6.  All science is laid in the nature of things; and he only who seeks it there, can rightly guide others in the paths of knowledge.  He alone can know whether his predecessors went right or wrong, who is capable of a judgement independent of theirs.  But with what shameful servility have many false or faulty definitions and rules been copied and copied from one grammar to another, as if authority had canonized their errors, or none had eyes to see them!  Whatsoever is dignified and fair, is also modest and reasonable; but modesty does not consist in having no opinion of one’s own, nor reason in following with blind partiality the footsteps of others.  Grammar unsupported by authority, is indeed mere fiction.  But what apology is this, for that authorship which has produced so many grammars without originality?  Shall he who cannot write for himself, improve upon him who can?  Shall he who cannot paint, retouch the canvass of Guido?  Shall modest ingenuity be allowed only to imitators and to thieves?  How many a prefatory argument issues virtually in this!  It is not deference to merit, but impudent pretence, practising on the credulity of ignorance!  Commonness alone exempts it from scrutiny, and the success it has, is but the wages of its own worthlessness!  To read and be informed, is to make a proper use of books for the advancement of learning; but to assume to be an author by editing mere commonplaces and stolen criticisms, is equally beneath the ambition of a scholar and the honesty of a man.

“’T is true, the ancients we may rob with ease;
But who with that mean shift himself can please?”
Sheffield, Duke of Buckingham.

7.  Grammar being a practical art, with the principles of which every intelligent person is more or less acquainted, it might be expected that a book written professedly on the subject, should exhibit some evidence of its author’s skill.  But it would seem that a multitude of bad or indifferent writers have judged themselves qualified to teach the art of speaking and writing well; so that correctness of language and neatness of style are as rarely to be found in grammars as in other books.  Nay, I have before suggested that in no other science are the principles of good writing so frequently and so shamefully violated.  The code of false grammar embraced in the following work, will go far to sustain this opinion.  There have been, however, several excellent scholars, who have thought it an object not unworthy of their talents, to prescribe and elucidate the principles of English Grammar.  But these, with scarcely any exception, have executed their inadequate designs, not as men engaged in their proper calling, but as mere literary almoners, descending for a day from their loftier purposes, to perform a service, needful indeed, and therefore approved, but very far from supplying all the aid that is requisite to a thorough knowledge of the subject.  Even the most meritorious have left ample room for improvement, though some have evinced an ability which does honour to themselves, while it gives cause to regret their lack of an inducement to greater labour.  The mere grammarian can neither aspire to praise, nor stipulate for a reward; and to those who were best qualified to write, the subject could offer no adequate motive for diligence.