the writer having_ any idea of its import.” But it is surely a mischievous maxim, never to “think of _mending_ what you write. Let it _go_. No [p098] patching; no _after painting_.” On the other hand he is right in protesting “against the use of what, by some, is called the _dash_. Who is to know what is intended by the use of these _dashes_? . . . . It is a cover for ignorance as to the use of points; and it can answer no other purpose.” In Letter XV, there is a singular conceit with regard to the keeping up a distinction between _a_ and _an_, where it is insisted that we must not say “_a_ dog, cat, owl, and sparrow,” because owl requires _an_; “and that it should be, a dog, a cat, an owl, and a sparrow;” which is certainly better, and would be so, even if there were no owl in the question. Letter XVII. The criticism on Milton’s “than _whom_ none higher sat,” is perfectly correct. _Than_ is never a preposition, and is simply a variation from the older _then_, both in English and in German. _John is better than James_ means simply John is good first, then James: _er_ is _eher_ or _e’er_. _Who_ would sound awkwardly, but would be more grammatical. Letter XIX gives a definition of the ellipsis, which would be a lesson to Apollonius himself: the compasses, it seems, “do not take their sweep all round, but leave out parts of the area or surface.” The objection to Blackstone’s language is very questionable. “The very _scheme and model_ WAS settled,” may, perhaps, be defended, because scheme and model are considered as one thing, the words being intended to illustrate each other, but not to point out different attributes of the administration of justice; and both words may be admitted, as a collective term, to govern a singular rather than a plural verb. It seems also to be an error to make _with_ a conjunction rather than a preposition, and to say “The bag, with the guineas and dollars in it _were_ stolen,” or “zeal, with discretion, _do_ much.” “I expected to have seen,” is justly noticed as a common error for “I expected to see.” The meaning of an _active_ verb is erroneously confounded with that of a _transitive_ verb, in the remarks on the word _elope_, which means to go off, or to run off, and we should naturally say _was_ gone off, but _had_ run off.