is governed by the noun which it possesses.”—­Wilbur and Livingston’s Gram., p. 24. (32.) “A noun or pronoun in the possessive case is governed by the noun it possesses.”—­Goldsbury’s Gram., p. 68. (33.) “The possessive case is governed by the person or thing possessed; as, ‘this is his book.’”—­P.  E. Day’s Gram., p. 81. (34.) “A noun or pronoun in the possessive case, is governed by the noun which it possesses.”—­Kirkham’s Gram., Rule 12th, pp. 52 and 181; Frazer’s Gram., 1844, p. 25; F.  H. Miller’s, 21. (35.) “Here the boy is represented as acting.  He is, therefore, in the nominative case.”—­Kirkham’s Gram., p. 41. (36.) “Some of the auxiliaries are themselves principal verbs, as:  have, do, will, and am, or be.”—­Cooper’s Grammars, both, p. 50. (37.) “Nouns of the male kind are masculine.  Those of the female kind are feminine.”—­Beck’s Gram., p. 6. (38.) “‘To-day’s lesson is longer than yesterday’s:’  here to-day and yesterday are substantives.”—­Murray’s Gram., p. 114; Ingersoll’s, 50; et al. (39.) “In this example, to-day and yesterday are nouns in the possessive case.”—­Kirkham’s Gram., p. 88. (40.) “An Indian in Britain would be much surprised to stumble upon an elephant feeding at large in the open fields.”—­Kames, El. of Crit., Vol. i, p. 219. (41.) “If we were to contrive a new language, we might make any articulate sound the sign of any idea:  there would be no impropriety in calling oxen men, or rational beings by the name of oxen.”—­Murray’s Gram., p. 139. (42.) “All the parts of a sentence should correspond to each other.”—­Ib., p. 222; Kirkham’s, 193; Ingersoll’s, 275; Goldsbury’s, 74; Hiley’s, 110; Weld’s, 193; Alger’s, 71; Fisk’s, 148; S.  Putnam’s, 95; Merchant’s, 101; Merchant’s Murray, 95.

(43.) “Full through his neck the weighty falchion sped,
          Along the pavement roll’d the mutt’ring head.”
        —­Odyssey, xxii, 365.

UNDER CRITICAL NOTE VII.—­OF SELF-CONTRADICTION.

(1.) “Though the construction will not admit of a plural verb, the sentence would certainly stand better thus:  ’The king, the lords, and the commons, form an excellent constitution.’”—­Murray’s Gram., p. 151; Ingersoll’s, 239.

[FORMULE.—­Not proper, because the first clause here quoted is contradicted by the last.  But, according to Critical Note 7th, “Every writer or speaker should be careful not to contradict himself; for what is self-contradictory, is both null in argument, and bad in style.”  The following change may remove the discrepance:  “Though ’The king with the lords and commons,’ must have a singular rather than a plural verb, the sentence would certainly stand better thus:  ’The king, the lords, and the commons, form an excellent constitution.’”]