Magnitudini Pori adjicere videbatur bellua qua vehebatur, tantum inter cæteras eminens, quanto aliis ipse præstabat. _L. 8. cap. 14._ It is a still greater deviation from congruity, to affect not only variety in the words, but also in the construction. Describing Thermopylæ, Titus Livius says, Id jugum, sicut Apennini dorso Italia dividitur, ita mediam Græciam deremit. _L. 36. § 15._ Speaking of Shakespear: There may remain a suspicion that we over-rate the greatness of his genius; in the same manner as bodies appear more gigantic on account of their being disproportioned and mishapen. _History of G. Britain, vol. 1. p. 138._ This is studying variety in a period where the beauty lies in uniformity. Better thus: There may remain a suspicion that we over-rate the greatness of his genius, in the same manner as we over-rate the greatness of bodies which are disproportioned and mishapen. Next as to the length of the members that signify the resembling objects. To produce a resemblance betwixt such members, they ought not only to be constructed in the same manner, but as nearly as possible be equal in length. By neglecting this circumstance, the following example is defective in neatness. As the performance of all other religious duties will not avail in the sight of God, _without charity_, so neither will the discharge of all other ministerial duties avail in the sight of men _without a faithful discharge of this principal duty_. _Dissertation upon parties, dedication._ In the following passage all the errors are accumulated that a period expressing a resemblance can well admit: Ministers are answerable for every thing done to the prejudice of the constitution, in the same proportion as the preservation of the constitution in its purity and vigour, or the perverting and weakening it, are of greater consequence to the nation, than any other instances of good or bad government. _Dissertation upon parties, dedication._ The same rule obtains in a comparison where things are opposed to each other. Objects contrasted, not less than what are similar, require a resemblance in the members of the period that express them. The reason is, that contrast has no effect upon the mind, except where the things compared have a resemblance in their capital parts[87]. Therefore, in opposing two circumstances to each other, it remarkably heightens the contrast, to make as entire as possible the resemblance betwixt the other parts, and in particular betwixt the members expressing the two circumstances contrasted. As things are often best illustrated by their contraries, I shall also give examples of deviations from the rule in this case. * * * * * Addison says,