m._, p. 107.

OBS. 5.--On this point, a new author has just given us the following
precept and criticism: "Never connect by _or_, or _nor_, two or more names
or substitutes that have the same _asserter_ [i.e. _verb_] depending on
them for sense, if when taken separately, they require different forms of
the _asserters_. Examples. 'Neither you nor I _am concerned_. Either he
_or_ thou _wast_ there. Either they _or_ he is faulty.' These examples are
as erroneous as it would be to say, 'Neither _you am_ concerned, nor am I.'
'Either he _wast_ there, or thou wast.' 'Either _they is_ faulty, or he
is.' The sentences should stand thus--'Neither of us _is_ concerned,' or,
'neither _are you_ concerned, nor _am I_.' 'Either _he was_ there, or _thou
wast_.' 'Either _they are_ faulty, or _he is_. They are, however, in all
their impropriety, writen [sic--KTH] according to the principles of Goold
Brown's _grammar!_ and the theories of most of the former
writers."--_Oliver B. Peirce's Gram._, p. 252. We shall see by-and-by who
is right.

OBS. 6.--Cobbett also--while he approves of such English as, "_He, with
them, are_ able to do much," for, "_He and they are_ able to do
much"--condemns expressly every possible example in which the verb has not
a full and explicit concord with each of its nominatives, if they are
connected by _or_ or _nor_. His doctrine is this: "If nominatives of
different _numbers_ present themselves, we must not give them a verb which
_disagrees_ with either the one or the other. We must not say: 'Neither the
halter _nor_ the bayonets _are_ sufficient to prevent us from obtaining our
rights.' We must avoid this bad grammar by using a different form of words:
as, 'We are to be prevented from obtaining our rights by neither the halter
nor the bayonets.' And, why should we _wish_ to write bad grammar, if we
can express our meaning in good grammar?"--_Cobbett's E. Gram._, 242.
This question would have more force, if the correction here offered did not
convey a meaning _widely different_ from that of the sentence corrected.
But he goes on: "We cannot say, 'They or I _am_ in fault; I, or they, or
he, _is_ the author of it; George or I _am_ the person.' Mr. Lindley Murray
says, that we _may_ use these phrases; and that we have only to take care
that the verb agree with that person which is _placed nearest_ to it; but,
he says also, that it would be _better_ to avoid such phrases by giving a
different turn to our words. I