of the accent, as before stated.  Now, as our poetry abounds with monosyllables, the relative time of which is adjusted by emphasis and cadence, according to the nature and importance of the terms, and according to the requirements of rhythm, with no reference to this factitious principle, no conformity thereto but what is accidental, it cannot but be a puzzling exercise, when these difficulties come to be summed up, to attempt the application of a doctrine so vainly conceived to be “the easiest and simplest rule in the world!”

OBS. 13.—­Lindley Murray’s principles of accent and quantity, which later grammarians have so extensively copied, were mostly extracted from Sheridan’s; and, as the compiler appears to have been aware of but few, if any, of his predecessor’s errors, he has adopted and greatly spread well-nigh all that have just been pointed out; while, in regard to some points, he has considerably increased the number.  His scheme, as he at last fixed it, appears to consist essentially of propositions already refuted, or objected to, above; as any reader may see, who will turn to his definition of accent, and his rules for the determination of quantity.  In opposition to Sheridan, who not very consistently says, that, “All unaccented syllables are short,” this author appears to have adopted the greater error of Fisher, who supposed that the vowel sounds called long and short, are just the same as the long and short syllabic quantities.  By this rule, thousands of syllables will be called long, which are in fact short, being always so uttered in both prose and poetry; and, by the other, some will occasionally be called short, which are in fact long, being made so by the poet, under a slight secondary accent, or perhaps none.  Again, in supposing our numerous monosyllables to be accented, and their quantity to be thereby fixed, without excepting “the particles, such as a, the, to, in, &c.,” which were excepted by Sheridan, Murray has much augmented the multitude of errors which necessarily flow from the original rule.  This principle, indeed, he adopted timidly; saying, as though he hardly believed the assertion true:  “And some writers assert, that every monosyllable of two or more letters, has one of its letters thus distinguished.”—­Murray’s Gram., 8vo, p. 236; 12mo, 189.  But still he adopted it, and adopted it fully, in his section on Quantity; for, of his twelve words, exemplifying syllabic time so regulated, no fewer than nine are monosyllables.  It is observable, however, that, in some instances, it is not one letter, but two, that he marks; as in the words, “m=o=od, h=o=use.”—­Ib., p. 239; 12mo, 192.  And again, it should be observed, that generally, wherever he marks accent, he follows the old mode, which Sheridan and Webster so justly condemn; so that, even when he is speaking of “the accent on the consonant,” the sign of stress, as that of time, is set over a vowel:  as, “Sadly, robber.”—­Ib., 8vo, 240; 12mo, 193.  So in his Spelling-Book, where words are often falsely divided:  as, “Ve nice,” for Ven’-ice; “Ha no ver,” for Han’o-ver; &c.—­See p. 101.