“Peter’s wife’s mother lay sick of a fever.” “His physician said that his disease would require his utmost skill to defeat its progress in his limbs.”  Phrases like these are constantly occurring, which can not be explained intelligibly by the existing grammars.  In fact, the words said to be nouns in the possessive case, have changed their character, by use, from nouns to adjectives, or definitive words, and should thus be classed.  Russia iron, Holland gin, China ware, American people, the Washington tavern, Lafayette house, Astor house, Hudson river, (formerly Hudson’s,) Baffin’s bay, Van Dieman’s land, John street, Harper’s ferry, Hill’s bridge, a paper book, a bound book, a red book, John’s book—­one which John is known to use, it may be a borrowed one, but generally known as some way connected with him,—­Rev. Mr. Smith’s church, St. John’s church, Grace church, Murray’s grammar; not the property nor in the possession of Lindley Murray, neither does it govern him; for he has gone to speak a purer language than he taught on earth.  It is mine.  I bought it, have possessed it these ten years; but, thank fortune, am little governed by it.  But more on this point when we come to the proper place.  What I have said, will serve as a hint, which will enable you to see the impropriety of adopting the “possessive case.”

It may be said that more cases are employed in other languages.  That is a poor reason why we should break the barriers of natural language.  Beside, I know not how we should decide by that rule, for none of them have a case that will compare with the English possessive.  The genitive of the French, Latin, or Greek, will apply in only a few respects.  The former has three, the latter five, and the Latin six cases, neither of which correspond with the possessive, as explained by Murray and his satellites.  We should be slow to adopt into our language an idiom which does not belong to it, and compel learners to make distinctions where none exist.  It is an easy matter to tell children that the apostrophe and letter s marks the possessive case; but when they ask the difference in the meaning between the use of the noun and those which all admit are adjectives, it will be no indifferent task to satisfy them.  What is the difference in the construction of language or the sense conveyed, between Hudson’s river, and Hudson river?  Davis’s straits, or Bass straits?  St. John’s church, or Episcopal church? the sun’s beams, or sun shine?  In all cases these words are used to define the succeeding noun.  They regard “property or possession,” only when attending circumstances, altogether foreign from any quality in the form or meaning of the word itself, are so combined as to give it that import.  And in such cases, we retain these words as adjectives, long after the property has passed from the hands of the persons who gave it a name. Field’s point, Fuller’s