generalA Rout that fell on the whole Body of the thereon’s, the therein’s, and thereby’s, when those useful Expletives, the altho’s and the Unto’s, and those most convenient Synalæpha’s ’midst, ’mongst, ’gainst, and ’twixt, were every one cut off; which dismal Slaughter was follow’d with the utter Extirpation of the ancient House of the hereof’s and the therefrom’s, &c. Nor is this Reformation the Arbitrary Fancy of a Few, who would impose their own Private Opinions and Practices upon the rest of their Countrymen, but grounded on the Authority of Horace, who tells us in his Epistle de arte Poetica, that Present Use is the final Judge of Language, (the Verse is too well known to need quoting)B and on the common Reason of Mankind, which forbids us those antiquated Words and obsolete Idioms of Speech, whose worth Time has worn out, how well soever they may seem to stop a Gap in Verse, and suit our shapeless Immature Conceptions; for what is grown Pedantick and unbecoming when ’tis spoke, will not have a jot the better grace for being writ down. This Gentleman’s Opinion, and that of others, which agrees with his, justify’d by the Example of all the Polite Writers in King Charles the Second’s Reign, which probably may be the Augustan Age of English Poetry, is not to warrant the Affectation of such as are for the Can’ts, the Don’ts, the Won’ts, the Shan’ts, &c. but to refer to the Ear the cutting off those useless Syllables the Ed’s and Eth’s both in Verse and Prose; and I question whether any one wou’d not be better pleas’d to hear disturb’d read than disturbed, and rebuk’d than rebuked, tho’ the Doctor wonders how it can be endur’d.

How intolerable must those two Lines of Hudibras be to him then, on more Accounts than one.

Where there are almost as many Abreviations as there are Words, and I question whether the being an Hudibrastick is sufficient to excuse it, if it is, otherwise inexcusable; perhaps the Reader may not be displeas’d to see the Lines that follow, which are no great Digression from our Subject.

Which may very well be introduc’d as often as one has occasion to speak of the late Examiner, or any one that belongs to him. Let this Learned Doctor and his new Academy do their utmost to furnish our Language with what the French call Chevilles, with his Thoroughs, Althoughs, and the whole Army of antiquated Words before-mention’d; I can’t imagine Mr. Dryden’s Poetry will be in any Danger of becoming unintelligible, tho’ he has us’d Abreviations as much as any Polite Writer; and will preserve that Character when the Doctor’s is forgotten, unless we should return to our Original Barbarity, as he says we incline to do. He complains the Refinement of our Language has hitherto been trusted to illiterate Court Fops, Half-witted Poets, and University Boys. He would have a thin Society, if he should exclude all such from his own Academy: And if the Choice be in himself, as he seems to insinuate, I believe the Reformation of our Language would have just as much success as the Reformation of our Manners, which, ’tis said, none have more corrupted than the very Reformers. He gives us his Word, That the Style of some great Ministers very much exceed that of any other Productions. Where I wonder are the Instances of this Excellence? In Speeches in Parliament, for themselves or others, or what Works of theirs has been communicated to him, that he should know more than all Mankind? One would think he was their Master by what he says, in the next Page, What I have most at Heart, is some Method for ascertaining and fixing our Language for ever. Now you must know, that this Reverend Author, who is so concern’d for the Fixing our Language, has himself a Style of a very deficient Character; in which the Reader will perceive how much we shou’d be improv’d, by having his manner ascertained and fixed; for doubtless he thinks his own the best, and his Friends know no better than to be of his Mind. He would be more comprehensive, says an Author of Note, if he would alter and correct his Style, which is too loose and diffus’d in all Conscience. So that when I read him sometimes for a good while together, tho’ I go on very evenly and smoothly, I find it difficult to recollect what I have been doing, and whether I have been reading or sleeping. My present Advice to him therefore is, that he would study Tacitus, and such other Politicians as say much in few Words: And if he obstinately persists in the same Childish fondness for his Style, I shall be obliged to shew in how small a Compass the whole Substance of what he says, may be contained. All this vile Drudgery will I submit to for his sake, &c. But so little likelihood there is of his mending his Style by reading Tacitus, that he defies him and charges him with the Corruption of the Roman Tongue, by saying that in Two or Three Words, about which such a Genius as he is might have employ’d Twenty or Thirty. This Brevity he calls Affectation, and assures us, it brought Barbarisms into the Latin Tongue, even before the Goths invaded Italy. However he exposes his own Ignorance, he should have been careful not to have discover’d his Friends: Does the Translation of the Bible teach us to understand Fairfax? Are that and the Common-Prayer the Standard of Language? Yet he affirms, that without them one cou’d not understand any thing written a hundred Years ago. Whereas the Jerusalem of Fairfax is older than that, and whoever reads it will find the Language as new as any can be expected from the New Academy these Fifty Years. For our Tongue is not so variable in the best Authors as the Doctor represents it, and the difference between the present English and the English a Hundred Years ago, is not so great as between the Old and Modern French in that Term. Of all the Parts of Learning, that is