I must observe, however, that this sort of full and oratorical climax, can neither be always obtained, nor ought to be always sought after. Only some kinds of writing admit such sentences; and, to study them too frequently, especially if the subject require not so much pomp, is affected and disagreeable. But there is something approaching to a climax, which it is a general rule to study; 'ne decrescat oratio,' as Quintilian speaks, 'et ne fortiori subjungatur aliquid infirmius.' A weaker assertion or proposition should never come after a stronger one; and when our sentence consists of two members, the longest should, generally, be the concluding one. There is a twofold reason for this last direction. Periods, thus divided, are pronounced more easily; and the shortest member being placed first, we carry it more readily in our memory as we proceed to the second, and see the connexion of the two more clearly. Thus to say, 'when our passions have forsaken us, we flatter ourselves with the belief that we have forsaken them,' is both more graceful and more clear, than to begin with the longest part of the proposition: 'we flatter ourselves with the belief that we have forsaken our passions, when they have forsaken us.' In general, it is always agreeable to find a sentence rising upon us, and growing in its importance to the very last word, when this construction can be managed without affectation, or unseasonable pomp. 'If we rise yet higher,' says Mr. Addison, very beautifully, and consider the fixed stars as so many oceans of flame, that are each of them attended with a different set of planets; and still discover new firmaments and new lights, that are sunk farther in those unfathomable depths of æther; we are lost in such a labyrinth of suns and worlds, and confounded with the magnificence and immensity of Nature.' (Spect. No. 420.) Hence follows clearly,

A fifth rule for the strength of sentences, which is, to avoid concluding them with an adverb, a preposition, or any inconsiderable word. Such conclusions are always enfeebling and degrading. There are sentences, indeed, where the stress and significancy rest chiefly upon some words of this kind. In this case, they are not to be considered as circumstances, but as the capital figures; and ought, in propriety, to have the principal place allotted them. No fault, for instance, can be found with this sentence of Bolingbroke's: "In their prosperity, my friends shall never hear of me; in their adversity, always.' Where never and always, being emphatical words, were to be so placed, as to make a strong impression. But I speak now of those inferior parts of speech, when introduced as circumstances, or as qualifications of more important words. In such case, they should always be disposed of in the least conspicuous parts of the period; and so classed with other words of greater dignity, as to be kept in their proper secondary station.

Agreeably to this rule, we should always avoid concluding with any of those particles, which mark the cases of nouns, of, to, from, with, by. For instance, it is a great deal better to say, 'Avarice is a crime of which wise men are often guilty,' than to say, 'Avarice is a crime which wise men are often guilty of.' This is a phraseology

For besides the

which all correct writers shun, and with reason. want of dignity which arises from those monosyllables at the end, the imagination cannot avoid resting, for a little, on the import of the word which closes the sentence: and, as those prepositions have no import of their own, but only serve to point out the relations of other words, it is disagreeable for the mind to be left pausing on a word, which does not, by itself, produce any idea, nor form any picture in the fancy.

For the same reason, verbs which are used in a compound sense, with some of these prepositions, are, though not so bad, yet still not so beautiful conclusions of a period; such as, bring about, lay hold of, come over to, clear up, and many other of this kind; instead of which, if we can employ a simple verb, it always terminates the sentence with more strength. Even the pronoun it, though it has the import of a substantive noun, and indeed often forces itself upon us unavoidably, yet, when we want to give dignity to a sentence, should, if possible, be avoided in the conclusion; more especially, when it is joined with some of the prepositions, as, with it, in it, to it. In the following sentence of the Spectator, which otherwise is abundantly noble, the bad effect of this close is sensible: There is not in my opinion, a more pleasing and triumphant consideration in religion, than this, of the perpetual progress which the soul makes towards the perfection of its nature, without ever arriving at a period in it.' (No. 111.) How much more graceful the sentence, if it had been so constructed as to close with the word period.

Besides particles and pronouns, any phrase which expresses a circumstance only, always brings up the rear of a sentence with a bad grace. We may judge of this, by the following sentence from Lord Bolingbroke: (Letter on the State of Parties at the Accession of King George I.) 'Let me, therefore, conclude by repeating, that division has caused all the mischief we lament; that union alone can retrieve it; and that a great advance towards this union, was the coalition of parties, so happily begun, so successfully carried on, and of late so unaccountably neglected; to say no worse.' This last phrase, to say no worse, occasions a sad falling off at the end; so much the more unhappy, as the rest of the period is conducted after the manner of a climax, which we expect to find growing to the last.

The proper disposition of such circumstances in a sentence, is often attended with considerable trouble, in order to adjust them so, as shali consist equally with the perspicuity and the grace of the period. Though necessary parts, they are, however, like unshapely stones in a building, which try the skill of an artist, where to place them with the least offence. Jungantur,' says Quintilian, 'quo congruunt maximè; sicut in structurâ saxorum rudium, etiam ipsa enormitas invenit cui applicari, et in quo possit insistere."

Let them be inserted wherever the happiest place for them can be found; as in a structure composed of rough stones, there are always places where the most irregular and unshapely may find some adjacent one to which it can be joined, and some basis on which it may rest.'

The close is always an unsuitable place for them. When the sense admits it, the sooner they are despatched, generally speaking, the better; that the more important and significant words may possess the last place, quite disencumbered. It is a rule, too, never to crowd too many circumstances together, but rather to intersperse them in different parts of the sentence, joined with the capital words on which they depend; provided that care be taken, as I before directed, not to clog those capital words with them. For instance, when Dean Swift says, 'What I had the honour of mentioning to your Lordship, some time ago, in conversation, was not a new thought.' (Letter to the Earl of Oxford.) These two circumstances, some time ago, and in conversation, which are here put together, would have had a better effect disjoined thus: 'What I had the honour, sometime ago, of mentioning to your Lordship in conversation.' And in the following sentence of Lord Bolingbroke's: (Remarks on the History of England.) A monarchy, limited like ours, may be placed, for aught I know, as it has been often represented, just in the middle point, from whence a deviation leads, on the one hand, to tyranny, and on the other, to anarchy.' The arrangement would have been happier thus: A monarchy, limited like ours, may, for aught I know, be placed, as it has often been represented, just in the middle point,' &c.

I shall give only one rule more, relating to the strength of a sentence, which is, that in the members of a sentence, where two things are compared or contrasted to each other; where either a resemblance or an opposition is intended to be expressed; some resemblance, in the language and construction, should be preserved. For when the things themselves correspond to each other, we naturally expect to find the words corresponding too. We are disappointed when it is otherwise; and the comparison, or contrast, appears more imperfect. Thus, when Lord Bolingbroke says, "The laughers will be for those who have most wit; the serious part of mankind, for those who have most reason on their side;' (Dissert. on Parties, Pref.) the opposition would have been more complete, if he had said, 'The laughers will be for those who have most wit; the serious, for those who have most reason on their side.' The following passage from Mr. Pope's preface to his Homer, fully exemplifies the rule I am now giving: 'Homer was the greater genius; Virgil, the better artist; in the one, we most admire the man; in the other, the work. Homer hurries us with a commanding impetuosity; Virgil leads us with an attractive majesty. Homer scatters with a generous profusion; Virgil bestows with a careful magnificence. Homer, like the Nile, pours out his riches with a sudden overflow; Virgil, like a river in its banks, with a constant stream. And when we look upon their machines, Homer seems like his own Jupiter, in his terrors, shaking Olympus, scattering the lightnings, and firing the heavens; Virgil, like the same power, in his benevolence, counselling with the gods, laying plans for empires, and ordering his whole creation.' Periods thus constructed, when introduced with propriety, and not returning too often, have a sen

sible beauty. But we must beware of carrying our attention to this beauty too far. It ought only to be occasionally studied, when comparison or opposition of objects naturally leads to it. If such a construction as this be aimed at in all our sentences, it leads to a disagreeble uniformity; produces a regularly returning clink in the period, which tires the ear; and plainly discovers affectation. Among the ancients, the style of Isocrates is faulty in this respect; and on that account, by some of their best critics, particularly by Dionysius of Halicarnassus, he is severely censured.

This finishes what I had to say concerning sentences, considered, with respect to their meaning, under the three heads of perspicuity, unity, and strength. It is a subject on which I have insisted fully, for two reasons: First, because it is a subject which, by its nature, can be rendered more didactic, and subjected more to precise rule, than many other subjects of criticism; and next, because it appears to me of considerable importance and use.

For, though many of those attentions which I have been recommending, may appear minute, yet their effect, upon writing and style, is much greater than might at first be imagined. A sentiment which is expressed in a period, clearly, neatly, and happily arranged, makes always a stronger impression on the mind, than one that is feeble or embarrassed. Every one feels this upon a comparison: and if the effect be sensible in one sentence, how much more in a whole discourse, or composition, that is made up of such sentences?

The fundamental rule of the construction of sentences, and into which all others might be resolved, undoubtedly is, to communicate, in the clearest and most natural order, the ideas which we mean to transfuse into the minds of others. Every arrangement that does most justice to the sense, and expresses it to most advantage, strikes us as beautiful. To this point have tended all the rules I have given. And, indeed, did men always think clearly, and were they, at the same time, fully masters of the language in which they write, there would be occasion for few rules. Their sentences would then, of course, acquire all those properties of precision, unity, and strength, which I have recommended. For we may

rest assured, that, whenever we express ourselves ill, there is,besides the mismanagement of language, for the most part, some mistake in our manner of conceiving the subject. Embarrassed, obscure, and feeble sentences, are generally, if not always, the result of embarrassed, obscure, and feeble thought. Thought and language act and re-act upon each other mutually. Logic and rhetoric have here, as in many other cases, a strict connexion; and he that is learning to arrange his sentences with accuracy and order, is learning, at the same time, to think with accuracy and order; an observation which alone will justify all the care and attention we have bestowed on this subject.

U

QUESTIONS.

WHAT does our author term the sage. Here are how many ands? Of third quality of a correct sentence; and this agreeable writer, what is farther what does he mean by it? Of the two remarked? Of a writer, so accurate as former qualities, what is remarked; Dean Swift, what is strange? Repeat but why is more than these requisite ? the sentence; and of it, what is remarkWhat is the first rule given for pro-ed? What, in the next place, is worthy moting the strength of a sentence ? of observation? Who makes this reWith what may these, sometimes, be mark; what examples are given; and consistent, but they always have what what is said of them? Hence, what foleffect? What is a general maxim? lows? What examples from Lord BoThey cannot be superfluous without lingbroke, and from Cæsar, are given to what; and what follows? What ex-illustrate this observation? Of the latter ample is given to illustrate this remark? illustration, what is remarked? Why What, therefore, is considered one of is this attention to the copulative of the most useful of exercises, in cor- considerable importance to all who recting what we have written? Here, study eloquence? Hence, for what what should be employed; and what purpose, are the omission, and the rewill our sentences acquire, when thus petition of it, respectively used; and for retrenched? Of what, however, must what reason? To illustrate this more we be careful; and why? To what fully, what example is given from the must some regard be had; and what writings of the apostle Paul? What is must be left? Besides redundant words, the third rule for promoting the strength of what should sentences be cleared? of a sentence? What must every one As every word ought to present a new see; and what is equally plain? What, idea, what follows? What fault stands however, cannot be ascertained by any opposed to this? What examples are precise rule? With what must this given to illustrate this remark? In both vary? What must be studied, in the these instances, what is observed of the first place; and of the nature of our second member of the sentence; and language, what is remarked? In our what remark follows? When words language, where, for the most part, are multiplied, without a corresponding are the important words placed? To multiplication of ideas, what is their illustrate this remark, what example is effect? After removing superfluities, given; and of this order, what is obwhat is the second direction given for served? What, however, is sometimes promoting the strength of a sentence? advantageous? What example is Of these little words, what is remarked? given from Mr. Pope? From the great Why cannot a particular set of rules liberty of inversion, what advantage respecting them be given? What, then, did the Greek and Latin writers enjoy? must here direct us? Of the splitting Who endeavoured to imitate them in of particles, what is observed? What this? What was the consequence; and example is given? In such instances why? What two instances are given what effect is produced; and why are from Mr. Gordon, to illustrate this rewe, in thought, put to a stand? What mark? But, notwithstanding these indo some writers needlessly multiply?stances, of our language, what is reWhat example is given? Where is marked? What example illustrates such a style proper? But, in the ordi- this remark; and of it, what is evident? nary current of discourse, how should Of some writers, what is observed ? we express ourselves? Where do other what instance is given; and to it, what writers make it a practice of omitting is owing? From what will this appear? the relative? What examples are Of what is he speaking? Repeat the given? Of this eliptical style, what is passage. Of this passage, what is obremarked? How, therefore, should served? On opening any page of Mr. these sentences be written? What is Addison, what will we see? What exthe first observation, made on the copu- ample is given? How does this style lative and; and what sort of effect has compare with the style of Lord it? To illustrate this remark, from Shaftesbury?

whom is an example taken; and of Whether we practice inversion or what is he speaking? Repeat the pas-not, what is a point of great moment?