had been blameable in a peaceable government, were employed to detect conspiracies;" where had is put for would have*. - Hume's History of England.

Ambiguity is frequently created by confounding fact with hypothesis, or making no distinction between dubitative and assertive phraseologies. Thus, if we employ such expressions as these, “if thou knewest," " though he was learned," not only to express the certainty of a fact, but likewise to denote a mere hypothesis as opposed to fact, we necessarily render the expression ambiguous. It is by thus confounding things totally distinct, that writers have been betrayed not into ambiguity only, but even into palpable errors. In evidence of this, I give the following example: "Though he were divinely inspired, and spoke therefore as the oracles of God, with supreme authority; though he were endowed with supernatural powers, and could, therefore, have confirmed the truth of what he asserted by miracles; yet, in compliance with the way in which human nature and reasonable creatures are usually wrought upon, he reasoned." - Atterbury's Sermons.

Here the writer expresses the inspiration and the supernatural powers of Jesus, not as properties or virtues which he really did possess, but which, though not possessing them, he might be supposed to possess. Now, as his intention was to ascribe these virtues to

* A similar phraseology in the use of the pluperfect indicative for the same tense subjunctive, obtains in Latin, as,

" Impulerat ferro Argolicas fœdare latebras." - Virgil.

Jesus, as truly belonging to him, he should have employed the indicative form was, and not were, as in the following sentence: "though he was rich, yet for our sakes he became poor." "Though he were rich," would imply the non-existence of the attribute, in other words, "that he was not rich."

A very little attention would serve to prevent these ambiguities and errors. If the attribute be conceived as unconditionally certain, the indicative form without ellipsis must be employed, as, "I teach," " I had taught," " I shall teach." If futurity, hypothesis, or uncertainty, be intended, with the concessive term, the auxiliary may be either expressed or understood, as perspicuity may require, and the taste and judgment of the writer may dictate; thus, " if any man teach strange doctrines, he shall be severely rebuked." -Bible. In the former clause, the auxiliary verb shall is unnecessary, and is therefore, without impropriety, omitted. "Then hear thou in heaven, and forgive the sin of thy servants and of thy people Israel, that thou teach them the good way wherein they should walk."-Ibid. In this example the suppression of the auxiliary verb is somewhat unfavourable to perspicuity, and renders the clause stiff and awkward. It would be better, I think, " thou mayest teach them the good way." Harshness indeed, and the appearance of affectation, should be particularly avoided. Where there is no manifest danger of misconception, the use of the assertive for the dubitative form is far preferable to those starched and pedantie phraseologies which some writers are fond of exhibiting. For this reason, such expressions as the following appear to me highly offensive : " if thou have determined, we must submit," "unless he have consented, the writing will be void," " if this have been the seat of their original formation," " unless thou shall speak, we cannot determine." The last I consider as truly ungrammatical. In such cases, if the dubitative phraseology should appear to be preferable, the stiffness and affectation here reprehended may frequently be prevented by inserting the note of doubt or contingency.

I observe farther, that the substitution of as for if when the affirmation is unconditional, will often serve to prevent ambiguity *. Thus, when the ant in the fable says to the grasshopper who had trifled away the summer in singing, "if you sung in summer, dance in winter," as the first clause, taken by itself, leaves the meaning somewhat ambiguous, "as you sung" would be the better expression.

* The Latins used si in both cases: and though their poets did not attend to this distinction, their prose writers generally observed it, by joining si for quoniam with the indicative mood.

4

IRREGULAR VERBS.

THE general rule for the formation of the preterite tense, and the perfect participle, is to add to the present the syllable ed, if the verb end with a consonant, or d, if it end with a vowel, as,

Turn, Turned, Turned; Love, Loved, Loved.

Verbs, which depart from this rule, are called irregular, of which I believe the subsequent enumeration to be nearly complete *.

* Where R is added, the verb follows also the general rule. † Some have excluded bore as the preterite of this verb. We

have sufficient authority, however, for admitting it; thus,

" By marrying her who bore me."-DRYDEN.

* Beholden is obsolescent in this sense.
† "So kept the diamond, and the rogue was bit."-POPE.

"There was lately a young gentleman bit to the bone."TATLER.