made and consequently the noun is of the second person, and nominative case independent.

It may be proper also to remark, that the interjection is not to be considered as governing a word, when,without essentially weakening the force of the expression, a verb may be supplied on which the noun or pronoun may terminate; as, 0 how vile that deed! How sad its remembrance! i. e. O how vile was that deed! How sad is its remembrance! But when a verb cannot be supplied without altering the phraseology and diminishing the force of the sentence, the interjection should be considered as performing the office of govermnent.

RULE XIV.

The adverb like and the adjectives worth and like sometimes govern an objective case; as, She moves like a queen. He is like his father. She is worth him and all his family. Like, in the first example, has the properties of an adverb, and qualifies moves. It also has the properties of a preposition, and shows the relation between moves and queen; it therefore governs queen in the objective case. In the second example, like is an adjective belonging to the pronoun he, and shows the relation between is and father, and consequently governs father in the objective. In the third example, worth is an adjective, and belongs to the pronoun she. It also shows the relation between is and him, and governs the latter word in the objective.

Some grammarians consider words situated like queen, father and him, in the above examples, to be governed by some preposition understood.But the insertion of a preposition would be altogether superfluous; as in each case the office of

a preposition is evidently performed by another word. Besides, it would be impossible to place a preposition after the adjective worth, as here used, without giving the sentence a ridiculous coustruction, and involving its meaning in obscurity.

RULE XV.

Nouns implying measure, length of time, and distance of space, are put in the objective without a governing word; as,

The building is fifty feet in length: They arrived several weeks ago: Baltimore is one hundred miles distant from Philadelphia. Here the nouns feet, weeks, and miles, are all nouns in the objective case without a governing word. They are not governed by prepositions understood, for the obvious reason that prepositions cannot be used in this connexion with any propriety.-Should they be inserted, they would be an incumbrance worse than useless. Take, for instance, the last example: "Baltimore is one hundred miles distant from Philadelphia," and let some preposition be supplied to govern miles. What preposition will it be? And how would the sentence read with it inserted? The fact is, such is the idioma of the English language, that a noun thus situated needs no governing word; the sentence is complete in its simplest form.

RULE XVI.

Participial nouns may have the same cases, and be governed in the same manner, as common substantives. They also have the power of governing other words in the objective case; as,

Our heavenly Father, by diffusing his benefits, manifests his kindness: Blessed is the man that keepeth his hand from doing evil. In these examples, diffusing and doing are participial nouns, in the ob

jective case, governed by the prepositions by and from; and they likewise govern the nouns benefits and evil by which they are followed. Participial nouns are sometimes placed after transitive verbs and governed by them; as, I cannot omit noting this truth: They could not avoid seeing me as I passed along the street. Here, noting and seeing are participial nouns, and are governed by the verbs omit and avoid.

In the following examples the participial noun ist intransitive, having no government of a case; as, They talked of returning here last week: He is desirous of going with his friends.-In the following sentences, the participial noun is used in the nominative case: The loving of our enemies is the command of God: The executing of good laws will strengthen government: His dying reduced the family to poverty.

The participial noun, although capable of expressing the relation of property or possession does not elegantly assume the distinctive form of the possessive case: thus, instead of saying, They were deprived of reading and writing's advantages: we more properly say, They were deprived of the advantages of reading and writing.

Cases Corresponding.

RULE XVII.

Two or more nouns coming together and signifying the same thing, are put by apposition in the

same case; as,

Joseph the son of Jacob, was much beloved by his father: The Israelites were greatly oppressed by pharaoh, king of Egypt: Give me here John the baptist's head. In the first example, Joseph and son both refer to the same person, and are therefore in

apposition; in the second, pharaoh, and king are in apposition; in the third, John and baptist's are in apposition, and both in the possessive case. The sign of the possessive after John is understood. When two nouns in the possessive case thus succeed each other, in apposition, the sign of the possessive is very properly omitted after the former. Two or more nouns of the singular number,when put in apposition, always require a singular verb. The following sentences are therefore inaccurate. Paul the servant of Christ, the apostle to the Gentiles, were eminent for piety and christian enterprise: was eminent. Solomon, the son of David, and king of Israel, are much celebrated for wisdom: is much celebrated.

RULE XVIII.

Any intransitive or passive verb may have the same case after it as before it when both words refer to the same thing; as,

The disciples were first called christians at antioch. The verb to be, through all its variations, has the same case after it as that which next precedes it: as, I am he whom they invited: It may be (or might have been) he, but it cannot be (or could not have been) I: It seems to have been he who conducted himself so wisely; It appeared to be she that transacted the buisiness: I understood it to be him: I believe it to have been them: We at first took it to be her; but were afterwards convinced that it was not she: He is not the person who it seemed he was: She is not now the woman whom they represented her to have been: Whom do you fancy him to be? By these examples, it appears that this verb has no government of case, but serves, in all its forms, as a conductor to the cases;

so that the two cases which, in the construction of the sentence, are the next before and after it, must always be alike.

When the verb to be is understood, it has the same case before and after it as when it is expressed: : as; He seems the leader of the party: He shall continue clerk: They appointed me executor; i. e. he seems to be the leader of the party, &c.

Verbs which signify to become, to wander, to live, to die, to go, to return, and others of a similar nature, have the same case before and after them; as, The calf became an ox; He wandered an outcast: He lived the object of paternal love, &c.

Passive verbs have the same case before and after them, when both words refer to the same thing; as, He was styled Cæsar: She was named Penelope: Homer is styled the prince of poets: James was created a duke: The general was saluted emperor: The professor was appointed tutor to the prince.

All the examples under this rule, and all others of a similar nature, may be explained on the principle that nouns and pronouns are in the same case, when they signify the same thing; the one merely describing the other, or exhibiting it under different circumstances.

MISCELLANEOUS RULES.

RULE XIX.

Pronouns must always agree with their antecedents and the nouns for which they stand, in gender and number; as,

This is the friend whom I love; That is the vice which I hate: The king and the queen had put on their robes: The moon appears, and she shines, but the light is not her own.