alsely; some calling it "_a part of the verb_," while they neither
join it to the verb as a prefix, nor include it among the auxiliaries. Thus
Kirkham: "_To_ is not a preposition when _joined to_ a verb in this mood;
thus, _to_ ride, _to_ rule; but it should be parsed _with the verb_, and
_as a part_ of it."--_Gram. in Familiar Lect._, p. 137. So R. C. Smith:
"This little word _to_ when _used before_ verbs in this manner, is not a
preposition, but forms a part of the verb, and, in parsing, should be so
considered."--_Productive Gram._, p. 65. How can that be "_a part_ of the
verb," which is _a word_ used _before_ it? or how is _to_ "joined to the
verb," or made a part of it, in the phrase, "_to_ ride?" But Smith does not
abide by his own doctrine; for, in an other part of his book, he adopts the
phraseology of Murray, and makes _to_ a preposition: saying, "The
_preposition_ TO, though generally used before the latter verb, is
sometimes properly omitted; as, 'I heard him say it;' instead of '_to_ say
it.'"--_Productive Gram._, p. 156. See _Murray's Rule_ 12th.

OBS. 11.--Most English grammarians have considered the word _to_ as a part
of the infinitive, a part _of the verb_; and, like the teachers of Latin,
have referred the government of this mood to a preceding verb. But the rule
which they give, is partial, and often inapplicable; and their exceptions
to it, or the heterogeneous parts into which some of them divide it, are
both numerous and puzzling. They teach that at least half of the ten
different parts of speech "_frequently_ govern the infinitive:" if so,
there should be a distinct rule for each; for why should the government of
one part of speech be made an exception to that of an other? and, if this
be done, with respect to the infinitive, why not also with respect to the
objective case? In all instances to which their rule is applicable, the
rule which I have given, amounts to the same thing; and it obviates the
necessity for their numerous exceptions, and the embarrassment arising from
other constructions of the infinitive not noticed in them. Why then is the
simplest solution imaginable still so frequently rejected for so much
complexity and inconsistency? Or how can the more common rule in question
be suitable for a child, if its applicability depends on a relation between
the two verbs, which the preposition _to_ sometimes expresses, and
sometimes does not?

OBS. 12.--All authors admit that in some instance