case
after _to be_ expressed, and put by apposition with _him_, according
to the same RULE. _Man_ is in the obj. case, put by apposition with
_which_: RULE 7. The latter part of the sentence may be _literally_
rendered thus: He plainly appears to have proved _to be that base
character which_ the prophet foresaw him to be, viz. a _man_ of
violence, cruelty, and blood. The antecedent part of the first
_what_, in the next sentence, is governed by _hides_; and _which_,
the relative part, is governed by _know_ understood. The antecedent
part of the second _what_, is governed by _hides_ understood, and
the relative part is governed by _know_ expressed.
4. The first _he_, in the seventh example, is, in the opinion of
some, nom. to _can hear_ understood; but Mr. N.R. Smith, a
distinguished and acute grammarian, suggests the propriety of
rendering the sentence thus; "He that formed the ear, _formed it to
hear_; can he not hear?" The first _he_, in the last example, is
redundant; yet the construction is sometimes admissible, for the
expression is more forcible than it would be to say, "Let him hear
who hath ears to hear;" and if we adopt the ingenious method of Mr.
Pages:
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384