"Whether our conduct be inspected, and we are under a righteous government, or under no government at all."——Priestley's Pref. to Let. to a Phil. Unb.
What a confusion of modes! or rather of tenses!
"Tho THOU be long, in the first part of the verse," says Sheridan, in the passage just quoted; yet soon after uses the indicative in a phrase precisely similar; "And tho it is impossible to prolong the sound of this word." Can this great critic give a reason for this change of modes? Such examples serve to show at least the necessity of studying our language with more attention, than even many eminent scholars are willing to bestow.
It has been remarked by Lowth, and many other writers on this subject, that "the verb itself in the present, and the auxiliary both of the present and past imperfect times, often carry with them somewhat of a future sense."[112] Thus, if he come tomorrow, if he should or would come tomorrow, carry somewhat of a future sense. The writer should have gone farther, and said that these expressions are in future time; for they form the English future, and belong to no other tense. This would have been the truth, and have prevented the numberless errors which have proceeded from his arranging them in the present tense of the subjunctive. Let us attend to the following passages.
"This can never happen till patriotism flourish more in Britain."—Home's Sketches, book 2. s. 9.
"Pray heaven, he prove so, when you come to him."——Two Gent. of Verona, act 2. s. 10.
"But if thou linger in my territories."——Same, act 3. s. 2.
"Lest, growing ruinous, the building fall."——Same, act 5. s. 6.
"If the second be pronounced thus, the verse will be degraded into hobbling prose."——Sheridan's Art of Reading.
It is needless to multiply similar passages; the same use of the verb, without the personal termination, occurs in almost every page of our best writings, and it is perfectly correct.