the authority of any man.”  See p. 13.  The notable results of these important premises are too numerous for detail even in this general pandect.  But it is to be mentioned here, that, according to this theory, a nominative coming after than or as, is in general to be accounted a nominative absolute; that is, a nominative which is independent of any verb; or, (as the ingenious author himself expresses it,) “A word in the subjective case following another subjective, and immediately preceded by than, as, or not, may be used without an ASSERTER immediately depending on it for sense.”—­Peirce’s Gram., p. 195.  See also his “Grammatical Chart, Rule I, Part 2.”

OBS. 25.—­“Lowth, Priestley, Murray, and most grammarians say, that hypothetical, conditional, concessive, or exceptive conjunctions; as, if, lest, though, unless, except; require, or govern the subjunctive mood.  But in this they are certainly wrong:  for, as Dr. Crombie rightly observes, the verb is put in the subjunctive mood, because the mood expresses contingency, not because it follows the conjunction:  for these writers themselves allow, that the same conjunctions are to be followed by the indicative mood, when the verb is not intended to express a contingency.  In the following sentence:  ’Though he be displeased at it, I will bolt my door; and let him break it open if he dare:’  may we not as well affirm, that and governs the imperative mood, as that though and if govern the subjunctive?”—­Churchill’s Gram., p. 321.

OBS. 26.—­In the list of correspondents contained in Note 7th below, there are some words which ought not to be called conjunctions, by the parser; for the relation of a word as the proper correspondent to an other word, does not necessarily determine its part of speech.  Thus, such is to be parsed as an adjective; as, sometimes as a pronoun; so, as a conjunctive adverb.  And only, merely, also, and even, are sometimes conjunctive adverbs; as, “Nor is this only a matter of convenience to the poet, it is also a source of gratification to the reader.”—­ Campbell’s Rhet., p. 166. Murray’s, Gram., i, 362.  Professor Bullions will have it, that these adverbs may relate to nouns—­a doctrine which I disapprove.  He says “Only, solely, chiefly, merely, too, also, and perhaps a few others, are sometimes joined to substantives; as, ’Not only the men, but the women also were present.’”—­English Gram., p. 116. Only and also are here, I think, conjunctive adverbs; but it is not the office of adverbs to qualify nouns; and, that these words are adjuncts to the nouns men and women, rather than the verb were, which is once expressed and once understood, I see no sufficient reason to