solemn picture of our Lord, with the Virgin on one side, St. John on the other, in which Cimabue made the last and most splendid effort of the old rigid Byzantine art to retain its imperilled supremacy; and thus Latin Christianity seemed to assert its rights against Teutonic independence before their final severance; beneath these auspices met the most august assembly, as to the numbers and rank of the prelates, and the ambassadors of Christian kings, which for centuries had assumed the functions of a representative senate of Christendom."

In this sentence the description of the place of meeting, quite allowable in itself, and when properly treated with due subordination to the main idea, is interrupted by side remarks which tend to distract the attention and obscure the meaning. These may be stated in the following order: 1. The height never before equalled; 2. The tall pillars; 3. The Italian Basilica expanded into a Latin cross; 4. The picture over the altar; 5. Byzantine art; 6. Latin Christianity asserting its rights. From the beginning to the end of this long sentence the sense is held in suspense; and after the presentation of this array of topics, the interrupted sentence is at length resumed; but the reader's attention has been carried so far away from the subject that the connection can only be perceived with difficulty. There is a similar passage in Macaulay's essay on Warren Hastings, where he describes the scene of the trial. In this the simple structure is adopted. The same effort is made in each to prepare the reader for the acts of an assembly, by a description of the place in which those acts occurred. But in Macaulay's work there is no confusion; the scene is presented with vivid distinctness; and the impression left upon the mind is at once clear and permanent.

These faults may be perceived in shorter sentences as well as in those of greater length.

"After Napoleon's escape from Elba, and landing on the coast of France, he advanced as rapidly as possible towards Paris, and on the way he was met by the troops under the command of Marshal Ney, who had sworn to bring him back in an iron cage, but now saluted him as emperor."

Here the fault consists in a transition from Napoleon to Marshal Ney; for whereas the sentence begins with the escape of the former from Elba, and his march on Paris, it ends with the action of the latter.

"The successor of Henry II. was Francis II., the first husband of Mary,

afterwards Queen of Scots, who died after a reign of one year, and was succeeded by his brother, Charles IX., then a boy only ten years old, who had for his guardian Catherine de' Medici, an ambitious and unscrupulous woman."

In this sentence a transition is made from Francis II. to Charles IX., and another to Catherine de' Medici.

$ 54. APPENDED CLAUSES.

2. Another rule for the observance of unity is that members should not be added after the sentence has come to a close.

In the following sentence from Lord Clarendon's History, a violation of this rule will be noticed :

"The next day upon the plains, Dr. Henchman, one of the prebends of Salisbury, met the king, the Lord Wilmot and Philips then leaving him to go to the sea-coast to find a vessel, the doctor conducting the king to a place called Heale, three miles from Salisbury, belonging then to Sergeant Hyde, who was afterwards Chief-Justice of the King's Bench, and then in possession of the widow of his elder brother; a house that stood alone from neighbors and from any highway, where, coming in late, he supped with some gentlemen that were accidentally in the house, which could not very well be avoided."

This whole passage is confused in its arrangement, but the most noticeable fault is the appendage of a clause after the words "elder brother," where the sentence comes naturally to an end.

$55. THE PARENTHESIS.

3. Unity requires that proper attention be paid to the use of the parenthesis.

The parenthesis generally conveys an idea of a subordinate character, and it is inserted in the midst of the sentence nearest to those words whose meaning it is designed to affect. When properly employed it is of great value in composition, and need not interfere at all with the unity of the sentence; but it is very liable to improper use.

The parenthesis is usually indicated by certain marks; but these are merely for the convenience of the reader, and in many cases it has nothing whatever to indicate its presence. Whether these marks be used or not is a mere question of punctuation, and does not at all affect the true nature of the parenthesis.

The parenthesis is useful under the following circumstances: 1. To give emphasis.

The following is an example :

66

Suppose (and we beg pardon for putting such a supposition even for the sake of argument) that the Duke of Wellington had, after the campaign of 1815, privately accepted £200,000 from Louis XVIII., as a mark of his gratitude."-MACAULAY.

Here the parenthesis conveys an apology for putting a supposed case; and therefore the thing referred to is marked as disgraceful and infamous, with an emphasis that could not otherwise be given.

2. The parenthesis is also used to offer a necessary explanation :

"If the debt were wiped out (a measure, be it understood, which we by no means recommend), the fundholder would cease to spend his five hundred a year."-MACAULAY.

Here the parenthesis inserts a necessary explanation of the author's own views in the most convenient and striking place. 3. Another case is to be found in parenthetical clauses.

99.66

These are numerous and useful. They comprise all such convenient and often indispensable formulas as the following: "So to speak," strange to say," ," "if I may be allowed the expression," "in spite of himself," "out of the very kindness of his heart," "through utter ignorance," "through mere wantonness," "awful thought," and the like.

In all cases where the parenthesis is used care should be taken that there be no abrupt transition, but that it flow onward smoothly with the rest of the sentence.

Some

Errors in the use of the parenthesis are very common. writers employ them to an excessive degree, and seem unable to produce any number of sentences without inserting explanatory clauses or modifying statements. Their intention is to make the meaning clearer; but the result of so many interruptions to the course of thought is generally to make it ob

scure.

The improper use of the parenthesis takes place whenever it is of undue length or of too frequent occurrence, or when it has too slight a connection with the subject under consideration. This may be seen in the following passage from De Quincey:

66

'Forty years ago (or in all probability a good deal more, for we have already completed thirty-seven years from Waterloo, and my remembrance upon this subject goes back to a period lying much behind that great era) I used to be annoyed and irritated by the false interpretation given to the Greek word aiwv (æon).”

Here the parenthesis is of undue length, for out of fifty-five words it comprises thirty-four; and besides, while the sentence refers to false interpretations of the Greek word, the parenthesis takes away the attention of the reader to the totally different subject of the era of Waterloo.

In the following example from Bolingbroke the same fault may be seen:

"It seems to me that in order to maintain the system of the world at a certain point far below that of ideal perfection (for we are made capable of conceiving what we are incapable of attaining), but, however, sufficient upon the whole to constitute a state easy and happy (or at the worst, tolerable); I say, it seems to me that the Author of nature has seen fit to mingle among the societies of men a few, and but a few, of those on whom he is graciously pleased to bestow a larger portion of the ethereal spirit than is given in the ordinary course of his government to the sons of men."

This passage exhibits many faults, such as useless repetitions, tedious circumlocution, and general awkwardness of construction; but the thing to be noticed here is the use of the parenthesis without any sufficient cause, and its occurrence twice in the same sentence.

The following is an extract from a translation of Rotteck's Universal History:

"Only what was decreed or approved by such assemblies (of the people themselves in so far as it was possible, or at least of the great who represented them in some measure) was regarded as law."

Here the parenthesis is of disproportionate length, since it comprises twenty-three words out of thirty-six.

$56. UNITY IN LONG AND SHORT SENTENCES.

From the foregoing illustrations it is evident that unity does not depend upon mere length, since it may be as well observed in the periodic as in the simple structure. The long sentence has its own beauties and its own advantages; but it requires more careful handling and a higher degree of elaboration in order to be effective. Violations of unity are no doubt chiefly

visible in long sentences, but these arise not so much from their length as from the carelessness of the writer. Lord Clarendon, amid many excellences which have made his history a classical work, exhibits this one great blemish; for his careless constructions lead to more frequent offences against unity than can be found in any other writer of equal merit. His habit often is to begin a statement, and then append clause after clause, joining each by any connective that may come to hand, without any thought of proper subordination; and when at length the sentence comes to an end, its close does not appear to depend upon any purpose of the writer, but seems rather to come by chance.

Where unity is thus affected the remedy is generally easy. Either the sentence itself may be reconstructed, or, if this cannot be done, it may be broken up into two or more new ones, each of which will be complete in itself.

We have now to consider the subject of perspicuity in general.

The chief requisite here is clearness of conception on the part of the writer. It is evident that one who has distinct ideas of his subject will be best able to impart such ideas to others; and, on the other hand, it may be said that without this it is impossible to attain to perspicuity. No writer can give to others that which he himself does not possess. Of obscure passages, some are without any definite meaning; others lead to a conclusion which is not what is to be expected from the context; others again are susceptible of a meaning which was never in the mind of the writer; and in such cases the fault will generally be found to arise from the lack of clear conceptions on the part of the author.