History of G. Britain, vol. 1. p. 250.
In periods of this kind, it appears more neat to express the past time by the participle passive, thus:
The nobility having been seized with the general discontent, unwarily threw themselves, &c. [or], The nobility who had been seized, &c. unwarily threw themselves, &c.
So much upon conjunction and disjunction in general. I proceed to apply the rule to comparisons in particular. Where a resemblance betwixt two objects is described, the writer ought to study a resemblance betwixt the two members that express these objects. For it makes the resemblance the more entire to find it extended even to the words. To illustrate this rule, I shall give various examples of deviations from it. I begin with the words that express the resemblance.
I have observed of late, the style of some great ministers very much to exceed that of any other productions.
Letter to the Lord High Treasurer. Swift.
This, instead of studying the resemblance of words in a period that expresses a comparison, is going out of one’s road to avoid it. Instead of productions which resemble not ministers great or small, the proper word is writers or authors.
If men of eminence are exposed to censure on the one hand, they are as much liable to flattery on the other. If they receive reproaches which are not due to them, they likewise receive praises which they do not deserve.
Spectator.
Here the subject plainly demands uniformity in expression instead of variety; and therefore it is submitted whether the period would not do better in the following manner: