6

must suffer;' he will maintain his principles, though he lose his estate whether he succeed or not, his intention is laudable;' if he be not prosperous he will not repine;' 'if a man smite his servant and he die,' etc., Exodus XXI. 20. In all these examples, the things signified by the verbs are uncertain, and refer to future time; but in the instances which follow, future time is not referred to; and therefore a difference takes place; if thou livest virtuously, thou art happy;' 'unless he means what he says, he is doubly faithless;' if he allows the excellence of virtue, he does not regard her precepts;' page 202. It is proper here to observe, that the potential mood, as well as the indicative, is converted into the subjunctive, by the expression of contingency being applied to it: as, if thou canst do anything;' 'have compassion,' etc.

66

"That tense which is denominated the present of the subjunctive, may be considered as having two forms of the principal verb: first, that which simply denotes contingency: as, 'if he desires it, I will perform the operation; that is, if he now desires it:' Secondly, that which denotes both contingency and futurity: as, if he desire it, I will perform the operation; that is, if he should hereafter desire it.'

"The imperfect tense of the verb to be, in the subjunctive, has likewise, according to the practice of good writers, two variations, namely, if he were present, he was highly culpable; if he was present, he was highly culpable."

"The varied forms of the verb to be, which refer to present time, and also the variations in the imperfect, are often used indiscriminately. When it is proper to do so, and when improper, general usage and correct taste must determine."

Mr. Harris, in his "Hermes," gave us a chapter of 33 pages, octavo, on mode or mood, but the most intelligent and acute English reader cannot, from anything therein stated, glean

what is mode or mood.

What is the origin of this paradox? Have not Englishmen sufficient intellect to comprehend a well written English sentence, paragraph, or chapter?

Certainly they have. The origin of this paradox is not any natural or general defect in the comprehension of Englishmen,

Decause there is no nation of the earth more advanced in useful and profitable knowledge. It is the natural consequence of writing on a subject, of which the writer had confused or imperfect ideas. We may be considered presumptuous in asserting that Mr. Harris, who had so general a knowledge of other languages, had an imperfect knowledge, or confused ideas of his own. A great critic on language has judiciously observed, that a person may study all the languages of Europe in a few years, but to study one perfectly, is more than the business of a man's life?

That Mr. Harris, according to the fashion of the respectable in his time, instead of occupying himself in studying English, employed himself in studying Greek and Latin, and that he devoted much of his time to the study of the modern or living languages, is very probable. In what time, then, did he study that which is more than the business of a man's life?

He says (see our first extract, p. 69),

"Hence, then, according as we exhibit it, either in a different part, or after a different manner, hence I say the variety of modes or moods."

Peruse the preceding sentence with an earnest desire to uphold its correctness, and then tell us what is the antecedent of the word it. Is not it substituted for the soul or a part of the soul, and must not the different part, be also a different part of the soul? Let us replace the soul,' or 'a part of the soul,' instead of the word it, and supply the different, which must evidently be a different part of the soul, and then see what sense the sentence will make, which must run in either of the two following forms. "Hence, then, according as we exhibit the soul either in a different part of the soul, or after a different manner; hence I say, the variety of modes or moods." Or thus: "Hence, then, according as we exhibit a part of the soul, in a different part of the soul, or after a different manner, hence, I say, the variety of modes or moods."

The sentence admits only of these two constructions which we have given it, and certainly neither of them is calculated to corroborate the opinion which Doctor Lowth expressed of "Hermes," in the preface to his Grammar, namely: "Those

who would enter more deeply into this subject, will find it fully and accurately handled, with the greatest acuteness of investigation, perspicuity of explication, and elegance of method, in a treatise, entitled Hermes,' by James Harris, Esq., the most beautiful and perfect example of analysis that has been exhibited, since the days of Aristotle."

The foregoing is an incontrovertible proof of the manner in which truth and public duty are sometimes sacrificed to kindness, interest. or ambition. The Doctor, knowing how much importance Mr. Harris's approbation must add to his "Short Introduction to English Grammar," appears to have bestowed this unlimited praise to obtain it. The calculation proved to be correct, as may be seen in the 6th extract from "Hermes;" in which he in return says of Lowth's Introduction: "But for those, and all other speculations, relative to the genius of the English language, we refer the reader who wishes for the most authentic information to that excellent treatise of the learned Doctor Lowth, entitled A Short Introduction to English Grammar." Both, evidently, thought more of returning mutual obligations, than of investigating each other's work. Horne Tooke was much more faithful in the discharge of his duty as a public writer, than either Mr. Harris or Doctor Lowth; and his opinion of Harris's "Hermes," is strongly opposed to the Reverend Bishop's, as may be seen in many parts of the “Diversions of Purley."

EXAMPLE 1.

Diversions of Purley, Part 7.- "The recommendation, no doubt, is full, and the authority great; but I cannot say that I have found the performance to correspond; nor can I boast of any acquisition from its perusal, except indeed of hard words, and frivolous and unintelligible distinctions."

EXAMPLE 2.

In page 275, Horne Tooke says,

"Mr. Harris's logical ignorance most happily deprived him of a sense of his misfortunes. And so little, good man, did he dream of the danger of his situation, that whilst all others

were acknowledging their successless, though indefatigable labours, and lamenting their insuperable difficulties, he prefaces his doctrine of connectives with this singularly confident introduction: 'What remains of our work is a matter of less difficulty; it being the same here as in some historical pictures; when the principal figures are once formed, it is easy labour to design the rest.'

The sentence to which we have already alluded namely, "Hence, then, according as we exhibit it, either in a diffe"rent part, or after a different manner," wants both perspi-cuity and common sense. Mr. Harris could declare nothing more incomprehensible to man's understanding, than the exhibition of the whole in its part, or the exhibition of one part of any thing in a different part of the same. If any person was to announce, that he could exhibit a perfect human being in his shin, or that he could exhibit the knee in the eye, or the eye in the knee, he should justly be considered as a fit subject for a mad-house. What is it but exhibiting the whole in a part, or one part in another?

Hence we say, that the nature and origin of modes or moods, cannot be ascertained from what Mr. Harris wrote on the subject.

Doctor Lowth gives us the three following different definitions of mode in the same page. (See first and second extract, p. 71.)

1st. "The mode is the manner of representing the being, action or passion."

2nd. "A mode is a particular form of the verb, denoting the manner, in which a thing is, does, or suffers.

3rd. "A mode is a particular form of the verb, expressing an intention of the mind concerning such being, doing, or suffering."

We have here three different definitions of the same thing, of which two at least must be wrong; because, if any one of them is right, the other two which are different must be wrong. Let us examine them, and try to discover which of them is right. In the first of them, he says, that "A mode is the manner of representing the being, action or passion." What

is the manner of representing the being, action, or passion? The only manner of representing the being, action, or passion, having any connexion with grammar, is by the application of words. Hence mode is the application of words. Can anything be more vague or unmeaning than this? No wonder, indeed, he attempted to define it better; with what success we shall see.

2. "A mode is a particular form of the verb, denoting the manner in which a thing is, does, or suffers."

Let us test this definition.

I can correctly say, I am of that family, but I cannot say, I am that family; because the family must consist of two or more persons; therefore, I cannot say, I am that family, neither can you say with any propriety, that a mood is a particular form of the verb, which we shall prove by the Doctor's own words. In the 37th and 38th page of his Grammar,

he gave us the ten following forms of the verb; I am, thou art,

he is, we are, thou beest, I was, thou wast, we were, I shall be,

10

thou shalt be.

Now, if each of these ten different forms is of the indicative mood, can you say that the indicative mood is any one of them? You can say it, but then you say as perfect nonsense as, I am the family, or, the family is I. Am is of the indicative mood, but it is not the mood, nor is the mood am, because the indicative mood consists of ten different forms, according to Lowth, and any one of them cannot be the ten; the same as, I am of the family, but I am not the family: therefore, mode is not a particular form of the verb, but a plurality of different forms, which appears from the Doctor's own classification of the forms of the verb, according to the different moods to which he makes them belong. His definition of mood, and his conjugation are dangerously opposed to each other. If his definition of mood be admitted, we must admit eighty moods; or else there must be some forms of the verb, that are of no mood, which we believe no grammarian