to have formed very different opinions. The latter, in the
chapter which, in his Philosophy of Rhetoric, he devotes to disputed points
in syntax, says: "There is only one other observation of Dr. Lowth, on
which, before I conclude this article, I must beg leave to offer some
remarks. 'Phrases like the following, though very common, are improper:
Much depends upon the _rule's being observed_; and error will be the
consequence of _its being neglected_. For here _is_ a noun _and_ a pronoun
representing it, each in the possessive case, that is, under the government
of another noun, but without other noun to govern it: for _being observed_,
and _being neglected_, are not nouns: nor can you supply the place of the
possessive case by the preposition _of_ before the noun or pronoun.'[346]
For my part," continues Campbell, "notwithstanding what is here very
speciously urged, I am not satisfied that there is any fault in the phrases
censured. They appear to me to be perfectly in the idiom of our tongue, and
such as on some occasions could not easily be avoided, unless by recurring
to circumlocution, an expedient which invariably tends to enervate the
expression."--_Philosophy of Rhetoric_, B. ii, Ch. iv, p. 234.

OBS. 8.--Dr. Campbell, if I understand his argument, defends the foregoing
expressions against the objections of Dr. Lowth, not on the ground that
participles as such may govern the possessive case, but on the supposition
that as the simple active participle may become a noun, and in that
character govern the possessive case, so may the passive participle, and
with equal propriety, notwithstanding it consists of two or more words,
which must in this construction be considered as forming "one compound
noun." I am not sure that he means to confine himself strictly to this
latter ground, but if he does, his position cannot be said in any respect
to contravene my rule for the possessive case. I do not, however, agree
with him, either in the opinion which he offers, or in the negative which
he attempts to prove. In view of the two examples, "Much depends upon the
_rule's being observed_," and, "Much depends upon _their observing of the
rule_," he says: "Now, although I allow both _the_ modes of expression to
be good, I think the first _simpler and better_ than the second." Then,
denying all faults, he proceeds: "Let us consider whether the former be
liable to _any objections_, which do not equally affect the latter." But in
hi