f exceptions.

It will be noticed that we do not take the points exactly in their
order of strength. It seemed better to deal with the full stop before
passing to the punctuation of the parts of a sentence. Again, it may
be said that, strictly speaking, italics do not form part of the
subject. But they are at any rate so intimately connected with it that
to have passed them over would have been merely pedantic. Even the
sections on references to notes and on the correction of proofs may
not be considered altogether out of place. As few grammatical terms as
possible have been made use of. Some have been found necessary in
order to secure the brevity of statement proper to a little work on a
little subject.

THE FULL STOP

I. A full stop is placed at the end of every sentence that is neither
exclamatory nor interrogative.

A penal statute is virtually annulled if the penalties which
it imposes are regularly remitted as often as they are
incurred. The sovereign was undoubtedly competent to remit
penalties without limit. He was, therefore, competent to
annul virtually a penal statute. It might seem that there
could be no serious objection to his doing formally what he
might do virtually.

How much should be put into a sentence is rather a matter of style
than of punctuation. The tendency of modern literature is in favour of
the short sentence. In the prose of Milton and of Jeremy Taylor, the
full stop does not come to release the thought till all the
circumstances have been grouped around it, and the necessary
qualifications made. In Macaulay the circumstances and the
qualifications are set out sentence by sentence. So the steps of
reasoning in the example which we have given are stated with that
distinct pause between each of them which the reader would make if he
thought them out for himself. They might be welded together thus:

Seeing that a penal statute is virtually annulled if the
penalties which it imposes are regularly remitted as often
as they are incurred, and seeing that the sovereign was
undoubtedly competent to remit penalties without limit, it
follows that he was competent to annul virtually a penal
statute; and it might seem that there could be no serious
objection to his doing formally what he might do virtually.

Both forms are correct in point of punctuation. Which is the better
form is a question of style. Take ano