uch depends
upon _Tyro's observing of_ the rule,' &c.; which is the same as, 'Much
depends on Tyro's _observance_ of the rule.' But, as this construction
sounds rather _harshly_, it would, in general, be better to express the
sentiment in the following, or some other form: 'Much depends on the
_rule's being observed_; and error will be the consequence of _its being
neglected_? or--'_on observing the rule_; and--_of neglecting
it_.'"--_Murray's Gram._, 8vo, p. 193; _Ingersoll's_, 199; and others.

OBS. 6.--Here it is assumed, that "_their observing the rule_," or "_Tyro's
observing the rule_," is an ungrammatical phrase; and, several different
methods being suggested for its correction, a preference is at length given
to what is perhaps not less objectionable than the original phrase itself.
The last form offered, "_on observing the rule_," &c., is indeed correct
enough in itself; but, as a substitute for the other, it is both inaccurate
and insufficient. It merely omits the possessive case, and leaves the
action of the participle undetermined in respect to the agent. For the
possessive case before a real participle, denotes not the possessor of
something, as in other instances, but the agent of the action, or the
subject of the being or passion; and the simple question here is, whether
this extraordinary use of the possessive case is, or is not, such an idiom
of our language as ought to be justified. Participles may become nouns, if
we choose to use them substantively; but can they govern the possessive
case before them, while they govern also the objective after them, or while
they have a participial meaning which is qualified by adverbs? If they can,
Lowth, Murray, and others, are wrong in supposing the foregoing phrases to
be ungrammatical, and in teaching that the possessive case before a
participle converts it into a noun; and if they cannot, Priestley, Murray,
Hiley, Wells, Weld, and others, are wrong in supposing that a participle,
or a phrase beginning with a participle, may properly govern the possessive
case. Compare Murray's seventh note under his Rule 10th, with the second
under his Rule 14th. The same contradiction is taught by many other
compilers. See _Smith's New Grammar_, pp. 152 and 162; _Comly's Gram._, 91
and 108; _Ingersoll's_, 180 and 199.

OBS. 7.--Concerning one of the forms of expression which Murray approves
and prefers, among his corrections above, the learned doctors Lowth and
Campbell appear