If this be the case, much of the lost mutual understanding and unity of feeling may be restored.—Times.
Correct, if mutual is confined to understanding: they no longer understand each other.
Once their differences removed, both felt that in presence of certain incalculable factors in Europe it would be of mutual advantage to draw closer together.—Times.
Slightly clumsy; but it means that they would get advantage from each other by drawing together, and may stand.
...conversing with his Andalusian lady-love in rosy whispers about their mutual passion for Spanish chocolate all the while.—Meredith.
Surely you have heard Mrs. Toddles talking to Mrs. Doddles about their mutual maids.—Thackeray.
Indefensible.
There may be, moreover, while each has the key of the fellow breast, a mutually sensitive nerve.—Meredith.
A nerve cannot respond to each other; nerves can; a common nerve would have done; or mutually sensitive nerves.
It is now definitely announced that King Edward will meet President Loubet this afternoon near Paris. Our Paris Correspondent says the meeting will take place by mutual desire.—Times.
Right or wrong according to what is meant by desire. (1) If it means that King Edward and M. Loubet desired, that is, had a yearning for, each other, it is correct; but the writer probably did not intend so poetic a flight. (2) If it means that they merely desired a meeting, it is wrong, exactly as our mutual friend is wrong. The relation is not one between A and B; it is only that A and B hold separately the same relation to C, the meeting. It should be common desire. (3) If desire is here equivalent to request, and each is represented as having requested the other to meet him, it is again correct; but only politeness to the writer would induce any one to take this alternative.
The carpenter holds the hammer in one hand, the nail in the other, and they do their work equally well. So it is with every craftsman; the hands are mutually busy.—Times.
