tense of any verb, when the circumstances of contingency and futurity concur, it is proper to vary the terminations of the second and third persons singular; that without the concurrence of those circumstances, the terminations should not be altered and that the verb and the auxiliaries of the three past tenses, and the auxiliaries of the future, undergo no alterations whatever: except the imperfect of the verb to be, which, in cases denoting contingency, is varied in all the persons of the singular number.

After perusing what has been advanced on this subject, it will be natural for the student to inquire, what is the extent of the subjunctive mood? Some grammarians think it extends only to what is called the present tense of verbs generally, under the circumstances of contingency and futurity; and to the imperfect tense of the verb to be, when it denotes contingency because in these tenses only, the form of the verb admits of variation; and they suppose that it is variation merely which constitutes the distinction of moods. It is the opinion of other grammarians, that, besides the two cases just mentioned, all verbs in the three past, and the two future teases, are in the subjunctive mood, when they denote contingency and uncertainty, though they have not any change of termination; and that, when contingency is not signified, the verb, through all these five tenses, belongs to the indicative mood, whatever conjunction may attend it. They think, that the definition and nature of the subjunctive mood, have no reference to change of termination, but that they refer merely to the manner of the being, action, or passion, signified by the verb; and that the subjunctive mood may as properly exist, without a variation of the verb, as the infinitive mood, which certainly has no terminations different from those of the indicative. The decision of this point is not, however, of much consequence. The rules which ascertain the propriety of varying, or not varying, the terminations of the verb, are of more importance; and may be well observed, without a uniformity of sentiment respecting the nature

and limits of the subjunctive mood. For further remarks on the subject, see sect. 8. p. 102.

There is a peculiar neatness in a sentence beginning with the conjunctive form of a verb. "Were there no difference, there would be no choice."

A double conjunctive, in two correspondent clauses of a sentence, is sometimes made use of: as, " Had he done this, he had escaped ;""Had the limitations on the prerogative been, in his time, quite fixed and certain, his integrity had made him regard as sacred, the boundaries of the constitution." The sentence in the common form would have read thus: "If the limitations on the prerogative had been, &c. his integrity would have made him regard," &c.

9. Some conjunctions have their correspondent conjunctions belonging to them, so that, in the subsequent member, of the sentence, the latter answers to the former: as,

1st, Though, yet, nevertheless: as, " Though he was rich, yet for our sakes he became poor."

2d, Whether or as, "Whether he will go or not, I cannot tell."

3d, Either-or: as, "I will either send it, or bring it myself."

4th, Neither nor: as, "Neither thou nor I am able to compass it."

5th, As-as: expressing a comparison of equality: as, "She is as amiable as her sister."

6th, Asso: expressing a comparison of equality: as, "As the stars, so shall thy seed be."

7th, Asso: expressing a comparison of quality as, "As the one dieth, so dieth the other,"

8th, Soas: with a verb expressing a comparison of quality as, " To see thy glory, so as I have seen thee in the sanctuary."

9th, Soas: with a negative and an adjective expressing a comparison of quantity: as, "Pompey was not so great a man as Cæsar."

10th, So that expressing a consequence: was so fatigued, that he could scarcely move."

as," He

The conjunctions or and nor may often be used, with nearly equal propriety. "The king, whose character was not sufficiently vigorous, nor decisive, assented to the measure." In this sentence, or would perhaps have been better: but, in general, nor seems to repeat the negation in the former part of the sentence, and therefore gives more emphasis to the expression.

10. Conjunctions are often improperly used, both singly and in pairs. The following are examples of this impropriety. "The relations are so uncertain, as that they require a great deal of examination;" it should be," that they require," &c. "There was no man so sanguine, who did not apprehend some ill consequences :" it ought to be, "So sanguine as not to apprehend," &c.; or, “no man, how sanguine soever, who did not," &c. "To trust in him is no more but to acknowledge his power." "This is no other but the gate of paradise." In both these instances, but should be than. "We should sufficiently weigh the objects of our hope; whether they are such as we may reasonably expect from them what they propose," &c. It ought to be," that we may reasonably," &c. "The duke had not behaved with that loyalty as he ought to have done;" "with which he ought." "In the order as they lie in his preface:" it should be, " in order as they lie;" or, " in the order in which they lie." "Such sharp replies that cost him his life;" "as cost him," &c. "If he was truly that scarecrow, as he is now commonly painted;"" such a scarecrow," &c. "I wish I could do that justice to his memory, to oblige the painters," &c. ; " do such justice as to oblige," &c.

The particle as, when it is connected with the pronoun such, has the force of a relative pronoun: as, "Let such as presume to advise others, look well to their own conduct;" which is equivalent to," Let them who presume," &c.

But when used by itself, this particle is to be considered. as a conjunction.

Our language wants a conjunction adapted to familiar style, equivalent to notwithstanding. The words for all that, seem to be too low. "A word it was in the mouth of every one, but, for all that, this may still be a secret."

In regard that is solemn and antiquated; because would do much better in the following sentence. "It cannot be otherwise, in regard that the French prosody differs from that of every other," &c.

The word except is far preferable to other than. "It admitted of no effectual cure other than amputation." Except is also to be preferred to all but. "They were happy all but the stranger."

In the two following phrases the conjunction as is improperly omitted; "Which nobody presumes, or is so sanguine a to hope." "I must, however, be so just a to own."

The conjunction that is often properly omitted, and understood; as, "I beg you would come to me;" "See thou do it not ;" instead of "that you would," that thou do." But in the following and many similar phrases, this conjunction were much better inserted: "Yet it is reason the memory of their virtues remain to posterity." It should be," yet it is just that the memory," &c.

RULE XX.

When the qualities of different things are compared, the latter noun or pronoun is not governed by the conjunction than or 'as, (for conjunctions have no government of cases,) but argees with the verb, or is governed by the verb or the preposition, expressed or understood: as, "Thou art wiser than I;" that is, "than I am." "They loved him more than me :" i, e. "more than they loved me." The sentiment is well expressed by Plato, but much better by Solomon than him;" that is," than by him."

S

The propriety or impropriety of many phrases, in the preceding as well as in some other forms, may be discovered, by supplying the words that are not expressed; which will be evident from the following instances of erroneous construction. "He can read better than me." "He is as good as her." "Whether I be present or no." "Who did this? Me." By supplying the words understood in each of these phrases, their impropriety and governing rule will appear: as, "Better than I can read;" "As good as she is;" "Present or not present;" "I did it."

1. By not attending to this rule, many errors have been committed: a number of which is subjoined, as a further caution and direction to the learner. "Thou art a much greater loser than me by his death." "She suffers hourly more than me." "We contributed a third more than the Dutch, who were obliged to the same proportion more than us." "King Charles, and more than him, the duke and the popish faction, were at liberty to form new schemes." "The drift of all his sermons was, to prepare the Jews for the reception of a prophet mightier than him, and whose shoes he was not worthy to bear." "It was not the work of so eminent an author, as him to whom it was first imputed." "A stone is heavy, and the sand weighty; but a fool's wrath is heavier than them both." "If the king give us leave, we may perform the office as well as them that do." In these passages it ought to be, " I, we, he, they, respectively."

When the relative who immediately follows than, it seems to form an exception to the 20th rule; for in that connexion, the relative must be in the objective case: as, "Alfred, than whom, a greater king never reigned," &c, "Beelzebub, than whom, Satan excepted, none higher sat," &c. It is remarkable, that in such instances, if the personal pronoun were used, it would be in the nominative case; as, "A greater king never reigned than he," that is, "than he was." "Beelzebub, than he," &c. that is, "than he