occasions, they may have a spirited appearance; as prompted by a certain vivacity of thought, which can glance happily aside, as it is going along. (Art. 187.)

Obs. For the most part, their effect is not always spirited: nay, sometimes it is extremely bad. They seem a sort of wheels within wheels; sentences in the midst of sentences; the perplexed method of disposing of some thought, which a writer wants art to introduce in its proper place. It were needless to give any instances, as they occur so often among incorrect writers.

158. The fourth and last rule for the unity of a sentence, is, to bring it always to a full and perfect close. Every thing that is one, should have a beginning, a middle and an end. An unfinished sentence is no sentence at all, according to any grammatical rule.

Obs. But we very often meet with sentences, that are, so to speak, more than finished. When we have arrived at what we expected was to be the conclusion, when we are come to the word on which the mind, by what went before, is naturally led to rest; unexpectedly, some circumstance appears, which ought to have been omitted, or to have been disposed of elsewhere; but which is left lagging behind, like a tail adjected to the sentence. This looks to the rhetorician's eye, as does to the naturalist's the prodigious tail which the rude hand of early astronomy has given to the constellation Ursa Major.

159. The third quality of a correct sentence, is STRENGTH. By this is meant such a disposition of the several words and members, as shall bring out the sense to the best advantage; as shall render the impression which the period is designed to make, most full and complete; and give every word, and every member, its due weight and force. (Example. Art. 173.)

Obs. The two former qualities of perspicuity and unity, are, no doubt, absolutely necessary to the production of this effect; but more is still requisite. For a sentence may be clear enough, it may also be compact enough in all its parts, or have the requisite unity; and yet, by some unfavourable circumstance in the structure, it may fail in that strength or liveliness of impression which a more happy arrangement would have produced.

160. The first rule for promoting the strength of a sentence, is, to divest it of all redundant words. These may, sometimes, be consistent with a considerable degree both of elearness and unity; but they are always enfeebling. (See Art. 121.)

Illus. It is a general maxim, that any words which do not add some importance to the meaning of a sentence, always spoil it. They cannot be superfluous without being hurtful. All that can be easily supplied in the mind, is better left out in the expression. Thus: "Content with deserving a triumph, he refused the honor of it," is better lan

guage than to say, “Being content with deserving a triumph, he refused the honor of it."

Corol. One of the most useful exercises of correction, upon reviewing what we have written or composed, is therefore to contract that round-about method of expression, and to lop off those useless excrescences which are commonly found in a first draught. Here a severe eye should be employed; and we shall always find our sentences aquire more vigour and energy when thus retrenched; provided always, that we run not into the extreme of pruning so very close, as to give a hardness and dryness to style. For here, as in all other things, there is a due medium. Some regard, though not the principal, must be had to fulness and swelling of sound. Some leaves must be left to surround and shelter the fruit.

161. As sentences should be cleared of redundant words, so also of redundant members. As every word ought to present a new idea, so every member ought to contain a new thought. Opposed to this, stands the fault with which we sometimes meet, of the last member of a period being nothing else than the echo of the former, or the repetition of it in a different form. For example; speaking of beauty,

Illus. Mr. Addison says, "The very first discovery of it, strikes the mind with inward joy, and spreads delight through all its faculties."* And elsewhere," It is impossible for us to behold the divine works with coldness or indifference, or to survey so many beauties, without a secret satisfaction and complacency."t In both these instances, little or nothing is added by the second member of the sentence to what was already expressed in the first: and though the free and flowing manner of such an author as Mr. Addison, and the graceful harmony of his periods, may palliate such negligences; yet, in general, it holds, that style, freed from this prolixity, appears both more strong and more beautiful. The attention become remiss, the mind falls into inaction, when words are multiplied without a corresponding multiplication of ideas. (See Crit. 1. and 2. p. 71.)

162. After removing superfluities, the second rule for promoting the strength of a sentence, is, to attend particularly to the use of copulatives, relatives, and all the particles employed for transition and connection.

Illus. These little words, but, and, which, whose, where, &c. are frequently the most important words of any; they are the joints or hinges upon which all sentences turn, and, of course, much, both of the gracefulness and the strength of sentences, must depend upon the proper use of such particles. The varieties in using them are, indeed, so numerous, that no particular system of rules can be given respecting them. Attention to the practice of the most accurate writers, joined with frequent trials of the different effects produced by a different usage of those particles, must here direct us. (Art. 145. Illus. 1-11.)

163. What is called splitting of particles, or separating

a preposition from the noun which it governs, is always to be avoided. (Illus. 11. Art. 145.)

Illus. "Though virtue borrows no assistance from, yet it may often be accompanied by, the advantages of fortune." In pronouncing this sentence, we feel a sort of pain from the revulsion, or violent separation of two things, which, by their nature, should be closely united. We are put to a stand in thought; being obliged to rest for a little on the preposition by itself, which, at the same time, carries no signifitancy, till it is joined to its proper substantive noun.

164. Some writers needlessly multiply demonstrative and relative particles, by the frequent use of such phraseology as the following:

Illus. "There is nothing which disgusts us sooner than the empty pomp of language." In introducing a subject, or laying down a proposition to which we demand particular attention, this sort of style is very proper; but in the ordinary current of discourse, it is better to express ourselves more simply and shortly: "Nothing disgusts us sooner than the empty pomp of language.'

165. Other writers make a practice of omitting the relative, by adopting a phraseology of a different kind from the former. This error springs from the absurd supposition that, without this omission, the meaning could not be understood.

Illus. "The man I love."-" The dominions we possessed, and the conquests we made." But though this elliptical style be intelligible, and allowable in conversation and epistolary writing, yet in all writings of a serious or dignified kind, it is ungraceful. There, the relative should always be inserted in its proper place, and the construction filled up as, "The man whom I love."-"The dominions which we possessed, and the conquests which we made."

166. With regard to the copulative particle and, which occurs so frequently in all kinds of composition, several observations are to be made. First, it is evident, that the unnecessary repetition of this particle enfeebles style. It has much the same effect as the frequent use of the vulgar phrase, and so, when one is telling a story in common conversation.

Illus. 1. We shall, for one instance, take a sentence from Sir William Temple. He is speaking of the refinement of the French language: "The academy set up by Cardinal Richelieu, to amuse the wits of that age and country, and to divert them from raking into his politics and ministry, brought this into vogue; and the French wits have, for this last age, been wholly turned to the refinement of their style and language; and, indeed, with such success, that it can hardly be equalled, and runs equally through their verse and their prose." Here are no fewer than eight ands in one sentence. This agreeable writer too often makes his sentences drag in this manner, by a careless multiplication of copulatives.

2. It is strange that a writer so accurate as Dean Swift, should have stumbled on so improper an application of this particle, as he has made in the following sentence: "There is no talent so useful towards rising in the world, or which puts men more out of the reach of fortune, than that quality generally possessed by the dullest sort of people, and is, in common language, called discretion; a species of lower prudence, by the assistance of which,"* &c. By the insertion of, and is, in place of, which is, he has not only clogged the sentence, but even made it ungrammatical.

167. But, in the next place, it is worthy of observation, that though the natural use of the conjunction, and, be to join objects, and thereby make their connection more close; yet, in fact, by dropping the conjunction, we often mark a closer connection, a quicker succession of objects, than when it is inserted between them.

Illus. 1. Longinus makes this remark; which, from many instances, appears to be just: "Veni, vidi, vici," expresses with more spirit the rapidity and quick succession of conquest, than if connecting particles had been used.

2. So, in the following description of a rout, in Cæsar's Commentaries, the omission of the connective particle gives great force to the sentence: "Nostri, emissis pilis, gladiis rem gerunt; repentè post tergum equitatus cernitur; cohortes aliæ appropinquant. Hostes terga; vertunt; fugientibus equites occurrunt; fit magna cædes." Bell. Gall. lib. 7.

168. On the other hand, when we seek to prevent a quick transition from one object to another-when we are making some enumeration in which we wish that the objects should appear as distinct from each other as possible, and that the mind should rest, for a moment, on each object by itself, copulatives may be multiplied with peculiar advantage and grace.

Illus. As when Lord Bolingbroke says, " Such a man might fall a victim to power; but truth, and reason, and liberty would fall with him."

In the same manner, Cæsar describes an engagement with the Nervii: "His equitibus facile pulsis ac proturbatis, incredibile celeritate ad flumen decurrerunt; ut pene uno tempore, et ad sylvas, et in flumine, et jam in manibus nostris, hostes viderentur."§ Bell. Gall. 1. 2.

Here, although he is describing a quick succession of events, yet as it is his intention to shew in how many places the enemy seemed to be at one time, the copulative is very happily redoubled, in order to paint more strongly the distinction of these several places.

"I came, I saw, I conquered,"

Essay on the Fates of Clergymen. "Our men, after having discharged their javelins, attack with sword in hand; of a sudden the cavalry make their appearance behind; other bodies of men are seen drawing near; the enemies turn their backs; the horse meet them in their flight; a great slaughter ensues.

"The enemy, having easily beat off and scattered this body of horse, ran down with incredible celerity to the river, so that almost at one moment of time, they appeared to be in the woods, and in the river, and in the midst of our troops."

Scholia. This attention to the several cases, when it is proper to omit, and when to redouble the copulative, is of considerable importance to all who study eloquence. For it is a remarkable particularity in language, that the omission of a connecting particle should sometimes serve to make objects appear more closely connected and that the repetition of it should distinguish and separate them in some measure from each other. Hence, the omission of it is used to denote rapidity; and the repetition of it is designed to retard and to aggravate. The reason seems to be, that, in the former case, the mind is supposed to be hurried through a quick succession of objects, without gaining leisure to point out their connection; it drops the copulative in its hurry; and crowds the whole series together, as if the objects were but one. Whereas, when we enumerate, with a view to aggravate, the mind is supposed to proceed with a more slow and solemn pace; it marks fully the relation of each object to that which succeeds it; and by joining them together with several copulatives, makes us perceive, that the objects, though connected, are yet, in themselves, distinct; that they are many, not one. Observe, for instance, in the following enumeration made by the apostle Paul, what additional weight and distinctness are given to each particular by the repetition of a conjunction: "I am persuaded that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God." So much with regard to the use of copulatives.

169. A third rule for promoting the strength of a sentence, is, to dispose of the capital word, or words, in that place of the sentence where it, or they, will make the fullest impres

sion.

Illus. Every one must see, that there are in every sentence such capital words, on which the meaning principally rests; and it is equally plain, that these words should possess a conspicuous and distinguished place. But that place of the sentence where they will make the best figure, whether the beginning or the end, or, sometimes, even the middle, cannot, perhaps, be ascertained by any precise rule. This must vary with the nature of the sentence.

170. Perspicuity must ever be studied in the first place, and the nature of our language allows no great liberty in the choice of collocation. For the most part, with us, the important words are placed in the beginning of the sentence.

Illus. "The pleasures of the imagination, taken in their full extent, are not so gross as those of sense, nor so refined as those of the understanding." And this, indeed, seems the most plain and natural order, to place that in the front which is the chief object of the proposition we are laying down. Sometimes, however, when we intend to give weight to a sentence, it is of advantage to suspend the meaning for a little, and then bring it out full at the close: "Thus," says Pope, " on whatever side we contemplate Homer, what principally strikes us, is his wonderful invention."

* Rom. viii. 33, 39 † Addison.

Preface to Homer.