combining to form an adjective, whether literal or metaphorical, should generally be written with both apostrophe and hyphen; as, “Neats-foot oil,”—­“Calfs-foot jelly,”—­“A carp’s-tongue drill,”—­“A bird’s-eye view,”—­“The states’-rights’ party,”—­“A camel’s-hair shawl.”  But a triple compound noun may be formed with one hyphen only:  as, “In doomsday-book;” (—­Joh.  Dict.;) “An armsend-lift.” Cardell, who will have all possessives to be adjectives, writes an example thus:  “John’s camel’s hair girdle.”—­Elements of Eng.  Gram., p. 39.  That is as if John’s camel had a hair girdle! (7.) When the possessive case and its governing noun merely help to form a regular phrase, the compounding of them in any fashion may be reckoned improper; thus the phrases, a day’s work, at death’s door, on New Year’s Day, a new year’s gift, All Souls’ Day, All Saints’ Day, All Fools’ Day, the saints’ bell, the heart’s blood, for dog’s meat, though often written otherwise, may best stand as they do here.

OBS. 32.—­The existence of a permanent compound of any two words, does not necessarily preclude the use of the possessive relation between the same words.  Thus, we may speak of a horse’s shoe or a goat’s skin, notwithstanding there are such words as horseshoe and goatskin.  E.g., “That preach ye upon the housetops.”—­ALGER’S BIBLE:  Matt., x, 27.  “Unpeg the basket on the house’s top.”—­Beauties of Shak., p. 238.  Webster defines frostnail, (which, under the word cork, he erroneously writes frost nail,) “A nail driven into a horse-shoe, to prevent the horse from slipping on ice.”  Worcester has it, “A nail driven into a horse’s shoe, to prevent his slipping on the ice.” Johnson, “A nail with a prominent head driven into the horse’s shoes, that it may pierce the ice.”  Maunder, “A nail with a sharp head driven into the horses’ shoes in frosty weather.”  None of these descriptions is very well written.  Say rather, “A spur-headed nail driven into a horse’s shoe to prevent him from slipping.”  There is commonly some difference, and sometimes a very great one, between the compound noun and the possessive relation, and also between the radical compound and that of the possessive.  Thus a harelip is not a hare’s lip, nor is a headman a headsman, or heart-ease heart’s-ease. So, according to the books, a cat-head, a cat’s-head, and a cat’s head, are three very different things; yet what Webster writes, cat-tail, Johnson, cats-tail, Walker and others, cats-tail, means but the same thing, though not a cat’s tail. Johnson’s “kingspear, Jews-ear, lady-mantle, and lady-bedstraw,” are no more proper, than Webster’s “bear’s-wort, lion’s foot, lady’s mantle, and lady’s bed-straw.” All these are wrong.