d again after "_rich_;" for, the
article being an index to the noun, I conceive it to be improper ever to
construe two articles as having reference to one unrepeated word. Dr.
Priestley says, "We sometimes _repeat the article_, when the epithet
precedes the substantive; as He was met by _the_ worshipful _the_
magistrates."--_Gram._, p. 148. It is true, we occasionally meet with such
fulsome phraseology as this; but the question is, how is it to be
explained? I imagine that the word _personages_, or something equivalent,
must be understood after _worshipful_, and that the Doctor ought to have
inserted a comma there.

OBS. 10.--In Greek, there is no article corresponding to our _an_ or _a_,
consequently _man_ and _a man_ are rendered alike; the word, [Greek:
anthropos] may mean either. See, in the original, these texts: "There was
_a man_ sent from God," (_John_, i, 6,) and, "What is _man_, that thou art
mindful of him?"--_Heb._, ii, 6. So of other nouns. But the _definite_
article of that language, which is exactly equivalent to our _the_, is a
declinable word, making no small figure in grammar. It is varied by
numbers, genders, and cases; so that it assumes more than twenty different
forms, and becomes susceptible of six and thirty different ways of
_agreement_. But this article in English is perfectly simple, being
entirely destitute of grammatical modifications, and consequently incapable
of any form of grammatical agreement or disagreement--a circumstance of
which many of our grammarians seem to be ignorant; since they prescribe a
rule, wherein they say, it "_agrees_," "_may agree_," or "_must agree_,"
with its noun. Nor has the indefinite article any variation of form, except
the change from _an_ to _a_, which has been made for the sake of brevity or
euphony.

OBS. 11.--As _an_ or _a_ conveys the idea of unity, of course it applies to
no other than nouns of the singular number. _An eagle_ is one eagle, and
the plural word _eagles_ denotes more than one; but what could possibly be
meant by "_ans eagles_," if such a phrase were invented? Harris very
strangely says, "The Greeks have no article correspondent to _an_ or _a_,
but _supply its place by a NEGATION of their article_. And even in English,
_where_ the article _a_ cannot be used, as _in_ plurals, _its force is
exprest by the same_ NEGATION."--_Harris's Hermes_, p. 218. What a sample
of grammar is this! Besides several minor faults, we have here a
_nonentity_, a