But to go on according to Prescript.
2. Whether or no are our 24 Letters[A] sufficient to spell all the words of our English Tongue.
3. Whether or no if they be sufficient to spell all words us’d for English in our books, they be not sufficient to spell all Languages; if England be like Rome, Conquering all Nations, took in the Idola[t]ry of all Laws, so England being Conquer’d by all, hath not got the rubish of all Languages.
4. Whether or no we make good and proper use of those Letters we have.
5. Whether the old use and custom of the Letters for an hundred Years or more, be sufficient for justifying the mispelling most words, us’d to this day, or whether we had not better mend late than never.
Hereupon we argue. First, It is granted that we have not yet proper English for all words in other Languages, nor Letters sufficient to express our own; as Authors from time to time do justifie, who have bin so little taken notice of by the publick (though there is some small amendment made, that can scarce be perceiv’d). The latter Authors mentioning the former, all Men of no small Note.
Secondly, There was as good reason for amendment an Hundred Years ago, as there is now, and will be as good reason an Hundred years hence to delay the amendment, as their is now; not altering a tittle of the known Pronounciation of the words, but only of the spelling. That the Letters may be of good use, and we need not to Read all by authority, as the very Learned Men are forc’d to do in yet unknown words still; so little assistance do the Letters yield them, that they the more might pitty young beginners. Which thing hath made a many Foreigners (and no marvel at all) of all the Neighbouring Nations to throw away their Books and Study of English, as their English Grammars, as well as our own, do sufficiently declare.
Thus to maintain a thing always unreasonable, will always be (as it hath bin) a thing unreasonable and after this rate an error everlasting.
But it is answer’d, that many words be thus Spell’d to shew their derivations. That need not be objected, when Scholars can find out the Etymologyes, when scarce one Letter remains of their Original, more than James from Jacob, Thaddæus and Lebbæus, from Jude the honest, or Judas, not Iscareat, and Didymus from Thomas, Giles, Ægidius. As for changing the Letters, I shall hope they will put the devines in; I fear not that they can put the Lawyers out.
What advantage or disadvantage it may be to Booksellers or Printers, as none of my business, I leave to their consideration.