendor, at the expense of those who 
 have been foohsh or base enough to acquiesce, or to 
 seem to acquiesce, m. the fitness of the assumption. 
 
 Such acquiescence is not, however, so general now-a- 
 days as it formerly was ; and the chagrin v.^hich the "Z>oc- 
 iors" feel at the change is not more evident than it is 
 amusing. In the very chai-ge which I have just quoted, 
 the tutor of the heaven-born minister says, "A sj^iiit is 
 still manifest amongst us, producing an impatience of 
 control, a reluctance to acknowledge superiority^ and an 
 eagerness to call in question the expediency of established 
 forms and customs^ "What! is it, then, a sin; is it an 
 offence against God, to be reluctant to '■'■acknowledge 
 superiority " in a bishop who cannot write so well as oui'- 
 selves? Oh, no! We are not to be censvu-ed, because 
 we doubt of the expediency of those estabhshments, those
 
 272 Six Wessons. 
 
 colleges and universities, which cause immense revenues, 
 arising from public property, to be expended on the edu- 
 cation of men, who, after all, can produce, ia the literary 
 way, nothing better than writings such as those on which 
 we have now been remarking. 
 
 The nature of the faults in these extracts may, perhaps, be made 
 still clearer by calling your attention to the two kinds of sentences 
 called loose and periodic. A loose sentence is one in which the 
 sense is complete at the end of any phrase or clause in it, whereas 
 a periodic sentence keeps the sense suspended till the end. The 
 latter is generally preferable to the former. For instance. "We 
 have learned to speak and write English correctly, in a few months, 
 by means of this little book, in spite of many obstacles." This is a 
 loose sentence ; so loose that any member of it may be dropped 
 without injuring the sense. Now let us put it in a periodic form, 
 and yon will see that you can come to a full-stop nowhere except 
 at the end. "By means of this little book, we have, in a few 
 months, in spite of many obstacles, learned to speak and wtivo 
 English correctly."

 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY 
 
 Los Angeles 
 This book is DUE on the last date stamped below. 
 
 JUN 5 V-6% 
 I 3 \^& 
 
 f^AlN LOAN oiik 
 
 E:^ FEB ll)196S 
 
 I A.M. 
 
 RECEl 
 
 LD-IRL 
 
 ^ MAY ii3 Idee 
 
 (& 
 
 
 \ 
 
 
 ^M. 
 
 VE 
 
 Dl 
 
 2 1979 
 
 IVIMI ^ 
 
 i 1965 
 
 ij.Mkjy?/|fp^^,.,,PiiL 
 
 SEP 
 
 EWAl 
 
 L V 
 
 ft^lA 
 
 ]m 
 
 ORION 
 
 to/ URL OCT 20 '88 
 
 LD/URL 
 
 KEC'D LD-URE 
 
 DEC 2 71989 
 JAN 4 iQ^n 
 
 Form L9-25w-9,'47(A5618) 444 
 
 UNIVERSITY of CALIFORNIA 
 
 AT 
 
 T nc A TNjnFT R<;
 
 001 352 492 
 
 UCLAYoung Research Library 
 
 PE1111 .C63e 1901 
 
 L 009 508 719 3 
 
 SOUTHERN RPGfnL°,'?''"°'-"«
 
 rnia