like its synonym erase, is never properly used in any but a physical sense.

Observe. The dictionaries authorize the use of this word as a synonym of say and remark; as, for example, "What did you observe?" for "What did you say, or remark?" In this sense, however, it is better to leave observe to the exclusive use of those that delight in being fine.

Of all others. "The vice of covetousness, of all others, enters deepest into the soul." This sentence says that covetousness is one of the other vices. A thing can not be another thing, nor can it be one of a number of other things. The sentence should be, "Of all the vices, covetousness enters deepest into the soul"; or, "The vice of covetousness, of all the vices, enters," etc.; or, "The vice of covetousness,

more than all other vices, enters," etc.

Of any. This phrase is often used when of all is meant; thus, "This is the largest of any I have seen": should be, "the largest of all," etc. If any is used, it should be with the comparative, "This is larger than any other," for example.

Off of. In such sentences as "Give me a yard off of this piece of calico," either the off or the of is superfluous. The sentence would be correct with either one, but not with both of them. "The apples fell off of the tree":

read, "fell off the tree."

Often. This adverb is properly compared by changing its termination-often, oftener, oftenest. Why some writers use more and most to compare it, it is not easy to see; this mode of comparing it is certainly not euphonious.

Older-Elder. "He is the older man of the two, and the oldest in the neighborhood." "He is the elder of the two sons, and the eldest of the family." "The elder son is

heir to the estate; he is older than his brother by ten years."

On. Sales are made by, not on, subscription.

"Both volumes will be sold exclusively on [by] subscription."

"On seems to be a favorite preposition with Americans; at least it is constantly found where other prepositions would seem to be more correct and appropriate. F. G. Halleck, in condemning the abuse of on, quoted the phrases: 'Going to Europe on a steamboat; writing a letter on Chambers Street, and delivering it on Fifth Avenue.' Persons are constantly heard to speak of friends whom they saw on the street, and having come on the cars, while in the South members are elected to sit on the Legislature.-Schele de Vere.

The locution" on the street" has a signification in England that deters every one from using it in the sense of “in the street."

on "

On to. We get on a chair, on an omnibus, on a stump, a high horse," and on a spree; not on to. On to should not be used except in cases where both words are necessary to prevent ambiguity.

On-Upon. The preference of many writers would scem to be for upon. We are told of something that happened upon Monday last, or of something that is going to happen upon Decoration Day, and yet, in writing prose, we could get on very well if there were no such word.

"Upon differs very little in use from on," says the Standard Dictionary. "Upon is sometimes used for reasons of euphony or rhythm, and is also sometimes preferable when motion or position is involved: on when merely rest or support is to be indicated. Upon is sometimes written in two words; as, "Let us go up on the roof."

One. Certain pronouns of demonstrative signification are called indefinite because they refer to no particular subject. This is one of them. If we were putting a supposition by way of argument or illustration, we might say, "Suppose I were to lose my way in a wood"; or, "Suppose you were to lose your way in a wood "; or, "Suppose one were to lose one's way in a wood." All these forms are used, but, as a rule, the last is to be preferred. The first verges on egotism, and the second makes free with another's person, whereas the third is indifferent. "If one's honesty were impeached, what should one do?" is more courtly than to take either one's self or the person addressed for the example.

One should be followed by one, and not by he. "The better acquainted one is with any kind of rhetorical trick, the less liable he is to be misled by it": should be, “the less liable one is to be misled by it."

"Can one do what he [one] chooses with his [one's] money? Can he [one] destroy it?"-Corr. N. Y. Sun.

Professor Bain says, in his Composition Grammar:

"This pronoun continually lands writers in difficulties. English idiom requires that when the pronoun has to be again referred to it should be used itself a second time. The correct usage is shown by Pope: 'One may be ashamed to consume half one's days in bringing sense and rhyme together.' It would be against idiom to say 'half his days.'

"Still, the repetition of the pronoun is often felt to be heavy, and writers have recourse to various substitutions."

Fenimore Cooper, like Scott, is not very particular; an example may be quoted: “Modesty is a poor man's wealth ; but, as we grow substantial in the world, patroon, one can afford to begin to speak truth of himself as well as of his neighbor." Were Cooper a careful writer, we might per

suade ourselves that he chose we and one with a purpose: we might indicate that the speaker had himself and the patroon directly in his eye, although at the same time he wanted to put it generally; and one might hint that modesty succeeded in getting the better of him. But himself and his would alone show that such speculations are too refined for the occasion.

Men was more frequent in good writing formerly than "Neither do men [does one] light a candle and put it under a bushel." Do men [does one] gather grapes

now.

of thorns?"

"When one suddenly wakes up deaf, one forgets for a time that one has already been blind.”

One is frequently used superfluously; as, "It might have been expressed in one half the space."

The diction is always bettered by repeating the noun in sentences like this:

"It is often hard to tell a good man from a bad one by his face." Say, rather, "a good man from a bad man."

Ones.

“There is a word,” says an anonymous English writer, "that, especially in its plural form, is often used without any necessity. We refer to the word ones. 'The horses were very fine ones'; 'there were many admirable dresses, and among the best ones were those of Lady X. and the Countess of Y.'; 'the speeches were all good, the best ones being by Lord Z. and the Duke of Q.'; and so on ad infinitum. In all such cases ones is superfluous. The same word, in the singular and in the plural, is often inelegantly made to do duty for some other term when that other term should be used. The avoidance of repetition is of course at times desirable, but it is frequently proper to repeat a word that occurs in a preceding sen

tence, particularly if ambiguity would be the result of not doing so."

Lord Melbourne was a man of very different abilities and character from the eminent ones [men] that have now been drawn."

Only. This word, when used as an adjective, is more frequently misplaced than any other word in the language. Indeed, I am confident that it is not correctly placed half the time, either in conversation or in writing. Thus, "In its pages, papers of sterling merit [only] will only appear" (Miss Braddon); "Things are getting dull down in Texas; they only shot [only] three men down there last week"; "I have only got [only] three." Only is sometimes improperly used for except or unless; thus, "The trains will not stop only when the bell rings." The meaning here is clearly "except when the bell rings."

Dr. Bain, in his Higher English Grammar, speaking of the order of words, says:

The word requiring most attention is only.

According to the position of only, the same words may be made to express very different meanings.

"He only lived for their sakes.' Here only must be held as qualifying' lived for their sakes,' the emphasis being on lived, the word immediately adjoining. The meaning then is, 'he lived,' but did not work, did not die, did not do any other thing for their sakes.

666

'He lived only for their sakes.' Only now qualifies 'for their sakes,' and the sentence means, he lived for this one reason, namely, for their sakes, and not for any other reason. He lived for their sakes only. The force of the word when placed at the end is peculiar. Then it often has a diminutive or disparaging signification. 'He lived for their sakes,' and not for any more worthy reason.

'He