instead of "lies at anchor;" but the only case in which lay can be correctly used in this sense, is when we say "the ship lay at anchor,"-" lay off and on." In these phrases, however, the word lay is no part of the verb lay: it is the imperfect tense of the verb lie. Lay is an active verb; it makes laid in the imperfect tense; and

66

lays" or "laying" cannot be said of a ship or anything else, unless when followed by the objective case-by something that is laid. For instance, we say that a hen lays an egg; that a mason lays a stone upon the mortar. In the same way, if the word be applied to a ship, we must add what the ship lays, or is laying, as "the ship lays her anchor in the sand;" she is "laying her cargo on the wharf."

This confounding of lay and lie, more worthy of the days of barbarism and Babel-building, than of the nineteenth century, originated, no doubt, with that uncompromising specimen of humanity, the British tar. His own irregular movements, and those of his skipper, leave him but little leisure to attend to the movements of the irregular verbs. He finds that lay (the imperfect tense of the neuter verb lie) is applied to a ship in one instance, and, with characteristic straightforwardness, he makes his verb, "lay," "lays," "laying." From constant repetition the expression has become familiar to his superiors in the service, and it is now used by our naval

chroniclers, annalists, and historians, as a neuter verb, instead of "lie," "lies," "lying."

Of all others.

Add to these the anomaly involved in the expression "of all others," which is becoming very common in our day, but which, like most of the blunders that I have had to notice, arises from the circumstance that the writer is thinking of one mode of expression, while he is committing another to paper. Southey:

Here is an example from

"The place to which she was going was the very spot which, of all others in this wide world, she had wished most to see.' -The Doctor.

This expression is objectionable not only because it may be omitted altogether, without impairing the meaning, but also because it involves a contradiction. How, in the name of common sense, can one thing be another thing? One thing may be above, beyond other things, or more than other things; but it cannot be of other things. How, for instance, can the spot which Southey's woman wished to see, be one of other spots? What Southey had in his mind was, that the person wished to see the spot in question more than all other spots. But instead of using other to express difference," "exclusion," as it commonly does, he employs it to express ❝iden

tity." To make the sentence correct, the words, "of all others," should have been omitted, or the word for which "others" stands, should have been used in its stead, thus:

"The place to which she was going was the very spot which, of all spots in this wide world, she had wished most to see."

Here are some further examples :

"The study of nature in her animal and vegetable kingdoms, although of all others the most obvious and simple, seems to be one of the last which attracted the attention of mankind.". ROSCOE. Life of Leo X.

"A stain of all others the most readily made and the most difficult to expunge."-Ibid.

"They were of a country which, of all others in Europe, has been most familiar with war."-SIR WALTER SCOTT. Life of Napoleon.

"But half his heart was in his profession, which, of all others, would require the whole."-GILFILLAN. GILFILLAN. Literary Portraits.

"Astronomy, 'that star-eyed science,' which, of all others, most denotes the grandeur of our destiny."-Ibid.

The writer most addicted to this fault is Sir A. Alison, from whom I shall have occasion to quote several examples of it in the chapter on "Mannerism."

Among the many curious things that have been given to the world by the author of "Curiosities of Literature," those of his own unconscious making are not the least amusing. Of these I have already cited a few samples; and

I shall now adduce some further instances, which would make no inconsiderable addition to his chapter on "Literary Blunders."

"When relics of Saints were first introduced, the relic-mania was universal."-Curiosities of Literature.

That the relic-mania became universal "soon after" it was first introduced, is what the writer meant to say; not that its first introduction and its universal adoption were simultaneous, as he actually says.

"When a modern bishop was just advanced to a mitre.' Ibid.

As it is the mitre that makes the bishop, so it is the priest, and not the bishop, that is advanced to the mitre.

"I have seen an English ass once introduced on our stage, which did not act with this decorum. Our late actors have frequently been beasts-a Dutch taste."-Ibid.

From one part of this quotation the reader is led to believe that our late actors made beasts of themselves; but the inference from the context is that beasts were brought on the stage as actors.

"His successors now only made use of the 'sentences' as a row of pegs to hang on their fine-spun metaphysical questions." -1bid.

Here is another of those phrases, so common in this writer, in which he says the contrary

of what he means.

He means to say that the

questions were to be hung on the "sentences as on pegs; but he actually says that the pegs were to be hung on the questions. It should have been "on which to hang," instead of "to hang on."

"On this Abishai vaults on David's horse, and (with an Oriental metaphor) the land of the Philistines leaped to him instantly."-Ibid.

What description of metaphor that may be which could leap with the land of the Philistines, is only known to D'Israeli and the Orientals. It has not yet found a place in the European Republic of Letters. The writer probably meant to say" (to use an Oriental metaphor)."

In commenting on Bentley's readings of Milton, D'Israeli remarks:

"Bentley's canons of criticism are apochryphal."—Ibid.

It is obvious that D'Israeli does not understand the meaning of "apochryphal." The canons to be apochryphal must have been propounded by another, and appropriated by Bentley. It is his readings of Milton that are apochryphal and not his canons. The canons, whether sound or unsound, are really and truly Bentley's canons; but the readings he proposes are not the true readings of Milton.

Speaking of the Latin verses, sentences and texts of Scripture, written by Prynne on his