El. of Crit., ii, 251.  “I can promise no entertainment to those who shun thinking.”—­Ib., i, 36.  “We cannot help being of opinion.”—­ENCYC.  BRIT. Murray’s Gram., p. 76.  “I cannot help being of opinion.”—­Blair’s Rhet., p. 311.  “I cannot help mentioning here one character more.”—­Hughes.  Spect., No. 554.  “These would sometimes very narrowly miss being catched away.”—­Steele.  “Carleton very narrowly escaped being taken.”—­Grimshaw’s Hist., p. 111.  Better, “escaped from being taken;”—­or, “escaped capture.”

OBS. 19.—­In sentences like the following, the participle seems to be improperly made the object of the verb:  “I intend doing it.”—­“I remember meeting him.”  Better, “I intend to do it.”—­“I remember to have met him.”  According to my notion, it is an error to suppose that verbs in general may govern participles.  If there are any proper instances of such government, they would seem to be chiefly among verbs of quitting or avoiding.  And even here the analogy of General Grammar gives countenance to a different solution; as, “They left beating of Paul.”—­Acts, xxi, 32.  Better, “They left beating Paul;”—­or, “They quit beating Paul.”  Greek, “[Greek:  Epausanto tuptontes ton Paulon.]” Latin, “Cessaverunt percutientes Paulum.”—­Montanus.  “Cessarunt coedere Paulum.”—­Beza.  “Cessaverunt percutere Paulum.”—­Vulgate.  It is true, the English participle in ing differs in some respects from that which usually corresponds to it in Latin or Greek; it has more of a substantive character, and is commonly put for the Latin gerund.  If this difference does not destroy the argument from analogy, the opinion is still just, that left and quit are here intransitive, and that the participle beating relates to the pronoun they.  Such is unequivocally the construction of the Greek text, and also of the literal Latin of Arias Montanus.  But, to the mere English grammarian, this method of parsing will not be apt to suggest itself:  because, at first sight, the verbs appear to be transitive, and the participle in ing has nothing to prove it an adjunct of the nominative, and not the object of the verb—­unless, indeed, the mere fact that it is a participle, is proof of this.

OBS. 20.—­Our great Compiler, Murray, not understanding this construction, or not observing what verbs admit of it, or require it, has very unskillfully laid it down as a rule, that, “The participle with its adjuncts, may be considered as a substantive phrase in the objective case, governed by the preposition or verb, expressed or understood:  as, ‘By promising much and performing but little, we become despicable.’  ’He studied to avoid expressing himself too severely.’”—­Octavo