Concur with a person; in a measure; Distinct from.

Consist (to be composed) of, (to be com- Engage in a work; for a time.

Defend (others) from ;-(ourselves) Fall under disgrace; from a tree; into a

Look on what is present; for what is Resemblance to.

Taste of, means actual enjoyment;- Worthy, unworthy of. But after these,

835. What preposition it is proper to use, often depends as much upon what follows, as upon what goes before. Thus, "To fall from a height"—"into a pit”— "in battle"-"to work"-"upon an enemy."

836. Into is used only after verbs of motion, and implies entrance. In is used after verbs of motion or rest, and denotes situation, but never entrance; as, “Ho went into a carriage, and rode in it."

837. Boast, approve, and disapprove, are often used without a preposition following; so also worthy and unworthy.

838. The same preposition that follows a verb or adjective, usually follows the noun derived from it, and vice versâ; as, "Confide in"-" Confident in"-" Confi dence in."

EXERCISES TO BE CORRECTED.

In the following sentences, point out the prepositions and the antecedent tern.. If not appropriate, correct, and give the rule :

This remark is founded with truth. He was eager of recommending him to his fellow-citizens. I find great difficulty of writing. Every change is not a change to the better. Changed for a worse shape it can not be. It is important, in times of trial, to have a friend to whom you can confide. You may rely in the truth of what he says. Many have profited from good advice, but have not always been grateful of it. I have no occasion of his services. Favors are not always bestowed to the most deserving. This is very different to that. Virtue and vice differ widely with each other. Come in the house. We rode into a carriage with four horses. The boy fell under a deep pit. Such conduct can not be reconciled to your profession. Go, and be reconciled with thy brother. A man had four sons, and he divided his property between them. I am now engaged with that work. He insists on it that he is right.

THE POSSESSIVE GOVERNED BY SUBSTANTIVES

839. RULE XIII.—One substantive governs another in the possessive, when the latter substantive limits the signification of the former; as, "Virtue's reward"-" John's books."

840. The substantive in the possessive case limits the governing noun, by representing the thing named as proceeding from, possessed by, or suitable to the person or thing expressed by the possessive (165). It is of course necessary, under this rule, that the substantives signify different things.

66

841. A substantive, limited by the possessive, may be any noun in any case, or a verbal noun (462), either alone or with its regimen, or modifying words: as, On eagles' wings."-" He was opposed to John's writing"-"I am in favor of a pupil's composing frequently."—"John's having devoted himself too much to study was the cause of his sickness." (463).

842. The noun governing the possessive is often understood; as, "This book is John's [book]." It is always omitted after the possessive case of the personal pronouns; as, "This book is mine, thine, ours," &c., and, in this construction, when supplied, the possessive case must be changed for the possessive pronoun (241); as, "This is my book, thy book, our book;" not mine book, &c. (292).

843. The possessive case, and the preposition of with the objective, are often equivalent; as, "My father's house"="The house of my father." But

844. Sometimes the idea expressed by of with the objective, can not be ex pressed at all by the possessive; as, "A ring of gold"—" A cup of water"-“A piece of land"-"The house of refuge," &c. Sometimes, again, the ideas expressed are different; thus, "The Lord's day" means the sabbath. "The day of the Lord," means the day of judgment. 'My father's picture," means a picture belonging to my father. "A picture of my father," means a portrait of him. “God's love" means only the love which God feels. The love of God" means either the love which God feels to us, or that which we feel to him.

845. Of, before a possessive case, followed by its governing substantive, usually governs that substantive; as, "The heat of the sun's rays." But of before a possessive, not followed by its governing word, governs that word understood, and the expression refers to a part of the things possessed; as, “A discovery of [that is, from] Sir Isaac Newton's [discoveries];" meaning, "One of Sir Isaac Newton's discoveries" (242).

846. Even when the possessive case, and of with the objective, are equivalent in meaning, the arrangement and euphony, as well as perspicuity of the sentence, will often render the one expression preferable to the other. When this is the case, care should be taken to use that form which, in the circumstances is best. Thus, "In the name of the army" is better than, "In the army's name;" "My mother's gold ring" is better than, "The gold ring of my mother." A succession of words in either form is harsh, and may be avoided by a proper mixture of the two; thus, "My brother's wife's sister"-better-" The sister of my brother's wife."—" The sickness of the son of the king"-better-" The sickness of the king's son."

847. When several nouns come together in the possessive case, implying com

mon possession, the sign of the possessive is annexed to the last, and understood to the rest; as, “Jane and Lucy's books," that is, books the common property of Jane and Lucy. But if common possession is not implied, or if several words intervene, the sign of the possessive should be annexed to each; as, "Jane's and Lucy's books," that is, books, some of which are Jane's and others Lucy's.66 This gained the king's, as well as the people's, approbation."

848. When a name is complex, consisting of more terms than one, the sign of the possessive is annexed to the last only; as, "Julius Cæsar's Commentaries”— "John the Baptist's head"-" His brother Philip's wife"-"The Bishop of London's charge." Here Julius Caesar's is a complex name, in the possessive; John and brother are in the possessive, without the sign, that being annexed to the words Baptist and Philip, in apposition. In the last example, "London" is in the objective case, governed by of, and the 's annexed properly belongs to Bishop, gov. erned in the possessive by charge. In parsing the words separately, the transfer must, of course be so made. But the true reason for annexing 's to London is, that the whole phrase, “Bishop of London," is regarded as one term, governed in the possessive by charge, and may be so parsed. Thus, "A complex noun in the possessive case," &c.

849. When a short explanatory term is joined to a name, the sign of the possessive may be annexed to either; as, "I called at Smith's, the bookseller," or, 66 at Smith the bookseller's." But if, to such a phrase, the governing substantive is added, the sign of the possessive must be annexed to the last; as, "I called at Smith the bookseller's shop."

850. If the explanatory circumstance be complex, or consisting of more terms than one, the sign of the possessive must be annexed to the name or first substantive; as, "This Psalm is David's, the king, priest, and prophet of the people.""That book is Smith's, the bookseller in Maiden Lane."

851. This mode of expression, however, is never elegant, and though sometimes used when the governing substantive is understood, yet it would be better to avoid it, and say, "This is a psalm of David, the king," &c., or, "This is one of the psalms of David," &c. But an expression like this can not, with any propriety, be used when the governing substantive is added. Thus, "David, the king, priest, and prophet of the people's psalm," would be intolerable.

852. When two nouns in the possessive are governed by different words, the sign of the possessive must be annexed to each; as, "He took refuge at the governor's, the king's representative," that is, "at the governor's house."

853. The s after the apostrophe is sometimes omitted, when the first word ends, and the following word begins, with an s, or when the use of it would occasion a disagreeable repetition of s-sounds; as, "For righteousness' sake"--" For conscience' sake"-"For Jesus' sake"-" At Jesus' feet" (173). In other cases, such omission would generally be improper; as, "James' book"-"Miss' shoes," instead of, "James's book"-"Miss's shoes."

854. A clause of a sentence should never come between the possessive case and the word by which it is governed; thus, "She began to extol the farmer's, as she called him, excellent understanding," should be, "the excellent understanding of the farmer, as she called him."

855. A noun governing the possessive plural, or two or more nouns severally in