are, I know not; but it is certain that the difficulty here imagined does not concern the application of such rules as require the verb and pronoun to conform to the sense intended; and, where there is no apparent impropriety in adopting either number, there is no occasion to raise a scruple as to which is right.  To cut knots by dogmatism, and to tie them by sophistry, are employments equally vain.  It cannot be denied that there are in every multitude both a unity and a plurality, one or the other of which must be preferred as the principle of concord for the verb or the pronoun, or for both.  Nor is the number of nouns small, or their use unfrequent, which, according to our best authors, admit of either construction:  though Kirkham assails and repudiates his own rules, because, “Their application is quite limited.”—­Grammar in Familiar Lectures, p. 59.

OBS. 6.—­Murray’s doctrine seems to be, not that collective nouns are generally susceptible of two senses in respect to number, but that some naturally convey the idea of unity, others, that of plurality, and a few, either of these senses.  The last, which are probably ten times more numerous than all the rest, he somehow merges or forgets, so as to speak of two classes only:  saying, “Some nouns of multitude certainly convey to the mind an idea of plurality, others, that of a whole as one thing, and others again, sometimes that of unity, and sometimes that of plurality.  On this ground, it is warrantable, and consistent with the nature of things, to apply a plural verb and pronoun to the one class, and a singular verb and pronoun to the other.  We shall immediately perceive the impropriety of the following constructions:  ’The clergy has withdrawn itself from the temporal courts;’ ‘The assembly was divided in its opinion;’ &c.”—­Octavo Gram., p. 153.  The simple fact is, that clergy, assembly, and perhaps every other collective noun, may sometimes convey the idea of unity, and sometimes that of plurality; but an “opinion” or a voluntary “withdrawing” is a personal act or quality; wherefore it is here more consistent to adopt the plural sense and construction, in which alone we take the collection as individuals, or persons.

OBS. 7.—­Although a uniformity of number is generally preferable to diversity, in the construction of words that refer to the same collective noun:  and although many grammarians deny that any departure from such uniformity is allowable; yet, if the singular be put first, a plural pronoun may sometimes follow without obvious impropriety:  as, “So Judah was carried away out of their land.”—­2 Kings, xxv, 21.  “Israel is reproved and threatened for their impiety and idolatry.”—­Friends’ Bible, Hosea, x.  “There is the enemy who wait to give us battle.”—­Murray’s Introductory Reader, p. 36.  When the idea