by the adverb not,) the verb and pronoun must agree with the former and be understood to the latter: as, "Veracity, as well as justice, is to be our rule of life."—Butler's Analogy, p. 283. "The lowest mechanic, as well as the richest citizen, may boast that thousands of his fellow-creatures are employed for him."—Percival's Tales, ii, 177. "These principles, as well as every just rule of criticism, are founded upon the sensitive part of our nature."—Kames, El. of Crit., Vol. i, p. xxvi. "Nothing but wailings was heard."—"None but thou can aid us."—"No mortal man, save he," &c., "had e'er survived to say he saw."—Sir W. Scott.
NOTE IV.—When two or more subjects or antecedents are preceded by the adjective each, every, or no, they are taken separately; and, (except no be followed by a plural noun,) they require the verb and pronoun to be in the singular number: as, "No rank, no honour, no fortune, no condition in life, makes the guilty mind happy."—"Every phrase and every figure which he uses, tends to render the picture more lively and complete."—Blair's Rhet., p. 179.
"And every sense, and every heart, is joy."—Thomson.
"Each beast, each insect, happy in its own."—Pope.
NOTE V.—When any words or terms are to be taken conjointly as subjects or antecedents, the conjunction and, (in preference to with, or, nor, or any thing else,) must connect them. The following sentence is therefore inaccurate; with should be and; or else were should be was: "One of them, [the] wife of Thomas Cole, with her husband, were shot down, the others escaped."—Hutchinson's Hist., Vol. ii, p. 86. So, in the following couplet, or should be and, or else engines should be engine:
"What if the head, the eye, or ear repined,
To serve mere engines to the ruling mind?"—Pope.
NOTE VI.—Improper omissions must be supplied; but when there occurs a true ellipsis in the construction of joint nominatives or joint antecedents, the verb or pronoun must agree with them in the plural, just as if all the words were expressed: as, "The second and the third Epistle of John are each but one short chapter."—"The metaphorical and the literal meaning are improperly mixed."—Murray's Gram., p. 339. "The Doctrine of Words, separately consider'd, and in a Sentence, are Things distinct enough."—Brightland's Gram., Pref., p. iv. Better perhaps: "The doctrine of words separately considered, and that of words in a sentence, are things distinct enough."
"The Curii's and the Camilli's little field,
To vast extended territories yield."—Rowe's Lucan, B. i, l. 320.
NOTE VII.—Two or more distinct subject phrases connected by and, require a plural verb, and generally a plural noun too, if a nominative follow the verb; as, "To be wise in our own eyes, to be wise in the opinion of the world, and to be wise in the sight of our Creator, are three things so very different, as rarely to coincide."—Blair. "'This picture of my friend,' and 'This picture of my friend's,' suggest very different ideas."—Priestley's Gram., p. 71; Murray's, i, 178.
"Read of this burgess—on the stone appear,
How worthy he! how virtuous! and how dear!"—Crabbe.
IMPROPRIETIES FOR CORRECTION.
FALSE SYNTAX UNDER RULE XVI.
UNDER THE RULE ITSELF.—THE VERB AFTER JOINT NOMINATIVES.
"So much ability and merit is seldom found."—Murray's Key, 12mo, p. 18; Merchant's School Gram., p. 190.
[FORMULE.—Not proper, because the verb is is in the singular number, and does not correctly agree with its two nominatives, ability and merit, which are connected by and, and taken conjointly. But, according to Rule 16th, "When a verb has two or more nominatives connected by and, it must agree with them jointly in the plural, because they are taken together." Therefore, is should be are; thus, "So much ability and merit are seldom found." Or: "So much ability and so much merit are seldom found."]
"The syntax and etymology of the language is thus spread before the learner."—Bullions's English Gram., 2d Edition, Rec., p. iii. "Dr. Johnson tells us, that in English poetry the accent
