himself _by name_, as the speaker;
and, of the objects which there is occasion to name in discourse, but
comparatively few are such as can ever be supposed to speak. Consequently,
_nouns_ are rarely used in the first person; and when they do assume this
relation, a pronoun is commonly associated with them: as, "_I John_,"--"_We
Britons_." These words I conceive to agree throughout, in person, number,
gender, and case; though it must be confessed, that agreement like this is
not always required between words in apposition. But some grammarians deny
the first person to nouns altogether; others, with much more consistency,
ascribe it;[140] while very many are entirely silent on the subject. Yet it
is plain that both the doctrine of concords, and the analogy of general
grammar, require its admission. The reason of this may be seen in the
following examples: "_Themistocles ad te veni_." "I Themistocles have come
to you."--_Grant's Latin Gram._, p. 72. "_Adsum Troius AEneas_."--_Virgil_.
"_Romulus Rex regia arma offero_."--Livy. "_Annibal peto pacem_."--Id.
"_Callopius recensui._"--See _Terence's Comedies, at the end_. "_Paul_, an
apostle, &c., unto Timothy, _my_ own son in the faith."--_1 Tim._, i, 2.
Again, if the word _God_ is of the second person, in the text, "_Thou,
God_, seest me," why should any one deny that _Paul_ is of the first
person, in this one? "_I Paul_ have written it."--_Philemon_, 19. Or this?
"The salutation by the hand of _me Paul_."--_Col._, iv, 18. And so of the
plural: "Of _you builders_."--_Acts_, iv, 11. "Of _us the apostles_."--_2
Pet._, iii, 2. How can it be pretended, that, in the phrase, "_I Paul_,"
_I_ is of the first person, as denoting the speaker, and _Paul_, of some
other person, as denoting something or somebody that is _not_ the speaker?
Let the admirers of Murray, Kirkham, Ingersoll, R. C. Smith, Comly,
Greenleaf, Parkhurst, or of any others who teach this absurdity, answer.

OBS. 7.--As, in the direct application of what are called Christian names,
there is a kind of familiarity, which on many occasions would seem to
indicate a lack of proper respect; so in a frequent and familiar use of the
second person, as it is the placing of an other in the more intimate
relation of the hearer, and one's self in that of the speaker, there is a
sort of assumption which may seem less modest and respectful than to use
the third person. In the following example, the patriarch Jacob uses both
forms; appl