the two parts of the sentence, it is also the subject of a verb. These being the true characteristics of a relative pronoun, it is proper to refer the word to that class. But when a clause or a sentence is the antecedent, it is better to consider the as a conjunction, and to supply the pronoun it, if the writer has not used it; as, "He is angry, as [it] appears by this letter." Horne Tooke says, "The truth is, that AS is also an article; and (however and whenever used in English) means the same as It, or That, or Which."—Diversions of Purley, Vol. i, p. 223. But what definition he would give to "an article," does not appear.
OBS. 10.—In some examples, it seems questionable whether as ought to be reckoned a pronoun, or ought rather to be parsed as a conjunction after which a nominative is understood; as, "He then read the conditions as follow."—"The conditions are as follow."—Nutting's Gram., p. 106. "The principal evidences on which this assertion is grounded, are as follow."—Gurney's Essays, p. 166. "The Quiescent verbs are as follow."—Pike's Heb. Lex., p. 184. "The other numbers are duplications of these, and proceed as follow"—Dr. Murray's Hist. of Lang., Vol. ii, p. 35. "The most eminent of the kennel are bloodhounds, which lead the van, and are as follow."—Steele, Tattler, No. 62. "His words are as follow."—Spect., No. 62. "The words are as follow."—Addison, Spect., No. 513. "The objections that are raised against it as a tragedy, are as follow."—Gay, Pref. to What d' ye call it. "The particulars are as follow."—Bucke's Gram., p. 93. "The principal interjections in English are as follow."—Ward's Gram., p. 81. In all these instances, one may suppose the final clause to mean, "as they here follow;"—or, supposing as to be a pronoun, one may conceive it to mean, "such as follow." But some critical writers, it appears, prefer the singular verb, "as follows" Hear Campbell: "When a verb is used impersonally, it ought undoubtedly to be in the singular number, whether the neuter pronoun be expressed or understood: and when no nominative in the sentence can regularly be construed with the verb, it ought to be considered as impersonal. For this reason, analogy as well as usage favour [say favours] this mode of expression, 'The conditions of the agreement were as follows;' and not 'as follow.' A few late writers have inconsiderately adopted this last form through a mistake of the construction. For the same reason we ought to say, 'I shall consider his censures so far only as concerns my friend's conduct;' and not 'so far as concern.'"—Philosophy of Rhet., p. 229. It is too much to say, at least of one of these sentences, that there is no nominative with which the plural verb can be regularly construed. In the former, the word as may be said to be a plural nominative; or, if we will have this to be a conjunction, the pronoun they, representing conditions, may be regularly supplied, as above. In the latter, indeed, as is not a pronoun; because it refers to "so far," which is not a noun. But the sentence is bad English; because the verb concern or concerns is improperly left without a nominative. Say therefore, 'I shall consider his censures so far only as they concern my friend's conduct;'—or, 'so far only as my friend's conduct is concerned.' The following is an other example which I conceive to be wrong; because, with an adverb for its antecedent, as is made a nominative: "They ought therefore to be uttered as quickly as is consistent with distinct articulation."—Sheridan's Elocution, p. 76. Say rather, "They ought therefore to be uttered with as much rapidity as is consistent with distinct articulation."
OBS. 11.—Lindley Murray was so much puzzled with Tooke's notion of as, and Campbell's doctrine of the impersonal verb, that he has expressly left his pupils to hesitate and doubt, like himself, whether one ought to say "as follows" or "as follow," when the preceding noun is plural; or—to furnish an alternative, (if they choose it,) he shows them at last how they may dodge the question, by adopting some other phraseology. He begins thus: "Grammarians differ in opinion, respecting the propriety of the following modes of expression: 'The arguments advanced were nearly as follows;' 'the positions were, as appears, incontrovertible.'"— Murray's Gram., 8vo, p. 146. Then follows a detail of suggestions from Campbell and others, all the quotations being anonymous, or at least without definite references. Omitting these, I would here say of the two examples given, that they are not parallel instances. For, "as follows," refers to what the arguments were,—to the things themselves, considered plurally, and immediately to be exhibited; wherefore the expression ought rather to have been, "as follow," or, "as they here follow." But, "as appears" means "as it appears," or "as the case now appears;" and one of these plain modes of expression would have been much preferable, because the as is here evidently nothing but a conjunction.
OBS. 12.—"The diversity of sentiment on this subject," says L. Murray, "and the respectability of the different opponents, will naturally induce the readers to pause and reflect, before they decide."—Octavo Gram., p. 147. The equivalent expressions by means of which he proposes to evade at last the dilemma, are the following: "The arguments advanced were nearly such as follow;"—"The arguments advanced were nearly of the following nature;"—"The following are nearly the arguments which were advanced;"—
"The arguments advanced were nearly those which follow:"—"These, or nearly these, were the arguments advanced;"—"The positions were such as appear incontrovertible;"—"It appears that the positions were incontrovertible;"—"That the positions were incontrovertible, is apparent;"—"The positions were apparently incontrovertible;"—"In appearance, the positions were incontrovertible."—Ibid. If to shun the expression will serve our turn, surely here are ways enough! But to those who "pause and reflect" with the intention to decide, I would commend the following example: "Reconciliation was offered, on conditions as moderate as were consistent with a permanent union."—Murray's Key, under Rule 1. Here Murray supposes "was" to be wrong, and accordingly changes it to "were," by the Rule, "A verb must agree with its nominative case in number and person." But the amend-
