Shall we in deference to these great authorities allow wert to be the same with wast, and common to the Indicative and Subjunctive Mode? or rather abide by the practice of our best antient writers; the propriety of the language, which requires, as far as may be, distinct forms for different Modes; and the analogy of formation in each Mode; I was, Thou wast; I were, Thou wert? all which conspire to make wert peculiar to the Subjunctive Mode.
[22] Note, that the Imperfect and Perfect Times are here put together. And it is to be observed, that in the Subjunctive Mode, the event being spoken of under a condition, or supposition, or in the form of a wish, and therefore as doubtful and contingent, 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: as, “If he come to-morrow, I may speak to him:” ⸺ “If he should, or would, come to-morrow, I might, would, could, or should, speak to him.” Observe also, that the Auxiliary should in the Imperfect Times is used to express the Present, as well as the Past; as, “It is my desire, that he should [now] come;” as well as, “It was my desire that he should [then] come.” So that in this Mode the precise Time of the Verb is very much determined by the nature and drift of the Sentence.
⸺“Perdition catch my soul
But I do love thee!—”
⸺“This to me
In dreadful secrecy impart they did.”
Shakespear.
“Die he certainly did.”
Sherlock, Vol. 1. Disc. 7.