to amuse the wits of that age and country, and 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. Some writers often make their sentences drag in this manner, by a careless multiplication of copulatives.

But, in the next place, it is worthy of observation, that though the natural use of the conjunction and, is to join objects together, yet, in fact, by dropping the conjunction, we often mark a closer connexion, a quicker succession of objects, than when it is inserted between them. "I came, I saw, I conquered," expresses with more force the rapidity and quick succession of conquest, than if connecting particles had been used.

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. As when an author says, "Such a man might fall a victim to power; but truch, and reason, and liberty, would fall with him." Observe, 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."

The words designed to make the transition from one sen. tence to another, and the connexion between sentences, are sometimes very incorrect, and perform their office in an imperfect and obscure manner. The following is an example of this kind of inaccuracy. "By greatness, I do not mean the bulk of any single object only, but the largeness of a whole view. Such are the prospects of an open champaign country, a vast uncultivated desert," &c. The word such signifies of that nature or quality, which necessarily pre-supposes some adjective, or word descriptive of a qua

lity going before, to which it refers. But, in the foregoing sentence, there is no such adjective. The author had spoken of greatness in the abstract only; and, therefore, such has no distinct antecedent to which we can refer it. The sentence would have been introduced with more propriety, by saying, To this class belong, or under this head are ranged, the prospects, &c.

As connective particles are the hinges, tacks, and pins, by which the words, in the same clause, the clauses in the same member, the members in the same sentence, and even the sentences in the same discourse, are united together, and their relations suggested, so they should not be either too frequently repeated, awkwardly exposed to view, or made up of polysyllables, when shorter words would as well convey our meaning. Notwithstanding that, insomuch that, forasmuch as, furthermore, &c. are tedious words, which tend to overload and perplex a sentence.

We shall conclude this head with two remarks on the subject of inserting or omitting the conjunctions. The first is, that the illative conjunctions, the causal, and the disjunctive, when they suit the sense, can more rarely be dis pensed with than the copulative. The second is, that the omission of copulatives always succeeds best, when the connexion of the thoughts is either very close, or very distant. It is mostly in the intermediate cases that the conjunction is deemed necessary. When the connexion in thought is very distant, the copulative appears absurd; and when very close, superfluous.

The third rule for promoting the strength of a sentence, is, to dispose of the capital word, or words, so that they may make the greatest impression.

That there are, in every sentence, such capital words on which the meaning principally rests, every one must see; and that these words should possess a conspicuous and distinguished place, is equally plain. For the most. part, with us, the important words are placed in the beginning of the sentence. So in the following passages: "Silver and gold have I none; but such as I have, give I unto thee," &c. "Your fathers, where are they? and the prophets, do they live for ever?"

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,”

ין

says an author, "on whatever side we contemplate this ancient writer, what principally strikes us, is his wonderful invention."

To accomplish this end, the placing of capital words.in a conspicuous part of the sentence, the natural order of our language must sometimes be inverted. According to this natural order, the nominative has the first place, the verb the second, and the objective, if it be an active verb that is employed, has the third. Circumstances follow the nominative, the verb, or the objective, as they happen to belong to any of them. "Diana of the Ephesians is great," is the natural order of the sentence. But its strength is increased by inversion, thus: "Great is Diana of the Ephesians." "I profess, in the sincerity of my heart," &c. is the natural order of a circumstance. Inverted thus: "In the sincerity of my heart, I profess," &c.

Some authors greatly invert the natural order of sentences: others write mostly in a natural style. Each method has its advantages. The inverted possesses strength, dignity, and variety: the other, more nature, ease, and simplicity. We shall give an instance of each method, taken from writers of considerable eminence. The first is of the inverted order. The author is speaking of the misery of vice. "This, as to the complete immoral state, is, what of their own accord, men readily remark. Where there is this absolute degeneracy, this total apostacy from all candour, truth, or equity, there are few who do not see and acknowledge the misery which is consequent. Seldom is, the case misconstrued, when at worst. The misfortune is, that we look not on this depravity, nor consider how it stands in less degrees. As if, to be absolutely immoral, were, indeed, the greatest misery; but to be so in a little degree, should be no misery or harm at all. Which, to allow, is just as reasonable as to own, that it is the greatest ill of a body to be in the utmost manner maimed or distorted; but that to lose the use only of one limb, or to be impaired in some single organ or member, is no ill wor thy the least notice." Here is no violence done to the language, though there are many inversions.

The following is an example of natural construction: "Our sight is the most perfect, and the most delightful, of all our senses. It fills the mind with the largest variety of ideas, converses with its objects at the greatest distance,

and continues the longest in action, without being tired or satiated with its proper enjoyments. The sense of feeling can, indeed, give us a notion of extension, shape, and all other ideas that enter at the eye except colours; but, at the same time, it is very much straitened and confined in its operations," &c.

But whether we use inversion or not, and in whatever part of the sentence we dispose of the capital words, it is always a point of consequence, that these capital words should stand clear and disentangled from any other words that would clog them. Thus, when there are any circumstances of time, place, or other limitations, which the principal object of our sentence requires to have connected with it, we must take care to dispose of them, so as not to cloud that principal object, nor to bury it under a load of circumstances. This will be made clearer by an example. "If, whilst they profess only to please, they secretly advise, and give instruction, they may now, perhaps, as well as formerly, be esteemed, with justice, the best and most honourable among authors.' This is a Iwell constructed sentence. It contains a great many circumstances and adverbs necessary to qualify the meaning: only, secretly, as well, perhaps, now, with justice, formerly; yet these are placed so properly, as neither to embarrass, nor weaken the sentence; while that which is the capital object in it; viz. “ 'being justly esteemed the best and most honourable among authors," comes out in the conclusion clear and detached, and possesses its proper place. See, now, what would have been the effect of a different arrangement: "If, whilst they profess to please only, they advise and give instruction secretly, they may be esteemed the best and most honourable among authors, with justice, perhaps, now as well as formerly." Here we have precisely the same words, and the same sense; but by means of the circumstances being so intermingled as to clog the capital words, the whole becomes feeble and perplexed.

The fourth rule for promoting the strength of sentences, is, that a weaker assertion or proposition should never come after a stronger one; and that, when our sentence consists of twe members, the longer should, generally, be the concluding one.

Thus, to say, "When our passions have forsaken us, we flatter ourselves with the belief that we have forsaken

Ꮓ

them," is both more easy and more clear, than to begin : with the longer part of the proposition: "We flatter ourselves with the belief that we have forsaken our passions, when they have forsaken us."

In general, it is agreeable to find a sentence rising upon us, and growing in its importance, to the very last word, when this construction can be managed without affectation. "If we rise yet higher," says Addison, ❝ and consider the fixed stars as so many oceans of flame, that are each of them attended with a different set of planets; and still discover new firmaments and new lights, that are sunk further in those unfathomable depths of ether; we are lost in such a labyrinth of suns and worlds, and confounded with the magnificence and immensity of nature."

The fifth rule for the strength of sentences is, to avoid concluding them with an adverb, a preposition, or any inconsiderable word.

Agreeably to this rule, we should not conclude with any of the particles of, to, from, with, by. For instance, it is a great deal better to say, "Avarice is a crime of which wise men are often guilty," than to say, "Avarice is a crime which wise men are often guilty of." This is a phraseology which all correct writers shun; and with rea-, son. For as the mind cannot help resting a little, on the import of the word which closes the sentence, it must be disagreeable to be left pausing on a word which does not, by itself, produce any idea.

For the same reason, verbs which are used in a compound sense, with some of these prepositions, are, though not so bad, yet still not proper conclusions of a period: such as, bring about, lay hold of, come over to, clear up, and many other of this kind; instead of which, if we can employ a simple verb, it always terminates the sentence with more strength. Even the pronoun it, should, if possible, be avoided in the conclusion: especially when it is joined with some of the prepositions; as, with it, in it, to it. We shall be sensible of this in the following sentence. "There is not, in my opinion, a more pleasing and triumphant consideration in religion, than this, of the perpetual progress which the soul makes towards the perfection of its nature, without ever arriving at a period in it." How much more agreeable the sentence if it had been so constructed as to close with the word period!