How to use "and"

Mister Micawber wrote:

Semicolon is used, besides else, to separate two sentences that are closely related complex items in the list This information is right, Aperisic; however, in your-- I was in the house number 21, 32 and 45; and the garages, patios and windows were all destroyed by the earthquake. -- semicolons should not used with conjunctions; they are used instead of conjunctions.  The following is OK: I was in house numbers 21, 32 and 45; the garages, patios and windows were all destroyed by the earthquake. The following is wrong because-- unless it is a list with internal commas-- an independent clause must be on each side of the semicolon: Gold, silver and platinum coins; and rings, bracelets and brooches made of these materials must pass through the customs. The above is not a list (which requires at least 3 items-- you have only two, A and B below), so it needs to read: (A) Gold, silver and platinum coins and (B) rings, bracelets and brooches made of these materials must pass through the customs. But-- as we are all trying to accomplish-- the awkward and after coins can be replaced (according to my perception, at least) by as well as.  I think there are some other good suggestions earlier in the thread as well.

I know what you want to say and I agree, but I repeat that there is possibly no other way to separate two and's in case where, for some reason, they appear one after another.

In this case

I was in the house number 21, 32 and 45; and the garages, patios and windows were all destroyed by the earthquake.

marked and has the same function as this and

I was in the house, and I found nobody there.

not as in this one

I was in the house and in the cellar, but I found nobody there.

Now, you probably think why anyone would use two successive and's, if you can use something else. I don't know, I just think what I would do if someone would insist on it, nothing else. (Maybe in a poem...)

At first when I read the initial question, I understood literally that we must connect those items with successive and's and I gave the answer, then I said what to do if two and's are changed as you all did. And whatever anyone of you say, I will not change my claim.

The semicolon is possible in this situation, if you really don't want to give up having two consecutive and's (and I agree that what you get with a semicolon is clumsy; that is why I gave the other options), but as with a semicolon always is, you should rethink whether a semicolon is really the final resort you can pull out for your sentence.

If you do not consider a semicolon for the situation like this one in the initial question, then you will probably never use a semicolon. A semicolon, in essence, is a grammatical element, but far more a stylistic one.

And that is my final point (OK, with two sample lines that follow it )

Hi,

I thought the earlier post was your final (one)?

Best wishes, Clive

Hi,

The original query related to "Cadmium, mercury, and asbestos, and materials, chemicals, and equipment which contain them shall not be used."

I'd like to suggest forcefully to anyone still following this thread that rewording is the commonest, clearest and best way to add clarity to the above. I don't recommend any attempt to use semi-colons. Various reworded examples have already been offered.

Semi-colons can be particularly problematic in speech.Two sentences rather than one would be quite common and acceptable. eg  "Cadmium, mercury, and asbestos shall not be used. Materials, chemicals, and equipment which contain them shall not be used, either."

Best wishes, Clive