PRINTERS' ERRORS.

Daily Telegraph (Napier), Issue 3039, 23 March 1881, Page 4

PRINTERS' ERRORS.

There is a tradition among printers to the effect that each " proof " of each column of the London Times passes through three hands —those of a first, second, and third " reader," the last named being a specially qualified University man, the terms of whose engagement are a salary of £1000 a year, ■with the proviso that for every " literal" (wrong or misplaced letter) he overlooks, he is liable to a fine of three guineas. Whether this be the case or not every reader of the Thunderer knows that such errors are exceedingly rave—that looking for them is much like looking for the proverbial needle in a haystack." "Every rule has its exception," and this is once more proved by the occurrence —in rather less than a column of Parliamentary matter published on the 14th January last—of no less than forty-five mistakes, varying m gravity from a " turned letter" to egregions misspelling. What makes it more remarkable is that the blunders escaped correction in the weekly edition, the one most generally circulated in the colonies. There must have been a screw loose somewhere on the occasion of that "dirty proof " escaping the Argus eyes of readers and sub-editors. Had the thing occurred to any other paper it would scarcely have called for notice, but in the case of the one that has so long claimed something like typographical infallibility, it is quite unjustifiable. Hard-worked " allround men" on the colonial press, who_ are sometimes twitted by lynx eyed subscribers for a few misprints may take heart of grace, and when aaain hauled over the coals point triumphantly to the Times issue of the 14th January, 1881, if not in justification, at least in proof that " mistakes do sometimes occur even in the best regulated 'typo' families."—Southland News.