_to be_, understood, and put by apposition with _he_, according to
RULE 21, and NOTE. _Which_, the relative part, is in the obj. case
after _to be_ expressed, and put by apposition with _him_, according
to the same RULE. _Man_ is in the obj. case, put by apposition with
_which_: RULE 7. The latter part of the sentence may be _literally_
rendered thus: He plainly appears to have proved _to be that base
character which_ the prophet foresaw him to be, viz. a _man_ of
violence, cruelty, and blood. The antecedent part of the first
_what_, in the next sentence, is governed by _hides_; and _which_,
the relative part, is governed by _know_ understood. The antecedent
part of the second _what_, is governed by _hides_ understood, and
the relative part is governed by _know_ expressed.

4. The first _he_, in the seventh example, is, in the opinion of
some, nom. to _can hear_ understood; but Mr. N.R. Smith, a
distinguished and acute grammarian, suggests the propriety of
rendering the sentence thus; "He that formed the ear, _formed it to
hear_; can he not hear?" The first _he_, in the last example, is
redundant; yet the construction is sometimes admissible, for the
expression is more forcible than it would be to say, "Let him hear
who hath ears to hear;" and if we adopt the ingenious method of Mr.
Smith, the sentence is grammatical, and may be rendered thus; "He
that hath ears, _hath ears_ to hear; let him hear."

EXERCISES IN PARSING.
_Idioms, anomalies, and intricacies_.

1. "The wall is three _feet_ high."
2. "His son is eight _years_ old."
3. "My knife is worth a _shilling_."