Sentence Order - April 3 1812 Letter by James Monroe

Solution 1:

1. 18th century style demanded a much freer use of commas than we tolerate today. In particular, bracketing a relative clause with commas did not necessarily imply as it does now that the clause is non-restrictive. If the relative clause is placed, set off with a comma, at the end of the sentence the scope of the relative clause is ambiguous: the relative clause may be taken to modify the entire preceding clause. So Madison interrupts the NP^†its course towards us with the relative clause in order to insure that the relative clause is understood to modify the noun. We might write this today as:

   The delay of the Hornet can only be explained on the reproachful supposition that the French government, instead of taking towards us a course which should be determined solely by considerations of justice, is waiting to see how matters turn out in London.

2. 18th century writers still wrote in a context in which public oratory was dominant, particularly in political matters. Consequently, Madison places his most important phrase, touching the consequences of refusal, right at the end, where it may receive climactic emphasis instead of trailing off into to a refusal of them. If you read this with your ear instead of your eye you can hear his minatory descent into the bottom register of his voice.

^†An NP is a phrase which acts, in its entirety, as a nominal sentence constituent. It is an initialism derived from noun phrase, but it is spoken ‘en pee’, because it is not necessarily what is usually meant by noun phrase, videlicet, a phrase headed by a noun. An NP need not be headed by a noun and in fact may not even contain a noun: in the sentence To speak more plainly would be dangerous, for instance, To speak more plainly is an NP.