"If I draw a catgut or any other cord to a great length between my fingers, I will make it smaller than it was before," &c.—— Goldsmith's Survey of Experimental Philosophy, book 2. chap. 2.
In the middle and southern states of America, this error is frequent, both in writing and conversation.
"Let us suppose the charter repealed and the bank annihilated; will we be better situated?"——Argument against repealing the charter of the Bank of North America.
This is very incorrect; there is hardly a possible case, in which will can be properly employed to ask a question in the first person.
"As soon as the diploma is made out, I will have the honor to transmit it to you."——Letter to Count Rochambeau.
Is not this promising to have the honor of a communication, an engagement which delicacy forbids? It is impossible for a foreigner to have a just idea of the absurdity of using will in this manner; but a correct English ear revolts at the practice.
Dr. Priestley observes very justly, that the form of the auxiliaries, shall, will, which is generally conditional, viz. should and would, is elegantly used to express a slight assertion, with modest diffidence.
"The royal power, it should seem, might be intrusted in their hands."——Hume's History, vol. 3. p. 383.
We say also, "I would not choose any." In these cases, the verbs are not conditional; they modestly declare a fact, and therefore properly belong to the indicative mode. But in the following passage, should is improperly employed:
"In judging only from the nature of things, and without the surer aid of divine revelation, one should be apt to embrace the opinion of Diodorus Siculus," &c.—— Warburton's Divine Legation, vol. 2. p. 81.