tion of this effect perfpicuity and unity are abfolutely neceflary; but more is requifite. For a fentence may be clear; it may also be compact, or have the requifite unity; and yet by fome unfavorable circumftance in the structure it may fail in that strength or liveliness of impreffion, which a more happy collocation would produce.

The first rule for promoting the ftrength of a fentence is, take from it all redundant words. Whatev er can be easily supplied in the mind, is better omitted in the expreffion Thus, "Content with deferving a tri"umph, he refufed the honor of it," is better than "Being content with deferving a triumph, he refused "the honor of it." It is one of the most useful exercifes on reviewing, what we have written, to contract that circuitous mode of expreffion, and to cut off those useless excrefcences, which are ufually found in a first draught. But we must be cautious of pruning fo closely, as to give a hardness and drynefs to the style. Some leaves must be left to fhelter and adorn the fruit.

As fentences should be cleared of fuperfluous words, fo alfo of fuperfluous members. Oppofed to this is the fault, we frequently meet, the last member of a period being only a repetition of the former in a different dress. For example, fpeaking of beauty, "The very firft dif"covery of it," fays Addifon, "ftrikes the mind with "inward joy, and spreads delight through all its facul

"ties." In this inftance fcarcely any thing is added by the fecond member of the fentence to what was expreffed in the first. Though the flowing ftyle of Addifon may palliate fuch negligence; yet it is generally true, that language, divested of this prolixity, is more strong and beautiful.

The fecond rule for promoting the strength of a fentence is, pay particular attention to the ufe of copulatives, relatives, and particles, employed for transition and connection. Some obfervations on this fubject, which appear ufeful, fhall be mentioned.

What is termed fplitting of particles, or feparating a prepofition from the noun, which it governs, is ever to be avoided. For example, " Though virtue borrows "no affiftance from, yet it may often be accompanied "by, the advantages of fortune." In fuch inftances we fuffer pain from the violent feparation of two things, which by nature are closely united.

The strength of a fentence is much injured by an unneceffary multiplication of relative and demonstrative particles. If a writer fay," there is nothing, which

66

ઠંડ

difgufts me fooner, than the empty pomp of lan"guage; he expreffes himfelf lefs forcibly, than if he had faid, "Nothing difgufts me fooner, than the emp"ty pomp of language." The former mode of expreffion in the introduction of a fubject, or in laying down

a propofition, to which particular attention is demanded, is very proper; but in ordinary discourse the latter is far preferable.

With regard to the relative we fhall only obferve, that in converfation and epiftolary writing it may be omitted; but in compofitions of a ferious or dignified kind it should conftantly be inferted.

On the copulative particle and, which occurs fo often, feveral obfervations are to be made. It is evident, that an unneceffary repetition of it enfeebles ftyle. By omitting it we often make a closer connection, a quicker fucceffion of objects, than when it is inferted between them. "Veni, vidi, vici," expreffes with more fpirit the rapidity of conqueft, than if connecting particles had been ufed. When, however, we wish to prevent a quick tranfition from one object to another; and when enumerating objects, which we with to appear as diftinct from each other, as poffible; copulatives may be multiplied with peculiar advantage. Thus Lord Bolingbroke fays with propriety, "Such a man might fall a victim "to power; but truth, and reason, and liberty, would "fall with him."

The third rule for promoting the ftrength of a sentence is, difpofe of the principal word or words in that part of the fentence, where they will make the most ftriking impreffion. Perfpicuity ought firft to be ftudied; and

the nature of our language allows no great liberty of collocation. In general the important words are placed at the beginning of a sentence. Thus Mr. Addison ; "The pleasures of the imagination, taken in their full "extent, are not so grofs, as those of sense; nor fo re"fined, as thofe of the understanding." This order feems to be the most plain and natural. Sometimes however, when we propofe giving weight to a sentence, it is useful to fufpend the meaning a little, and then to bring it out fully at the clofe. "Thus," fays Pope,

66

on whatever fide we contemplate Homer, what prin"cipally ftrikes us, is his wonderful invention."

The fourth rule for promoting the strength of fentences is, make the members of them go on rifing in their importance one above another. This kind of arrangement is called a climax, and is ever regarded, as a beauty in compofition. Why it pleafes is fufficiently evident. In all things we love to advance to what is more and more beautiful rather, than to follow a retrograde order. Having viewed fome confiderable object, we cannot without pain defcend to an inferior circumftance. “Cavendum eft," fays Quintilian, “ne decrefcat "oratio, et fortior fubjungatur aliquid infirmius." A weaker affertion fhould never follow a stronger one; and, when a fentence confists of two members, the longest should in general be the concluding one. Periods, thus divided, are pronounced, more eafily; and, the shortest

member being placed firft, we carry it more readily in our memory, as we proceed to the fecond, and fee the connection of the two more clearly. Thus to fay, "When our paffions have forsaken us, we flatter our "felves with the belief that we have forfaken them," is both more graceful and more perfpicuous, than to begin with the longest part of the propofition; "We flat"ter ourselves with the belief that we have forfaken our paffions, when they have forfaken us."

The fifth rule for conftructing fentences with strength is, avoid concluding them with an adverb, a prepofition, or any infignificant word. By fuch conclufions ftyle is always weakened and degraded. Sometimes indeed, where the ftrefs and fignificaney reft chiefly upon words of this kind, they ought to have the principal place allotted them. No fault, for example, can be found with this fentence of Bolingbroke; "In their profperity my "friends fhall never hear of me; in their adversity al

ways" where never and always, being emphatical words, are so placed, as to make a strong impreffion. But, when these inferior parts of speech are introduced, as circumstances, or as qualifications of more important words; they fhould always be difpofed of in the leaft confpicuous parts of the period.

We fhould always avoid concluding a fentence or member with any of those particles, which diftinguish the cafes of nouns; as of, to, from, with, by. Thus it is