of the degrees of comparison embrace not only the
absurdities which I have already censured in those of our common grammars,
but several new ones peculiar to this author. Of the inconsistency of his
doctrine and practice, take the following examples: "Which of two bodies,
that move with the same velocity, will exercise the _greatest_
power?"--_Ib._, p. 93; and again, p. 203, "'I was offered a _dollar_;'--'A
_dollar_ was offered (to) _me_.' The _first_ form should always be
avoided."--_Ib._, p. 127. "Nouns in apposition generally annex the sign of
the possessive case to the _last_; as, 'For David my _servant's_
sake.'--'John the _Baptist's_ head.' _Bible_."--_Ib._, p. 197.

OBS. 13.--So Murray: "We commonly say, 'This is the _weaker of the two_;'
or, 'The _weakest_ of the two;'[178] but the former is the regular mode of
expression, because there are _only two_ things compared."--_Octavo Gram._,
i, 167. What then of the following example: "Which of _those two persons_
has _most_ distinguished himself?"--_Ib., Key_, ii, 187. Again, in treating
of the adjectives _this_ and _that_, the same hand writes thus: "_This_
refers to the _nearest_ person or thing, and _that_ to the _most distant_:
as, '_This_ man is _more intelligent_ than _that_.' _This_ indicates the
_latter_, or _last_ mentioned; _that_, the _former_, or _first_ mentioned:
as, 'Both wealth and poverty are temptations; _that_ tends to excite pride,
_this_, discontent.'"--_Murray's Gram._, i, 56. In the former part of this
example, the superlative is twice applied where only two things are spoken
of; and, in the latter, it is twice made equivalent to the comparative,
with a like reference. The following example shows the same equivalence:
"_This_ refers to the _last_ mentioned or _nearer_ thing, _that_ to the
_first_ mentioned or _more_ distant thing."--_Webber's Gram._, p. 31. So
Churchill: "The superlative should not be used, when only two persons or
things are compared."--_New Gram._, p. 80. "In the _first_ of these two
sentences."--_Ib._, p. 162; _Lowth_, p. 120. According to the rule, it
should have been, "In the _former_ of these two sentences;" but this would
be here ambiguous, because _former_ might mean _maker_. "When our
sentence consists of two members, the _longest_ should, generally, be the
concluding one."--_Blair's Rhet._, p. 117: and _Jamieson's_, p. 99. "The
_shortest_ member being placed _first_, we carry it _more readily_ in our
memory as we procee