OBS. 40.—­It may be observed of these different relations between participles and other words, that nouns are much more apt to be put in the nominative or the objective case, than are pronouns.  For example:  “There is no more of moral principle in the way of abolitionists nominating their own candidates, than in that of their voting for those nominated by others.”—­GERRIT SMITH:  Liberator, Vol.  X, p. 17.  Indeed, a pronoun of the nominative or the objective case is hardly ever used in such a relation, unless it be so obviously the leading word in sense, as to preclude all question about the construction.[423] And this fact seems to make it the more doubtful, whether it be proper to use nouns in that manner.  But it may safely be held, that if the noun can well be considered the leading word in sense, we are at least under no necessity of subjecting it to the government of a mere participle.  If it be thought desirable to vary the foregoing example, it may easily be done, thus:  “There is no more of moral principle to prevent abolitionists from nominating their own candidates, than to prevent them from voting for those nominated by others.”  The following example is much like the preceding, but less justifiable:  “We see comfort, security, strength, pleasure, wealth, and prosperity, all flowing from men combining together; and misery, weakness, and poverty, ensuing from their acting separately or in opposition to each other.”—­West’s Letters, p. 133.  Say rather,—­“from men’s combining-together,” or, “from the just combination of men in society;” and,—­“from their separate action, or their opposition to one an other.”  Take an other example:  “If illorum be governed here of negotii, it must be in this order, gratia negotii illorum videndi; and this is, for the sake of their business being seen, and not, for the sake of them being seen.”—­Johnson’s Grammatical Commentaries, p. 352.  Here the learned critic, in disputing Perizonius’s resolution of the phrase, “illorum videndi gratia” has written disputable English.  But, had he affected the Latin idiom, a nearer imitation of it would have been,—­“for the sake of their business’s being seen, and not for the sake of their being seen.”  Or nearer still,—­“for the sake of seeing of their business, and not, for the sake of seeing of them.”  An elegant writer would be apt to avoid all these forms, and say,—­“for the sake of seeing their business;” and,—­“for the sake of seeing them;” though the former phrase, being but a version of bad Latin, makes no very good sense in any way.