‘i 
J 
J 
7861.] 
him, it muft be the creed of every one 
who believes the exiftence of one firft 
caufe, ‘* There isa natural, immutable, 
end eternal reafon for that which we call 
wirtue, and again that which we call 
wice; or, that which we call virtue, we 
call virtue for a natural, eternal, and im- 
‘mutable reafon; i. e. a natural, eternal, 
and immutable reafon being the caufe of 
our fo calling it; or, there is a natural, 
eternal, and immutable reafon, the caufe 
ef that which we call virtue.” If for fig- 
nify caufe here, what is the meaning of 
egainfi? It is evident, that, the two 
words are directly oppofed to each other + 
and, in fuch a cale, accerding to Mr. 
Tooke, ‘* having once difcovered one of 
the adverfe parties, the meaning of the 
other mutt follow of courfe,” p. 347. It 
will not be very ealy, however, to explain 
the meaning of a word denoting the oppofite 
of caufe. 
Without going further into detail, I 
thall obferve, that Mr. Tooke has frecuent- 
ly, in his interpretations, employed. what 
many muft think a very unauthorized pe- 
riphrafis, and has, in a very few inftances, 
given a fynonimous explanation. The 
word which he makes to reprefent the 
cau‘e is, in general, not.the caufz, but the 
shjeé?. If his explanation were juft, the 
prepofition dy fhould, in its fenfe of caufa- 
lity for which we now fo commonly em- 
ploy it, be capable of fupplying the place 
of for in the paflages he has quoted ; which 
#t will not do in a fingle inftance. It mutt 
be remembered withal, that Mr. Tooke 
has advanced not a fingle authority to 
fhew that faipina, or any obvious corrup- 
tion of it, was ever employed in the office 
oi for ; and therefore it is a fufficient ob- 
jection to his opinion that 
‘3. A much more fimple and plaufible 
etymology offers itfelf in the noun fop, 
way, road, the root or tke offspring of 
fonan,to go. Without ufing more :ati- 
tude of conftruétion than Mr. Tooke has 
done with caufe, fuch a word wiil furnifh 
us with a much better illuftration of the 
fenfe of for. Our author has fhewn this 
_himfelf in one, at Jeaft, of his interpreta- 
tions. * He quivered with his feet, and 
lay for dead; i.e. as if death, or his being 
dead, had been the caufe of his laying; 
or, he lay in that manner in which deaih, 
or being dead, is the caufe that perfons fo 
Jay.” Here he has given indeed an ex- 
planation of the meaning of for ; but it is 
in the word manner, not in the werd 
caufe. To lie for dead, is to lie in the 
manner of one dead; or, as we fay, ellip- 
ticaliy,-in a manner, or, in a way, dead, 
Remarks on Mr. Horne Tooke’s Etymalogies. olf 
This, however, is not the moft ufual figni- 
fication of for,*hough its occafional em- 
ployment in this «way is fufficiently ex- 
plained by our frequent ufe of the word 
way, at prefent in the fenfe of zzauner.. 
The ordinary office of for is to reprefent 
the read to fome obje&t. So Chrif? died for 
us 5 we were the object in his way to which 
he died. Cheliea Hofpital was built by 
way of* (relieving) dilabled foldiers. ‘I 
write for your fatisfaétion ;’” or, by way 
of fatisfying you. ‘ He fpeaks one word 
for another ;”* in his way to another, 
whilft another is his objeét. ** We failed 
directly for Genoa ;” in the way to Ge-~ 
oa. 
Sometimes for is ufed in appofition with 
the word following it, which thus expreffles 
not the object of the way, but the way 
itfelf: as in the inftances, * hired for 
life ;”"——** Chemifts have not been able, 
Jor aught is vulgarly known ;°—* he lay 
Jor dead (as above noticed) ;7°—** moral 
confiderations can #0 way move the fenfible 
appetite, were it not for (in the way of } 
the will.”"—** To die for a deferter,” de- 
notes, according to Mr. Tooke, that the 
being a deferter is the caufe of my death. 
But would he not think it -harfh to apply 
fuch a conftruétion to the expreffion— 
Horne Tooke was perfecuted for a trai- 
tor? The word, in both cafes, denotes 
not the cau/e, but the way, or manner, of 
my death, and of his perfecution, 
The inftances which Mr. Tooke has 
quoted from Tyrwhit of the ufe of for, in 
the fenfe of againfi, admit of a very eafy 
Interpretation, if we confider that one 
thing may ftand in the way of another, 
either as the obje€&t to which it is dire&ted, 
or as the obitacle by which it is im- 
peded+. 
* The more proper form of this expreffion 
feems to be by way to, as the words following 
it reprefent the object to which what goes 
* before defcribes the way. 
7 As we commonly employ againft to de- 
note the latter of thefe relations, the ufe of 
for is generally reftricted to the former: and it 
is from this cuftomary diftin@tion that thefe 
prepofitions have been ufually regarded as ap- 
polites. A diftinétion, however, in fo great 
meafure arbitrary, was frequently overlooked, 
and many more familiar inftances might be 
added to thofe of Mr. Tyrwhit, in illuftrationm 
of their interchange of capacity. 
‘¢ Againft my love fhail be as [ am now, 
With ‘lime’s injurious hand, cruth’d and o’ere= 
worn; 
When hours have drain’d his blood, and 
~ filld his brow 
With lines and wrinkles ; when his youthe 
ful morn 
Ee 2 
The’ 
