‘ UNITED KINGDOM.’ 23 
Aston, “ are not always remarked for their 
good English ?” 
‘* By no means,” answered Mr. Dart- 
mouth. 
‘* But Papa says,” cried George, “ that 
the worst of all is, the illiterate name which, 
since the union with Ireland, has been given, 
by authority, to this kingdom! What can 
be greater nonsense than the phrase, the 
United Kingdom? The United States, and 
the United Provinces, the hapless models, 
(Papa says,) of so much modern English ig- 
norance, are really English phrases ; that is, 
they are grammar. But how can a single 
state, province, kingdom, or territory, be a 
‘united kingdom,’ or the rest? We may 
say, poetically, that a kingdom (that is, the 
people of a kingdom—a multitude of indivi- 
duals) are, or is, ‘ united;’ but how can a 
single territory be a subject of union? How 
can it be said, that the King is ‘ King of the 
United Kingdom,’ unless, indeed, we mean, 
(what we do not mean !) the united people of 
a kingdom; for we mean united territories, 
1? 
that is, united territory : 
