ine upon the principles of grammar until they prove their
non-existence, but it is believed, nevertheless, to be based on
sound reason and common sense.

4. _Mine, thine, his, hers, ours, yours, theirs_, have, by many
respectable grammarians, been considered merely the possessive cases
of personal pronouns, whilst, by others, they have been denominated
pronouns or nouns in the nominative or objective case. It is
believed, however, that a little attention to the meaning and office
of these words, will clearly show the impropriety of both these
classifications. Those who pursue the former arrangement, allege,
that, in the examples, "You may imagine what kind of faith _theirs_
was; My pleasures are past; _hers_ and _yours_ are to come; they
applauded his conduct, but condemned _hers_ and _yours_," the words
_theirs, hers_, and _yours_, are personal pronouns in the possessive
case, and governed by their respective nouns understood. To prove
this, they construct the sentence thus, "You may imagine what kind
of faith _their faith_ was;--_her pleasures_ and _your pleasures_
are to come;--but condemned _her conduct_ and _your conduct_;" or
thus, "You may imagine what kind of faith the faith of them
was;--the pleasures of her and the pleasures of you, are to come;--
but condemned the conduct of her and the conduct of you." But these
constructions, (both of which are correct,) prove too much for their
purpose; for, as soon as we supply the nouns after these words, they
are resolved into personal pronouns of kindred meaning, and the
nouns which we supply: thus, _theirs_ becomes, their faith: _hers_,
her pleasures; and _yours_, your pleasures. This evidently gives us
two words instead of, and altogether distinct from, the first; so
that, in parsing, _their faith_, we are not, in reality, analyzing
_theirs_, but two other words of which _theirs_ is the proper
representative. These remarks also prove, with equal force, the
impropriety of calling these words merely simple pronouns or nouns
in the nominative or objective case. Without attempting to develop
the original or intrinsic meaning of these pluralizing adjuncts,
_ne_ and _s_, which were, no doubt, formerly detached from the
pronouns with which they now coalesce, for all practical purposes,
it is sufficient for us to know, that, in the presen