the whole may be at once apparent. The following are examples of confusion arising from a neglect of this rule: "The Romans understood liberty at least as well as we." Here the phrase "at least” might refer to liberty, but the author meant to say: “The Romans understood liberty as well, at least, as we.” "A great stone that I happened to find, after a long search, by the seashore, served me for an anchor." In this sentence it is doubt

66

ful whether the long search was entirely by the sea-shore, or whether it was also carried on elsewhere. The author's meaning probably was: "A great stone, that, after a long search, I happened to find by the sea-shore, served me for an anchor." "For the English are naturally fanciful, and very often disposed, by that gloominess and melancholy of temper which are so frequent in our nation, to many wild notions and extravagances to which others are not so liable." Here there is an awkward separation of the first part of the assertion, ending with the word "disposed," from the latter. The sentence would run better

thus: "For the English are naturally fanciful, and by that gloominess and melancholy of temper which are so frequent in our nation, are often disposed to many wild notions."

Words and expressions should not be left to be understood, unless they can be omitted with perfect clearness. "This generous action greatly increased his former services" should be written: "This generous action greatly increased the merit of his former services." So the following sentence is defective: "Arbitrary power I look upon as a greater evil than anarchy itself, as much as a savage is a happier state of life than a slave at the oar." It should be altered to "as much as the state of life of a savage is happier than that of a slave at the oar."

(6) Unity. As a rule, a sentence should contain one proposition. It may consist of parts, indeed, but these should be so closely connected as to form a united whole, and produce on the mind the impression of one object, not of many. To preserve the unity of a sentence, the following rules have been given :

I. During the course of the sentence, let the scene be changed as little as possible. Do not let the mind be hurried by sudden

transitions from person to person, or from subject to subject. "The sultan being dangerously wounded, they carried him to his tent; and, upon hearing of the defeat of his troops, they put him into a litter, which transported him to a place of safety, at the distance of fifteen leagues." This sentence would be improved by dividing it thus: "The sultan, being dangerously wounded, was carried to his tent. On hearing of the defeat of his troops, he was put into a litter," etc.

II. Do not crowd into one sentence things which have so little connection that they could bear to be divided into two or three sentences. "Archbishop Tillotson," says an author, “died in this year. He was exceedingly beloved by King William and Queen Mary, who nominated Dr. Tenison, bishop of Lincoln, to succeed him." Here we are carried, in the same sentence, from one proposition, “He was beloved by William and Mary,” to a quite different one, “They nominated Dr. Tenison to succeed him." The following sentences are still more faulty: "Their march was through an uncultivated country, whose savage inhabitants fared hardly, having no other riches than a breed of lean sheep, whose flesh was rank and unsavoury, by reason of their continual feeding upon salt fish." "To this

succeeded that licentiousness which entered with the Restoration, and, from infecting our religion and morals, fell to corrupt our language, which last was not like to be much improved by those who at that time made up the court of King Charles the Second; either such as had followed him in his banishment or who had been altogether conversant in the dialect of those times, or young men who had been educated in the same country so that the court, which used to be the standard of correctness and propriety of speech, was then, and I think has ever since continued, the worst school in England for that accomplishment; and so will remain, till better care be taken in the education of our nobility, that they may set out into the world with some foundation of literature, in order to qualify them for patterns of politeness." The author, in place of a sentence, has here given a loose dissertation upon several subjects; dif

B

ferent facts, reasonings, and observations being all linked together so that they all make parts of one sentence.

III. Keep clear of all unnecessary parentheses. These may sometimes be introduced with propriety, but generally their effect is bad. They are wheels within wheels, sentences in the midst of sentences, and tend to perplex the reader. The following sentence is not to be admired: "If your hearts secretly reproach you for the wrong choice you have made (as there is time for repentance and retreat, and a return to wisdom is always honourable), bethink you that the evil is not irreparable." It would be much better to express in a separate sentence the thoughts contained in this parenthesis.

IV. Bring each sentence to a full and perfect close. A sentence which is not complete is no sentence at all. Sometimes we meet with sentences which are continued, as it were, after they are finished. Some circumstance is added forming a sort of appendage or tail to the sentence, and entirely destroying its unity. For example, Dean Swift writes: "With these writings young divines are more conversant than with those of Demosthenes, who by many degrees excelled the other, at least as an orator." Here the natural close of the sentence is at the words "excelled the other," and the words added mar the effect of the whole.

(c) Strength. By this is meant such a disposition of the several words and members as shall bring out the sense to the best advantage, render the impression which the period is designed to make most full and complete, and give every word and every member their due weight and force. The following rules have been given in connection with this part of the subject :

I. Prune the sentence of all redundant words and phrases. They are enfeebling, and make the sentence move along tardily and encumbered. If words do not add to the meaning of a sentence, they tend to injure it. They cannot be superfluous without being hurtful. Thus "Content with deserving a triumph, he refused the honour of it," is better than "Being content with

66

deserving a triumph, he refused the honour of it." Addison, speaking of Beauty, says: The very first discovery of it strikes the mind with inward joy, and spreads delight through all its faculties." Here little or nothing is added by the second member of the sentence to that which was already contained in the first. An author writes: "I am honestly, seriously, and unalterably of opinion that nothing can possibly be more incurably and emphatically destructive or more decisively fatal to a kingdom than the introduction of thoughtless dissipation and the pomp of lazy luxury." Would not the whole import of this sentence be better expressed thus: "I am of opinion that nothing is more ruinous to a kingdom than luxury and dissipation"?

II. Attend particularly to the use of copulatives and other particles employed for transition and connection. Much of the strength and grace of a sentence often depends on the proper employment of such little but important words, which form the joints or hinges on which the sentence turns. For example. the separation of a preposition from the noun which it governs is to be avoided, as in the following example : "Though virtue borrows no assistance from, yet it may often be accompanied by, the advantages of fortune." Here there is an awkward separation of two things which, by their nature, should be united.

Some writers needlessly multiply demonstrative and relative particles. Thus we read: "There is nothing which disgusts us sooner than the empty pomp of language." This kind of style may sometimes be proper in an introductory sentence, but, generally speaking, it would be better to write simply: "Nothing disgusts us sooner than the empty pomp of language.”

Others omit the relative pronoun when it would be better to express it. In writings of a serious or dignified kind it is generally better not to employ elliptical expressions of this kind: "The man I love," "The dominions we possessed and the conquests we made," instead of: "The man whom I love," and "The dominions which we possessed and the conquests which we made."

The unnecessary use of the particle and enfeebles style.

Take the following sentence from Sir Richard Temple, for example: "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 there are no fewer than eight ands in one sentence, which drags along heavily through this careless multiplication of copulatives.

It is worthy of remark, that though the use of the conjunction and is naturally to join objects together, and so apparently to make their connection more close, yet in fact we can sometimes mark a more intimate union and a quicker succession of ideas by dropping it altogether. "I came, I saw, I conquered," expresses with more spirit the rapidity and quick succession of conquest than if connecting particles had been used.

Hence it follows that when we seek to prevent a too 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, in this case copulatives may be multiplied with peculiar advantage and grace, as when Bolingbroke says: "Such a man might fall a victim to power; but truth, and reason, and liberty would fall with him." St. Paul's writings furnish a beautiful illustration of this remark, Rom. viii. 38, 39: "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 Christ."

III. Dispose the principal word or words in that place of the sentence where they will make the fullest impression. Sometimes they may be placed with most advantage at the beginning, sometimes at the end, sometimes even in the middle. Generally, in English, the beginning of the sentence is the most