which is in itself so grand, burlesque and ridiculous."-Lectures on Rhetoric.

Can anything be more burlesque and ridiculous than the jumbling of the grand, the burlesque, and the ridiculous, which this curious sentence presents? What the writer meant was this:Claudian, in a fragment upon the wars of the giants, has contrived to render burlesque and ridiculous, this idea of their throwing the moun、 tains, which is in itself so grand.'

Another example occurs in Blair's definition of "precision :"_

"Precision imports pruning the expression, so as to exhibit neither more nor less than an exact copy of his idea who uses it."-Lectures.

Here we have, in two lines, not only the most glaring instance of a want of perspicuity, but also a want of precision, a want of grammar, and a want of truth. The want of perspicuity is apparent both in the words and in the arrangement of them. The want of precision, the very thing which the writer is endeavouring to define, is shown in the terms "neither more nor less," and "exact." Both express the same quality, and the sentence, to be "precise," should have been pruned of one or the other. The want of grammar is manifest in the expression, "his idea who uses it." And lastly, the definition is false on the very face of it. An expression may be an exact copy of a man's idea, and yet be deficient in precision. This will

happen, as Blair himself remarks further on, "when the ideas are not very clear in a man's mind;" when "being loose and general, they cannot be expressed with precision."

It is somewhat surprising to find a grammarian of the ability of Lindley Murray adopting Blair's definition of "precision," without the slightest attempt to retrench its superfluities or supply its lack of grammar. His words are:

"Precision signifies retrenching superfluities, and pruning the expression, so as to exhibit neither more nor less than an exact copy of the person's idea who uses it."-English Grammar.

The only alteration he makes is to substitute one possessive for another. Blair has "his idea who," and Murray "the person's idea who;" so that, according to these learned teachers of rhetoric and grammar, we must find the antecedent of "who" in the word "idea," or accept as correct the expressions "his who," "the person's who."

Here are some further examples of a want of perspicuity:

"The salt-merchants, the grocers, the confectioners conspired, together to adulterate the articles in which they dealt in a thousand ways."-ALISON. History of Europe.

This should be: "To adulterate, in a thousand ways, the articles in which they dealt."

"Hence the despotic state will be generally successful, if a contest occurs, in the outset."— Ibid.

This should be:

"Hence, if a contest occurs, the despotic state will be generally successful in the outset."

"Two municipal officers intimated that the people were crowding round the gates of the prisons, and praying for instructions, but they did nothing."

Who would infer from such a phrase that it was the municipal officers, and not the people, that prayed for instructions?

"Shut out by the sterility of the soil and the variable nature of the climate, where storms of rain and snow, attracted by the cold summits of the Atlas, are frequent, from the labours of agriculture, they dwell in the mountains with their flocks and herds only in the winter and spring."-ALISON. History of Europe from Fall of Napoleon.

Here the writer would lead us to believe that the "frequent storms of rain and snow" are caused by "the labours of agriculture." And yet, to prevent so preposterous a conclusion, all he had to do was to place the words, "from the labours of agriculture," immediately after the words "shut out." There is no want of clearness in the ideas; and nothing but a rare perversity of taste, or a studied design to write nonsense, can account for the form which is given to them on paper.

The following samples are from Isaac D'Israeli : "I have heard this great student censured for neglecting his official duties; but it would be necessary to decide on this accusation to know the character of his accusers."Curiosities.

In this phrase the writer expresses the contrary of what he means. He should have written it :

"I have heard this great student censured for neglecting his official duties; but in order to decide on this accusation, it would be necessary to know the character of his accusers."

"I have written the history of the Mar-Prelate Faction in Quarrels of Authors, which our historians appear not to have known."-Ibid.

This sentence is so constructed as to leave the reader to infer that what was not known to the historians was the Quarrels of Authors, and not the history of the Mar-Prelate Faction. The correct form is :

"I have written, in Quarrels of Authors, the history of the Mar-Prelate Faction, which our historians appear not to have known.”

"The beaux of that day used the abominable art of painting their faces, as well as the women."-Ibid.

This should be:

"The beaux of that day, as well as the women, used the abominable art of painting their faces."

"That great original, the author of Hudibras, has been censured for exposing to ridicule the Sir Samuel Luke, under whose roof he dwelt, in the grotesque character of his hero."Ibid.

The confusion here might have been obviated by placing the last member of the sentence immediately after the word "ridicule." As it stands, we are made to believe that Butler personated the

grotesque character of his hero, while he dwelt under the roof of Sir Samuel Luke!

Here are some instances from Hallam's "Literature of Europe." The punctuation is that of the second edition :

66

Wolsey left at his death many buildings which he had begun in an unfinished state, and which no one expects to see complete."

The historian meant to say :

"Wolsey left at his death, in an unfinished state, many buildings which he had begun, and which no one expects to see complete."

"I have now and then inserted in the text characters of books that I have not read on the faith of my guides."

To make sense of this we must read:

"I have now and then inserted in the text, on the faith of my guides, characters of books that I have not read."

"Leo Baptista Alberti was a man who may claim a place in the temple of glory he has not filled."

This should be:

"Leo Baptista Alberti was a man who may claim, in the temple of glory, a place he has not filled.'

"There is a copy in the British Museum; and M. Raynouard has given a short account of one that he had seen in the 'Journal des Savans' for 1826."

The meaning of this will be made clear by

D