UNCERTAIN ETYMOLOGIES—"LEADER."
(Vol. vi., p. 588.)
I must differ from your correspondent C., in believing that the "N. & Q." have effected much good service to etymology. Even the exposure of error, and the showing up of crotchets, is of no inconsiderable use. I beg to submit that C. himself (unless there are other Richmonds in the field) has done good service in this way. See Grummett, Slang Phrases, Martinet, Cockade, Romane, Covey, Bummaree, &c.
I do not, indeed, give implicit faith to his Steyne, and some more. He, however, would be a rash man who should write or help to write a Dictionary of the English language (a desideratum at present) without turning over the indices of the "N. & Q." Even in the first volume, the discussions on Pokership, Daysman, News, and a great many others, seem to me at least valuable contributions to general knowledge on etymology.
As to my remark (Vol. vi., p. 462.) about the derivation of leader, C. has, perhaps excusably, for the sake of the pun, done me injustice. I hazarded it on the authority of one who has been in the trade, and, as I believe, in the cuicunque perito. I beg to inclose his own account. He says:
"It is a fact, that when editorial articles are sent to the printer, written directions are generally sent with them denoting what type is to be used: thus, brevier leads, or bourgeois leads, signifying that the articles are to be set in brevier or bourgeois type with lead strips between the lines, to keep them further asunder. It is also a fact, that such articles are denominated in the printing-office 'leaded articles'—hence, leaders."
I submit if this does not justify my Note. I grant, however, many of those articles are entitled also to be called leaden, as C. will have it.
I do not think, however, that in tracing recent words, we should not give possible as well as certain origins. Many words, if not a double, have at least several putative origins.
Let me subscribe myself—seu male seu bene—
Nota.
P. S.—I would like to suggest that this origin of the term "leading article" is the most favourable to the modesty of any single writer for the Press, who should hardly pretend to lead public opinion.