primitive signification, it changes the meaning, but the new complex assertive coincides with the attached past time, the same as it did before may was prefixed; as, "I may have written that letter this year."

May can only be used before the primitive form of the principal assertive, or before the auxiliary have. May has the same exceptions as must, with respect to future time. (See page 38.)

MIGHT.

Might also implies possibility, and is a modification of may. The complex assertive, formed by prefixing the word might to the primitive form of the assertive, coincides with the detached past time; as, "He might do it yesterday."

Might, prefixed to the auxiliary have, coincides with the past transit; as, I might have written at his departure.

CAN.

Can implies capability; and every complex assertive of which it forms a part, or is an auxiliary, is used to express that capability; as, I can write to him; I can give it.

Can, prefixed to the form of the assertive coinciding with the passing transit, is used to denote future time, as in the preceding examples. For the exceptions, see the auxiliary may and must.

Can is only prefixed to the primitive form of the assertive, and always denotes future time; as, I

can write. No complex assertive of which can is an auxiliary can coincide with past time. Yet all writers on English grammar declare the contrary, and give us what they call the potential mood, perfect tense, in their conjugation; namely, I may or can have written; I may or can have given; I may or can have built.

We insist, that, I can have written to him; I can have given him the books; or I can have built a house in the past part of this week, month, day, or century, is an absurdity, and consequently each example is bad English.

Can, may be prefixed to the auxiliary have and coincides with the future transit; as, I can have finished my work at noon.

If we are asked, why cannot we say, He can have written, as well as, He may have written? we answer, because the capability of writing in a past time cannot now exist; and the possibility of having written can and does exist. As man is always placed in the passing transit, that is, in the boundary between past and future time, he has never done any thing, nor can he ever do any thing in any past or future time. Every thing that has ever been done, has been done in the boundary between the past and future; and every thing that will ever be done, must also be done in that boundary which will hereafter separate the past from the future, and then be a passing transit.

COULD.

Could is used as a modification of can. When it is prefixed to the passing transit they form a complex assertive, that coincides with the detached past time; as, "I could write yesterday." But

the complex assertive, formed by prefixing the word could to the auxiliary have, coincides with the passed transit; as, "I could have seen him at noon; or, at his departure.'

Why cannot we assert the capability of writing in the attached past time as well as in the detached? Because, by the complex assertive, formed by prefixing the auxiliary could to the primitive form of the assertive, we only declare that the capability of writing in some detached time did exist in that time; as "I could write yesterday," which is perfectly consistent; but, to assert that I can write in any past time, whether attached or detached, after that time has expired, is the inconsistency; as, I can have written yesterday; I can have built a house this year; that is, in the past part of this year.

WILL.

Will implies volition or exemption from restraint, and is used as a principal or auxiliary assertive; as, "He wills his entire property to his wife and children." "She will go to the country next week."

Every complex assertive, of which will is the only auxiliary, coincides with future time; as, "He will write.'

A complex assertive, of which will is the only auxiliary, is used;

1st. To assert the speaker's future free-agency; as, "I will write; we will go.'

2ndly. To assert or ascertain the future freeagency of personal subjects of the second or third person; as, "You will write; Will you write? He will go; Will he go?"

3rdly. To assert the speaker's conjectural predictions; as, "This horse will suit me; James will succeed."

4thly. To ascertain the conjectural predictions of others; as, "Will you have time." "Will the packet arrive before 12 o'clock."

The complex assertive, formed by prefixing will to the auxiliary have, coincides with the future transit; as, "He will have done at four o'clock."

WOULD.

Would is used as a modification of will. It implies volition, but coincides with a different time or transit.

Will always coincides with a future time or transit; and would with a past, when properly applied.

The complex assertive, formed by prefixing would to the primitive form of the assertive, coincides with the detached past time; as, “He would write yesterday."

When it is prefixed to the auxiliary have, the compound assertive coincides with the passed transit; as, "She would have written at her brother's departure, if she was not prevented."

SHALL.

Shall differs from will, and intimates that the subject is influenced by some cause.

Every complex assertive, of which shall is the only auxiliary, coincides with future time; as, "I

shall repay you five pounds on Sunday." "If he go, I shall stop at home."

A complex assertive, of which shall is the only auxiliary, is used,

1st. To predict the speaker's influenced agency; as, "If he go, I shall stop at home."

2nd. To assert or ascertain the future influenced agency of personal subjects of the second or third person; as, "You shall write; shall he come?"

3. To assert the speaker's positive predictions of things; as, "If equals be added to equals, the sums shall be equal." "Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit, shall be cut down, and shall be cast into the fire." Matt. vii. 19. etc.

4. To ascertain the positive predictions of others; as, "What shall I do to be saved?" "When shall I come?"

The complex assertive, formed by prefixing shall to the auxiliary have, coincides with the future transit; as, "Shall I have done when you come? I shall have finished at four o'clock."

SHOULD.

Should has the same relation to shall, that would has to will. Every complex assertive, of which should is an auxiliary, coincides with the same time or transit, as if the same complex assertives had the auxiliary would instead of should.

EXPOSITION OF ASSERTIVES.

The exposition of an assertive is a methodical