Undeniable as is the fact that a book marred by typographical errors and grammatical blemishes is a scandal to the profession, it must be admitted that a careful, steady, and competent reader is indispensable in every printing-office.
It is eminently desirable that a reader should have been previously brought up a compositor. By a practical acquaintance with the mechanical departments of the business, he will be better able to detect those manifold errata which, unperceived by the man of mere learning and science, lie lurking, as it were, in a thousand different forms, in every sheet; and which, if overlooked, justly offend the taste and discernment of all appreciators of correct and beautiful typography.
Some of the principal imperfections which are more easily observed by the man of practical knowledge in the art of printing are the following: viz. imperfect, wrong-founted, and inverted letters, particularly the lower-case n, o, s, and u, as well as p, d, b, and q; awkward and irregular spacing; uneven pages or columns; a false disposition of the reference marks; crookedness in words and lines; bad making-up of matter; erroneous indention, &c. These minutiæ, which are rather imperfections of workmanship than literal errors, are apt to be overlooked and neglected by mere literary readers.
A person of a thoroughly cultivated typographical taste, a quick eye, and a ready mind, though not a compositor, may doubtless be competent to detect those minor deviations from exact workmanship in a proof which the inexperienced and the careless are apt to overlook. But, without these qualifications, no person can be safely intrusted to read a sheet for press, and the labours of the printer are liable to go forth into the world in a manner that will reflect discredit on the employed and give offence to the employer. No form, therefore, ought to be put to press until it has been read and revised by an experienced reader.
A thorough proof-reader, in addition to a general and practical acquaintance with typography, should understand clearly the grammar and idiomatic structure of his mother-tongue, and have, as it were, an encyclopedic knowledge of the names, times, and productions of its writers, as well as an entire familiarity with the Bible especially, and with Shakspeare. He should be, in fact, a living orthographical, biographical, bibliographical, geographical, historical, and scientific dictionary, with some smattering of Hebrew, Greek, Latin, French, Spanish, Italian, and German. Yet all these accomplishments are valueless unless he also possess a keen and quick eye, that, like a hound, can detect an error almost by scent. There are eyes of this sort, that with a cursory glance will catch a solitary error in a page. The world is little aware how greatly many authors are indebted to a competent proof-reader for not only reforming their spelling and punctuation, but for valuable suggestions in regard to style, language, and grammar,—thus rectifying faults which would have rendered their works fair game for the critic.
Although no corrector of the press can strictly be required to do otherwise than to follow his copy,—that is, faithfully to adhere to the original, with all its defects,—yet every one must perceive that he performs a friendly and perhaps a charitable service, by pointing out, in proper time, imperfections and mistakes which have escaped the observation of a quick or voluminous writer. With the spirit, the opinions, the whims of an author, no corrector of the press has any business to interfere. In reprints of old and standard works, no license of alteration ought to be granted to either correctors or editors.
Strict uniformity should always be preserved in the use of capitals, in orthography, and punctuation. Nothing can be more vexatious to an author than to see the words honour, favour, &c. spelt with and without the u. This is a discrepancy which correctors ought sedulously to prevent. The above observations equally apply to the use of capitals to noun-substantives, &c. in one place, and the omission of them in another. However the opinions of authors may differ in these respects, still the system of spelling, &c. must not be varied in the same work.
When an author gives him the option, a proof-reader ought to spell ambiguous words and arrange compounds in a methodical and uniform way; and, to enable the compositors to become acquainted with and to observe his method, he should furnish for their guidance a list of such ambiguous words and compounds.[15]
Such being the qualifications of a reader, we exhibit the process which proof-sheets ought to undergo before the pages are put to press.
When a first proof is pulled, the compositor who imposed the sheet ought to collect and arrange the copy, and deliver both to the reader, who, after folding the sheet to prove the accuracy of its imposition, carefully examines the signatures, head-lines, and paging. He then calls his reading-boy, to read the copy aloud to him. This boy should be able to read with ease and distinctness any copy put into his hands. The eye of the reader should not follow, but rather precede, the voice of the boy: accustomed to this mode, he will be able to anticipate every single word in the copy; and, should a word or sentence happen to be missing in the proof, his attention will the more sensibly be arrested by it when he hears it pronounced by his reading-boy. He ought to be careful lest his eyes advance too far before the words of the boy; because, in his attention to the author’s meaning, he will be apt to read words in the proof which do not actually appear there, and the accuracy of the reading-boy will but tend to confirm him in the mistake.