ter _before_ he arrived." Hiley says, "The
_Past-Perfect_ expresses an action or event which _was past before_ some
_other past action or event_ mentioned in the sentence, _and to which_ it
refers; as, I _had finished_ my lessons _before_ he came." With this, Wells
appears to concur, his example being similar. It seems to me, that these
last two definitions, and their example too, are bad; because by the help
of _before_ or _after_, "_the past before the past_" _may_ be clearly
expressed by the _simple past tense_: as, "I _finished_ my letter _before_
he _arrived_."--"I _finished_ my lessons _before_ he _came_." "He _arrived_
soon _after_ I _finished_ the letter."--"Soon _after_ it _was completed_,
he _came in_."

[64] Samuel Kirkham, whose grammar is briefly described in the third
chapter of this introduction, boldly lays the blame of all his philological
faults, upon our noble _language itself_; and even conceives, that a
well-written and faultless grammar cannot be a good one, because it will
not accord with that reasonless jumble which he takes every existing
language to be! How diligently he laboured to perfect his work, and with
what zeal for truth and accuracy, may be guessed from the following
citation: "The truth is, after all _which_ can be done to render the
definitions and rules of grammar comprehensive and accurate, they will
still be found, when critically examined by men of learning and science,
_more_ or _less_ exceptionable. _These exceptions and imperfections_ are
the unavoidable consequence of the _imperfections of the language_.
Language as well as every thing else _of human invention_, will always be
_imperfect_. Consequently, a perfect system of grammatical principles,
_would not suit it_. A perfect grammar will not be produced, until some
perfect being writes it for a perfect language; and a perfect language will
not be constructed, until _some super-human agency_ is employed in its
production. All grammatical principles and systems which are not _perfect_
are _exceptionable_."--_Kirkham's Grammar_, p. 66. The unplausible
sophistry of these strange remarks, and the palliation they afford to the
multitudinous defects of the book which contains them, may be left, without
further comment, to the judgement of the reader.

[65] The phrase _complex ideas_, or _compound ideas_, has been used for the
notions which we have of things consisting of different parts, or having
various properties, so as to embr