is not intended, it is always a fault in allegory to be too dark.”—­Blair’s Rhet., p. 151; Murray’s Gram., 343.  “There may be an excess in too many short sentences also; by which the sense is split and broken.”—­Blair’s Rhet., p. 101.  “Are there any nouns you cannot see, hear, or feel, but only think of?  Name such a noun.”—­Infant School Gram., p. 17. “Flock is of the singular number, it denotes but one flock—­and in the nominative case, it is the active agent of the verb.”—­Kirkham’s Gram., p. 58.  “The article THE agrees with nouns of the singular or plural number.”—­Parker and Fox’s Gram., p. 8.  “The admiral bombarded Algiers, which has been continued.”—­Nixon’s Parser, p. 128.  “The world demanded freedom, which might have been expected.”—­Ibid. “The past tense represents an action as past and finished, either with or without respect to the time when.”—­Felton’s Gram., p. 22.  “That boy rode the wicked horse.”—­Butler’s Practical Gram., p. 42.  “The snake swallowed itself.”—­Ib., p. 57. “Do is sometimes used when shall or should is omitted; as, ‘if thou do repent.’”—­Ib., p. 85.  “SUBJUNCTIVE MOOD.  This mood has the tenses of the indicative.”—­Ib., p. 87.  “As nouns never speak, they are never in the first person.”—­Davis’s Practical Gram., p. 148.  “Nearly all parts of speech are used more or less in an elliptical sense.”—­Day’s District School Gram., p. 80.  “RULE.  No word in a period can have any greater extension than the other words or sections in the same sentence will give it.”—­Barrett’s Revised Gram., p. 38 and p. 43.  “Words used exclusively as Adverbs, should not be used as adjectives.”—­Clark’s Practical Gram., p. 166.  “Adjectives used in Predication, should not take the Adverbial form.”—­Ib., pp. 167 and 173.

UNDER CRITICAL NOTE XVI.—­OF THE INCORRIGIBLE.

“And this state of things belonging to the painter governs it in the possessive case.”—­Murray’s Gram., p. 195; Ingersoll’s, 201; et al.

[FORMULE.—­This composition is incorrigibly bad.  The participle “belonging” which seems to relate to “things,” is improperly meant to qualify “state.”  And the “state of things,” (which state really belongs only to the things,) is absurdly supposed to belong to a person—­i. e., “to the painter.”  Then this man, to whom the “state of things” is said to belong, is forthwith called “it,” and nonsensically declared to be “in the possessive case.”  But, according to Critical Note 16th, “Passages too erroneous for correction, may be criticised, orally or otherwise, and then passed over without any attempt to amend them.”  Therefore, no correction is attempted here.]