the beginning”—­or anywhere else.  For he discriminated metres, not by the number of feet, as he ought to have done, but by the number of syllables he found in each line.  His doctrine is this:  “Our iambick measure comprises verses—­Of four syllables,—­Of six,—­Of eight,—­Of ten.  Our trochaick measures are—­Of three syllables,—­Of five,—­Of seven.  These are the measures which are now in use, and above the rest those of seven, eight and ten syllables.  Our ancient poets wrote verses sometimes of twelve syllables, as Drayton’s Polyolbion; and of fourteen, as Chapman’s Homer.”  “We have another measure very quick and lively, and therefore much used in songs, which may be called the anapestick.

    ’May I govern my passion with absolute sway,
    And grow wiser and better as life wears away.’ Dr. Pope.

“In this measure a syllable is often retrenched from the first foot, [;] as [,]

    ’When present we love, and when absent agree,
    I th’nk not of I’ris [.] nor I’ris of me.’ Dryden.

“These measures are varied by many combinations, and sometimes by double endings, either with or without rhyme, as in the heroick measure.

    ’’Tis the divinity that stirs within us,
    ‘Tis heaven itself that points out an hereafter..’ Addison.

“So in that of eight syllables,

    ’They neither added nor confounded,
    They neither wanted nor abounded.’ Prior.

“In that of seven,

    ’For resistance I could fear none,
      But with twenty ships had done,
    What thou, brave and happy Vernon,
    Hast achieved with six alone.’ Glover.

“To these measures and their laws, may be reduced every species of English verse.”—­Dr. Johnson’s Grammar of the English Tongue, p. 14.  See his Quarto Dict. Here, except a few less important remarks, and sundry examples of the metres named, is Johnson’s whole scheme of versification.

OBS. 7.—­How, when a prosodist judges certain examples to “have an additional long syllable at the end,” he can “look upon the additional syllable to be at the beginning,” is a matter of marvel; yet, to abolish trochaics, Churchill not only does and advises this, but imagines short syllables removed sometimes from the beginning of lines; while sometimes he couples final short syllables with initial long ones, to make iambs, and yet does not always count these as feet in the verse, when he has done so!  Johnson’s instructions are both misunderstood and misrepresented by this grammarian.  I have therefore cited them the more fully.  The first syllable being retrenched from an anapest, there remains an iambus.  But what countenance has Johnson lent to the gross error of reckoning such a foot an anapest still?—­or to that of commencing the measurement of a line by including