conclusive, but "John sleeps bed," is indicative of nothing. In the former instance, sleeps is active, and immediately unites with its object, or receiver, time. In the latter, sleeps is neuter, and, like other neuter verbs, will not unite with its object bed but by a small connecting word, as, "John sleeps in bed."

169. Passive verbs, like neuter verbs, do not immediately unite with their objects, or receivers, but require to be conducted to them by the little word by.

170. Convert the whole, or as much as you can, of the first chapter of Genesis, which is in the active voice, into the passive voice, thus: "In the begininng, the heaven and the earth were created by God." This will be a good exercise for you, and will, if strictly attended to, give you a facility in distinguishing the passive verb from the active.

171. I think it advisable to conjugate this and the succeeding verb only in one mode, as the variety of forms which they assume is shown in the present, past, and present perfect indicative. The rest of the modes and tenses of to have are modelled after the conjugation of to love, and if you have not passed that verb carelessly, you are well qualified to carry out to have to the same extent.

172. When a verb has only two forms of spelling, and that form which makes the past tense, and that which follows have in the present perfect, both end in ed, it is a REGULAR verb. Do, having did and done, and have, having had in the past and present perfect, and all verbs varying likewise, are IRREGULAR verbs.

173. I am inclined to fall in with the observation of the learned Mr. Wallis, that did, hast, hath, has, had,

shalt, wilt, are evidently contracted for doed, haveth, haves, haved, shallest, and willest. This opinion, which I presume no one is prepared to confute, admits that have was once regular, but the change wrought in it in the lapse of time renders it now, undeniably, an irregular verb. Do had likewise ed in the past, but done, unless it was once doed, an opinion not very probable, must have always rendered it irregular.

174. Whenever do is employed as an auxiliary, as in the case of "I do love" and "I did love," instead of "I love" and "I loved," it is called the emphatic form. The emphatic verb contains a little more starch than the simple, and serves for stiff-necked expressions. When do is employed in its auxiliary capacity, it takes the place of the principal verb in changing for time.

175. I cannot resist this opportunity of giving you an instance of learned and philosophical sagacity. Mr. Tooke supposes that did is correspondent to the termination ed in our regular verbs. This supposition, however, is arrested in its course by a question put by Dr. Crombie, or the inflection might have seized every pedant of the day. "Whence," says the Doctor, "arises the termination ed in doed, for which did itself is contracted?"

176. Another philosophical treat emanates from Mr. Gilchrist, in his "Philosophic Etymology." He considers did to be nothing more than do doubled. Repetition, the same author says, is a mode of expressing complete action. Now mark the test of application. When you say, "I did a thing," according to Mr. Gilchrist, it is correspondent to "I do do it." But

to stiffen, or starch, the expression still more, you cannot, on the same principle, be wrong in giving "I do do do it," for "I did do it."

177. Such are the schemes of mal-administrators, and such the workings of the unsound and irrational bubbles of honourable and learned linguists. But you see how easily the anti-philosophical dogma of Gilchrist may be reduced to a most pitiable state of insignificancy. This too, may assist you to form a pretty accurate idea of the climax of anomalies which grammar writers have so long and so happily conjectured. I fearlessly avow, that early conjectures have done more to cramp and paralize the judgment of later writers than all other things whatsoever, and hence they have contributed a large share towards filling modern grammar books with error and confusion, with which their readers are kept on a perpetual struggle.

1. I

2. Thou shalt or wilt have been 3. He shall or will have been

shall or will have been 1. We shall or will have been 2. You shall or will have been 3. They shall or will have bean

178. If you put loving, or any other verb which ends in ing, after any of these inflections of the verb to be, you will make what grammarians call the progressive form of the verb. If you put loved instead of loving, you will make a passive verb. Progressive: "I am loving." Passive: "I am loved."

179. I scarcely need remark on the irregularities of the verb to be. They are clearly exhibited in the conjugation its self. "The variety of forms which to be assumes," says Dr. Crombie," clearly shows that it has proceeded from different sources.' The sources to which he alludes are, the Anglo-Saxon, Greek, FrancoTheatisc, Gaelic, Latin, and other languages. As I suppose to enter into controversy about things perhaps which neither I nor you understand, and do not wish to understand, would only be occupying space which may answer a much better purpose, I shall content my self by noticing one of the sources from which are is