OBS. 9.—­Similar to Wells’s, are the subjunctive forms of Allen H. Weld.  Mistaking annex to signify prefix, this author teaches thus:  “ANNEX if, though, unless, suppose, admit, grant, allow, or any word implying a condition, to each tense of the Indicative and Potential modes, to form the subjunctive; as, If thou lovest or love.  If he loves, or love.  Formerly it was customary to omit the terminations in the second and third persons of the present tense of the Subjunctive mode.  But now the terminations are generally retained, except when the ellipsis of shall or should is implied; as, If he obey, i. e., if he shall, or should obey.”—­Weld’s Grammar, Abridged Edition, p. 71.  Again:  “In general, the form of the verb in the Subjunctive, is the same as that of the Indicative; but an elliptical form in the second and third person [persona] singular, is used in the following instances:  (1.) Future contingency is expressed by the omission of the Indicative termination; as, If he go, for, if he shall go.  Though he slay me, i.e., though he should slay me. (2.) Lest and that annexed to a command are followed by the elliptical form of the Subjunctive; as, Love not sleep [,] lest thou come to poverty. (3.) If with but following it, when futurity is denoted, requires the elliptical form; as, If he do but touch the hills, they shall smoke.”—­Ib., p. 126.  As for this scheme, errors and inconsistencies mark every part of it.  First, the rule for forming the subjunctive is false, and is plainly contradicted by all that is true in the examples:  “If thou love,” or, “If he love” contains not the form of the indicative.  Secondly, no terminations have ever been “generally” omitted from, or retained in, the form of the subjunctive present; because that part of the mood, as commonly exhibited, is well known to be made of the radical verb, without inflection.  One might as well talk of suffixes for the imperative, “Love thou,” or “Do thou love.”  Thirdly, shall or should can never be really implied in the subjunctive present; because the supposed ellipsis, needless and unexampled, would change the tense, the mood, and commonly also the meaning.  “If he shall,” properly implies a condition of future certainty; “If he should,” a supposition of duty:  the true subjunctive suggests neither of these.  Fourthly, “the ellipsis of shall, or should,” is most absurdly called above, “the omission of the Indicative termination.”  Fifthly, it is very strangely supposed, that to omit what pertains to the indicative or the potential mood, will produce an “elliptical form of the Subjunctive.”  Sixthly, such examples as the last, “If he do but touch the hills,” having the auxiliary do not inflected as in the indicative, disprove the whole theory.