placed after the first "love," thus: "We are apt to love them who love us." This is a great blunder in Murray. Whom did he wish to designate by them? Why, persons in general; any persons; and them can never imply these. It always implies particular persons. Mr. Murray meant," we are apt to love those who love us;" that is, those persons, any persons, who love us; and not, "we are apt to love them," that is, them persons who love us. But if we wish them to represent particular persons, we do what is perfectly correct, in employing this word. For example: a woman has two children; "she loves them, who are wise and good" not because they are wise and good, for she may love them without their being either; but she loves them, and they, without any necessary connection, happen to be wise and good. You see that here, the word "them" is employed in a sense altogether different from that in which it is employed in the first example. In the first, the former clause of the sentence is dependent entirely upon the latter. "We are apt to love those who love us ;". apt to love them, because they love us. This is the reason that we love them. But in the last example, the mother of the children loves them, not because they are wise and good; for she would doubtless love them if they were not so, though perhaps not to such a degree; but she loves them independent of every consideration, and they, at the same time, happen to be wise and good The meaning of a sentence, must, in all such instances, be your guide; and a little reflection, will give you this meaning. We say, "it is a shame that they who are poor, though honest, are so little thought of." This is different from "it is a shame that those who are poor, though honest, are so little thought of," In the first, the meaning is, that "they, or a few particular persons, whom the hearer understands us to designate, who are poor and honest, are little thought of." In the second, that "those, those persons, any persons, persons in general, who are poor and honest, are little thought of."

205. We now come to the INDETERMINATE PRO. NOUNS. These were spoken of in paragraph 72. You see by that paragraph that they are adjectives as well as

Indeterminate Pronouns; and that it is only when used without any noun following them, that they are to be regarded as pronouns. Every, which is generally considered one of these pronouns, is always used before a noun, and is therefore always an adjective. Errors are very common in the using of this word, and also in the using of the words each and either. It is never correct to use after any of these, the plural verb, or plural pronoun. If I say, every person, every street, or every day, I mean to be sure, all persons, all streets, all days; but I do not mean them connectedly; I mean them separately. I mean this day, or the next day, or the next day, or some other day; I mean ANY ONE of all; and therefore I cannot say, "every day bring their changes." Nor can I say, "each of us have a book;" nor, "either of us are willing to go." In Byron's famous letter to D'Israeli, in reply to an article in Blackwood's Magazine, I find some very gross errors of this kind. The great poet there says: "With regard to Don Juan, I neither deny nor admit it to be mine-every body may form their own opinion; but if there be any who now, or in the progress of that poem, if it is to be continued, feel, or should feel themselves so aggrieved as to require a more explicit answer, privately and personally, they shall have it." I need not correct these sentences; you yourself can easily do so.

206. With the advice, that you will adhere strictly to the rules laid down in this Letter, and that you will always reflect upon the meaning of words when about to use them, I will conclude my instructions upon pronouns, and prepare for you a short Letter on adjectives.

MY YOUNG FRIEND,

LETTER XVI.

SYNTAX.

ADJECTIVES.

207. It would be disparaging your understanding for me to again tell you the purpose for which adjectives are employed. They are so easily comprehended, and I have spoken so frequently about them, that you can point them out as easily as I can.

208. You know that there are three degrees of comparison in adjectives: the positive, the comparative, and the superlative. And here is something that you must attend to; something that is not mentioned in any grammar book published: The comparative degree derives its name from there always being one thing compared with another, when the degree is used. Consequently, if you do not make a comparison between things when you use the degree, your sentence cannot be correct. It will not do to say, "Cooper is a much better writer;" because, though the degree is used, there is no comparison. We must say, Cooper is a much better writer than Marryatt." "The patriots who fought at the battle of New Orleans, achieved a greater victory;" no comparison; this must be, "the patriots who fought at the battle of New Orleans, achieved a greater victory than any on record."

209. When adjectives are used as nouns, they must be treated as such; and must have verbs and pronouns to agree with them accordingly. For instance: "As the selfish never feel the pain which they inflict upon others, they are necessarily always cruel." We cannot, however, use an adjective as a noun, in the singular number; we cannot say, "a selfish is always cruel."

210. When two or more adjectives apply to a noun there must be a comma, or commas placed between them; as, a sober, derserving man."

66

211. People are often very careless in using adjectives; we often hear them say, "You have a bad cold." "What a greasy candle that is." "What a delightful enjoyment." An adjective can never be correctly used along with a noun, unless there be more than one noun of the kind. To say "the high sky," is nonsense; because every body knows that the sky is high; besides, the expression causes every one who hears it, to suppose that there must be a low sky, or why would the distinction have been made. If there be but one thing of a kind, the employing of an adjective must always do harm. If I say, "this is cold ice," the adjective is not only useless but positively injurious; inasmuch as it causes those who hear me speak, to suppose that I think there is such a thing as warm ice. So when we hear a person say, "I have a bad cold," we

must necessarily suppose that there is a good cold in existence, or why make the distinction. A person may have

a severe cold, because there are colds which are not severe; and therefore the distinction is necessary. But to hear a person speak of the "big sun;" of "good health;" of "good moral character;" of "good order;" or of "bad sense," is enough to excite the laughter of any one. Mr. Cobbett, in his English Grammar, talks about "good grammar," and "bad grammar." Why, what is grammar? Nearly all grammarians in the commencement of their books tell us, that "grammar is the writing and speaking of the English language correctly." What, then, is bad grammar? Why, bad grammar must be "the BAD writing and speaking of the English language CORRECTLY!!"

LETTER XVII.

SYNTAX. VERBS.

MY YOUNG FRIEND,

212. You have now arrived at the most important part of your study; and if you but fully master this Letter, you need not be afraid to exhibit your writing to any critic upon grammar, in the land. But before you proceed, if you do not thoroughly understand all that relates to the etymology of verbs, you had better look back at Letter VIII, and read it through.

213. Being now ready to proceed on your journey of instruction, let me inform you, that there never can be a sentence, that there never can be any sense in words, unless there be, in that sentence, or in those words, a verb, either expressed or understood. This may appear very strange; but I will presently prove it to your satisfaction. Suppose I wrote a letter to you, and headed it thus: Philadelphia, January 6th, 1889 ;" would not this be a sentence? aye, and a complete one, too? and yet, where is there a verb in any part of this? "Philadelphia" is not a verb; nor is "January;" nor is "sixth ;" nor is any of the

แ

words, one thousand eight hundred and thirty nine." How, then, is a verb always required to make a sentence? Just reflect for a moment on this heading, and it is likely that you will find much more implied, than is expressed. You will find that these words mean, "the place in which I am writing this letter, is called Philadelphia; this day is the sixth one of the month called January; and which month is in the eighteen hundred and thirty ninth year of the Christian era." So then, here are seven verbs, where there appeared to be none at all. "A grammar of the English language, in a series of letters;" what does this sentence mean? why, it means, "this book is a grammar of the English language, written in a series of letters."

214. These detached words have been great mysteries to many, who have been obliged to invent several new cases of nouns, and to exhibit these words as belonging thereto, in order to screen their want of discernment. But if you only reflect a little upon the examples here given, you will be able to fill up with the proper words, and without any difficulty whatever, all such sentences.

215. It is not often that we put in, in our speaking or writing, all the words which are understood. We omit certain words necessary to a full expression of our meaning, because they are just as well understood as being embraced in the other words which we use, as if we expressed them; and because the omission prevents awkwardness of expression. This omission, or, as it is more generally called, this leaving out of words, is known as the ellipsis. A name which is a very appropriate one, signifying skipping over, or leaving out. Let me give you a sentence wherein the ellipsis is called into requisition: "He gave me, yesterday, a book, which, he said, belonged to his grandfather, a soldier of the revolution." That is, "He gave to me on yesterday, a book, which, he said, belonged to his grandfather, who was a soldier of the revolution." You must be careful, however, not to make the sentence too elliptical; for if you do, it will probably be unintelligible; or, at least not easily understood; thus: "He gave me yesterday a book, he said, belonged to his grandfather, a soldier of the revolution." You readily per