readers, that the ancient exactness on this point would often appear pedantic.  Many phrases and sentences, either original with the writer, or common to everybody, will therefore be found among the illustrations of the following work; for it was not supposed that any reader would demand for every thing of this kind the authority of some great name.  Anonymous examples are sufficient to elucidate principles, if not to establish them; and elucidation is often the sole purpose for which an example is needed.

22.  It is obvious enough, that no writer on grammar has any right to propose himself as authority for what he teaches; for every language, being the common property of all who use it, ought to be carefully guarded against the caprices of individuals; and especially against that presumption which might attempt to impose erroneous or arbitrary definitions and rules.  “Since the matter of which we are treating,” says the philologist of Salamanca, “is to be verified, first by reason, and then by testimony and usage, none ought to wonder if we sometimes deviate from the track of great men; for, with whatever authority any grammarian may weigh with me, unless he shall have confirmed his assertions by reason, and also by examples, he shall win no confidence in respect to grammar.  For, as Seneca says, Epistle 95, ’Grammarians are the guardians, not the authors, of language.’”—­Sanctii Minerva, Lib. ii, Cap. 2.  Yet, as what is intuitively seen to be true or false, is already sufficiently proved or detected, many points in grammar need nothing more than to be clearly stated and illustrated; nay, it would seem an injurious reflection on the understanding of the reader, to accumulate proofs of what cannot but be evident to all who speak the language.

23.  Among men of the same profession, there is an unavoidable rivalry, so far as they become competitors for the same prize; but in competition there is nothing dishonourable, while excellence alone obtains distinction, and no advantage is sought by unfair means.  It is evident that we ought to account him the best grammarian, who has the most completely executed the worthiest design.  But no worthy design can need a false apology; and it is worse than idle to prevaricate.  That is but a spurious modesty, which prompts a man to disclaim in one way what he assumes in an other—­or to underrate the duties of his office, that he may boast of having “done all that could reasonably be expected.”  Whoever professes to have improved the science of English grammar, must claim to know more of the matter than the generality of English grammarians; and he who begins with saying, that “little can be expected” from the office he assumes, must be wrongfully contradicted, when he is held to have done much.  Neither the ordinary power of speech, nor even the ability to write respectably on common topics, makes a man a critic among critics, or enables him to judge of literary merit.  And if, by virtue of these qualifications alone, a man will become a grammarian or a connoisseur, he can hold the rank only by courtesy—­a courtesy which is content to degrade the character, that his inferior pretensions may be accepted and honoured under the name.