New-York tribune., 1920-01-10
Are Pigs Who?

The conflict between poet and
grammarian is one Of those many
wars-just how many there are is
now plain to all-that never end.
Not for nothing were John. Milton
and William Shakespeare wabbly ON
the "Who VS.. Whom question. Of
such free and easy grammar is all
great imaginative writing; and
against the grammarians stand by
instinct and to the death not only
poets but all who are of an imagi-
native and bestirring mind.
Naturally, therefore, we find Wal
lace's Farmer, organ Of Iowa and
the sacred animal Of that great
state, arising to protest against that
old straitjacket Of the grammars
which would restrict the relative
"who" to persons and the relative
(which" to beasts and inanimate OBJ
jects. Says this outspoken upholder
Of the free tongue:
"Now, it should be plain to every
right thinking person that to refer
to that wonderful COW Tillie Acar-
ira, for example, as Tiliie Alca-tra,
which made the remarkable record
is violation of courtesy and good
taste to shocking degree. Any cow
that has made such record is en-
titled to be spoken of as a who and
not as which Who would refer to
Perfection Fairfax as which in a
Hereford gathering, and survive to
tell the tale?
Breasts and inanimate objects, in
deedi The persons who devised that
grouping too obviously never had the
pleasure of friendly relationship
with a horse or COW. The use of
which In speaking Of the scrubs and
razorbacks Of the olden time may
perhaps have been excusable, but
that time is now long since. Well
be hanged if we will be forced to
speak Of boar that sells for SEE, 900
as a which, and the grammarians
bc hanged alsol"
A reason for this nonsensical rule
classifying beasts with washing ma
chimes, pianos and tin pans is sug-
gested. Our grammarians "have
been born, lived and dried up and
blown away in towns" Hence their
|narrowness Of vision, it is urged, and
very likely. But we think something
less than justice is done to usage and
even to the grammarians in the
Farmers attack. The rule is often
taught strictly! But most gram
mars concede a large option in
the matter; and usage is as free as
Tillie Alcartra's tail in fly-time. The
distinction is wholly modern in
origin, for one thing, as a Shake
speare concordance will demon
strate:
"Like a drop Of water 20,
Who, falling there to And his fell
low" Comedy Of Errors.
"A brave vessel,
Who had, no doubt, some noble crea-
ture in her." The Tempest.
Nothing so certain as your anchors,
who do their best Office"
"A Winters Tale.
Or, if it must be ancestresses Of
the regal Tillie, here is Gilbert
White, in "The Natural History Of
|Selborne," writing as recently as
1888:
"If strange dogs como by .
she Ia doe] returns to the cows,
who, with fierce lowings and mcnac-
ing horns, drive the assailants quite
out Of the pasture"
And even to-day, since the dis
tinction was invented, not only per-
sonified objects, but the dog, your
friend, and the ship you love, and
the motor car that has taken you
through a slough, are all "who" if
your heart tells you so. That was
and is and ever shall be the way Of
English, let the grammarians rule
as they will. Shall a pig be admit
ted to this sacred height? We own
to being not altogether convinced of
the $4,000 price tag which Wal
lace's Farmer cites. But we own
also to having only casual acquaint-
ance with the pig-save after the
packing plant has separated him
from his soul. What is good enough
for Des Moines on this point ought
to be good enough for the country,
we gladly concede.