435 



skouldst* not blame us. Thou wouldst ' be most to blame 

 for alarming us. 



We must not confound with the forepoino- verbs a 

 fourth, should, as a sign of the potential mood, or, in 

 other words, as expressing the possibility of simple futu- 

 rity. This is unchanged in all the persons, whether 

 singular or plural. — Thus C. might proceed in the above 

 conversation : 



C. If I should* fall, and thou shouldst* see me, and 

 if B. should* be unable to help me, we should 1 all lament 

 our mishap. If we should* be so unfortunate, and if you 

 both should 4 go home without me, and if my parents 

 should* be there, &c. &c. 



An apparent exception to the above rule occurs in 

 scriptural language : "The Lord shall judge the world 

 in righteousness." " The Lord shall reign for ever and 

 ever," &c. In such cases, though the fact ought, in 

 ordinary language, to be announced as a matter of simple 

 futurity, yet by a kind of poetical licence, the narrator 

 assumes more than ordinary authority, which can only 

 be expressed by the tone of decision or determination de- 

 rived from inspiration itself. We overlook the speaker 

 or writer in the consideration of this all-commandinp; 

 decision, proceeding from the fountain of unchangeable 

 truth. To reduce these sentences to grammatical exact- 

 ness by substituting will for shall, as some injudicious 

 and tasteless reformers of spiritual poetry have done, en- 

 feebles their sentiment, without adding any thing to their 

 precision, for they are used only on an occasion in which 

 there is no possibility of mistake. 



I cannot but esteem the irregularity of the verbs in 

 question rather a beauty than a defect in our language. 

 No Englishman is puzzled in their use, because the rule 

 above given is absolute. Endless confusion arises from 

 those who, not perceiving that rule, attempt to correct 

 the language ; and the matter is only further obscured 



2 f 2 



