ar of every one
of them, has in no slight degree improved his conversation, and thereby
increased his importance. As a prefix, or accompaniment, to this catalogue
of corrected mistakes, the presentation of a few rules or principles of
language, which, strictly observed, might guard against numerous general
classes of errors, would not be thought misplaced, or undesirable. Some
suggestions on points most prominent are accordingly given among these
introductory remarks--not in formal statements of grammatical rules, but
in examples in which the spirit of such rules is revealed.

Not the least glaring among the many misuses of words and forms of
expression in conversation, occur by incorrectly employing the
pronouns--_who_, _which_, _what_, and _that_. It may be remarked, that
_who_ should be applied exclusively to persons. _Which_ usually refers to
animals and inanimate objects, except in such an expression as, "Tell me
_which_ of the two men was chosen?" _What_, means _that which_: thus,
"This is the book _what_ I wanted," should read, "This is the book _that_
(or _which_) I wanted."

Among interrogatives, _who?_ inquires for the name; _which?_ for the
individual; _what?_ for the character, or occupation. Thus, "_Who_ built
the bridge?" "Mr. Blake." "_Which_ of the Blakes?" "_Charles_ Blake."
"_What_ was he?" "A distinguished civil engineer."

The title of a small book for young people, recently published, was--"The
Way _that_ Little Children enter Heaven:" the word _that_ is here
incorrectly used as a substitute for _in which_, or _by which_.

When _this_ and _that_, and their plurals, are used in the sense of
_latter_ and _former_, _this_ and _these_ signify the _latter_, and _that_
and _those_ the _former_. Thus, in the following couplet from Burns:

"Farewell my friends, farewell my foes,
My peace with _these_, my love with _those_."

_these_ refers to "foes," and _those_ to "friends."

In the possessive case of nouns, some instances occur in which a wise
choice may be made, but in respect to which usage is divided. Thus, we may
say, "They called at _Walton's the bookseller's_," or, with equal
propriety, as far as custom is concerned, "at _Walton the bookseller's_."
The first form, however, is preferable.

The use of the hyphen [-] is frequently disregarded in epistolary
correspondence, occasioning not only a blemish but a blunder. Its
importance may be seen by comparing the meaning of "_glass house_" wit