s Gram._, p.
90. The former says, "The relative _usually_ follows _than_ in the
objective case, _even when the nominative goes before_; as, 'Alfred, than
whom a greater king never reigned.' This anomaly it is difficult to
explain. Most probably, _than_, at first had the force of a preposition,
which it now retains only when followed by the relative."--_Bullions, E.
Gram._, of 1843, p. 112. Again: "_A relative_ after _than_ is put in the
objective case; as, 'Satan, than _whom_ none higher sat.' This anomaly has
not been satisfactorily explained. In this case, some regard _than_ as a
preposition. _It_ is probably only a case of simple _enallage_"--_Bullions,
Analyt. and Pract. Gram._, of 1849, p. 191. Prof. Fowler, in his great
publication, of 1850, says of this example, "The expression should be,
Satan, than _who_ None higher sat."--_Fowler's E. Gram._, Sec.482, Note 2.
Thus, by one single form of _antiptosis_, have our grammarians been as much
divided and perplexed, as were the Latin grammarians by a vast number of
such changes; and, since there were some among the latter, who insisted on
a total rejection of the figure, there is no great presumption in
discarding, if we please, the very little that remains of it in English.

OBS. 24.--Peirce's _new theory_ of grammar rests mainly on the assumption,
that no correct sentence ever is, or can be, in any wise, _elliptical_.
This is one of the "Two GRAND PRINCIPLES" on which the author says his
"work is based."--_The Grammar_, p. 10. The other is, that grammar cannot
possibly be taught without a thorough reformation of its nomenclature, a
reformation involving a change of most of the names and technical terms
heretofore used for its elucidation. I do not give precisely his own words,
for one half of this author's system is expressed in such language as needs
to be translated _into English_ in order to be generally understood; but
this is precisely his meaning, and in words more intelligible. In what
estimation he holds these two positions, may be judged from the following
assertion: "_Without these grand points_, no work, whatever may be its
pretensions, can be A GRAMMAR of the LANGUAGE."--_Ib._ It follows that no
man who does not despise every other book that is called a grammar, can
entertain any favourable opinion of Peirce's. The author however is
tolerably consistent. He not only scorns to appeal, for the confirmation of
his own assertions and rules, to the judgement or p