As the practice of all writers and good speakers, and even of the vulgar, is nearly uniform in the distinction here mentioned, it is needless to produce more examples for illustration. One verb however deserves a separate consideration; which is _be_. In the use of this verb in the hypothetical sense, there is a difference between good authors and common parlance; the first write _were_, but most people in conversation say, _was_. Thus, "Every rich man has usually some sly way of jesting, which would make no great figure, _were_ he not rich."----Spect. No. 2. "He will often argue, that if this part of our trade _were_ well cultivated, we should gain from one nation," &c.---- Same. "_Were_ I (if I were) a father, I should take a particular care to preserve my children from these little horrors of imagination."---- Same, No. 12. "Nor think, tho men _were_ none, That heaven would want spectators, God want praise." Milton, P. L. "What then he _was_, oh, _were_ your Nestor now." Pope, Iliad, b. 7. 189. "Yes, if the nature of a clock _were_ to speak, not strike."----Ben Johnson. "Where the poor knave erroneously believes, If he _were_ rich, he would build churches, or Do such mad things."----Same. _Were_, in these examples, is the same hypothetical present tense just described, having not the least reference to the past.[118] But in conversation, we generally hear _was_; "if I _was_ in his place;" "if he _was_ here _now_," &c. and I observe that modern writers are copying the general practice. "If I _was_ not afraid of being thought to refine too much."--Boling. Refl. on Exile. Both these forms have such authorities to support them, that neither can be considered as wholly incorrect; they are both English. But custom will eventually establish the latter, _was_, as the hypothetical form of the substantive verb. It is now almost universally used, except in books; and the tide of general practice is irresistible. The following examples will illustrate what has been advanced. _Present time. Affirmative._ If he _has_ or _is_--denotes uncertainty. If he _had_ or _were_ or _was_--denote certainty that he has not, or is not. _Negative._ If he _has_ not or _is_ not--uncertainty. If he _had_ not, _were_ not or _was_ not--certainty that he has or is. _Past time. Affirm._ If he _had_ or _was_ yesterday--uncertainty. If he _had_ have,[119] or _had_ been yesterday--certainty that he _had_ not, or _was_ not. _Negative._ If he _had_ or _was_ not--uncertainty. If he _had_ not have, or _had_ not been--certainty that he had or was.[120] I cannot close my remarks on the tenses of the English verb, without noticing a common error, which must have sprung from inattention, and is perhaps too general now to admit of correction. It is the use of the past tense after another verb or _that_, when the sense requires a change of tenses. Thus,