Again: "The _nations_ of _unlettered men_ so adapted their language to philosophic truth, that all physical and intellectual research can find no essential rule to reject or change."-- _Ibid._, p.91.I have shown that "the nations of unlettered men" are among that portion of the earth's population, upon whose language the genius of grammar has never yet condescended to look down! That people who make no pretensions to learning, can furnish better models or instructions than "the most enlightened scholars," is an opinion which ought not to be disturbed by argument.
11.

I regret to say, that even Dr.Webster, with all his obligations and pretensions to literature, has well-nigh taken ground with Neef and Cardell, as above cited; and has not forborne to throw contempt, even on grammar as such, and on men of letters indiscriminately, by supposing the true principles of every language to be best observed and kept by the illiterate.

What marvel then, that all his multifarious grammars of the English language are despised?
Having suggested that the learned must follow the practice of the populace, because they cannot control it, he adds: "Men of letters may revolt at this suggestion, but if they will attend to the history of our language, they will find the fact to be as here stated.

It is commonly supposed that the tendency of this practice of unlettered men is _to corrupt the language_.

But the fact is directly the reverse.