adults, when they are spoken of without regard to a
distinct personality or identity; as, "_Which_ of you will go?"--"Crabb
knoweth not _which_ is _which_, himself or his parodist."--_Leigh Hunt_.

OBS. 25.--A proper name taken merely as a name, or an appellative taken in
any sense not strictly personal, must be represented by _which_, and not by
_who_; as, "Herod--_which_ is but an other name for cruelty."--"In every
prescription of duty, God proposeth himself as a rewarder; _which_ he is
only to those that please him."--_Dr. J. Owen_. _Which_ would perhaps be
more proper than _whom_, in the following passage: "They did not destroy
the _nations_, concerning _whom_ the Lord commanded them."--_Psalms_, cvi,
34. Dr. Blair has preferred it in the following instance: "My lion and my
pillar are sufficiently interpreted by the mention of _Achilles_ and the
_minister, which_ I join to them."--_Lectures_, p. 151. He meant, "_whose
names I connect with theirs_;" and not, that he joined the _person_ of
Achilles to a lion, or that of a minister to a pillar.

OBS. 26.--When two or more relative clauses pertain to the same antecedent,
if they are connected by a conjunction, the same relative ought to be
employed in each, agreeably to the doctrine of the seventh note below; but
if no conjunction is expressed or understood between them, the pronouns
ought rather to be different; as, "There are many things _that_ you can
speak of, _which_ cannot be seen."--_R W. Green's Gram._, p. 11. This
distinction is noticed in the fifth chapter of Etymology, Obs. 29th, on the
Classes of Pronouns. Dr. Priestley says, "Whatever relative _be_ used, in a
_series_ of clauses, relating to the same antecedent, the same ought to be
used in them all. 'It is remarkable, that _Holland_, against _which_ the
war was undertaken, _and that_, in the very beginning, was reduced to the
brink of destruction, lost nothing.'--_Universal History_, Vol. 25, p. 117.
It ought to have been, _and which in the very beginning_."--_Priestley's
Gram._, p. 102. L. Murray, (as I have shown in the Introduction, Ch. x,
22,) assumes all this, without references; adding as a salvo the word
"_generally_," which merely impairs the certainty of the rule:--"the same
relative ought _generally_ to be used in them all."--_Octavo Gram._, p.
155. And, of _who_ and _that_, Cobbett says: "Either may do; but both
_never_ ought to be relatives of the same antecedent in the same
sentence."--_Gram