BAD HAND-WRITING.

Dunstan Times, Issue 769, 12 January 1877, Page 3

BAD HAND-WRITING.

—o— Ono of the most useful accomplishments a man can possess is to lie aWe to write in a plan, legible way, an that other people maybe able to read easily what ho writes. I'nfortunately there are many people who pay but little regard to the matter. There are some who would not be guilty of a breach of conventional politeness, but who do not scruple to wri'e in such a miserably bad band that what they say can only with the greatest difficulty ho deciphered. They would not bo ao impolite as to hoop you waiting for dinner—oh dear, no—but they knowingly and persistently write so wretchedly Ihkt they oblige others to waste time in getting at their meaning. Ask them why they do so, and they avill answer that they have got into tho habit of writing in that fashion, or that they have so much to do that they arc obliged to write quickly, and therefore illegibly. They, in fact, write quickly in order to save their own time at the expense of tho time of others. There are many men who have contracted this pernicious habit. They write as if their interests and convenience only are worthy of attention, They seem to lie oblivions of the fact that the convenience of editors and compositors is also worthy of consideration. Take an illustration. An editor receives a

manuscript which ho is twice as long as he should ho in reading, mid many words, and oven sentences, ho cannot make out at all. Wliy should an editor’s time bo wasted in this way ? But the evil does not end there. The manuscript is sent to the compositors, who are frequently the most patient and painstaking men in the world, or they would strike ton times more frequently than they do. The manuscript is taken in hand and proceeded with. In a few minutes there is a pause over a word, and ;lien a fall storr. At last the word is deciphered, either by the compositor or some fellow-compositor near by, or a blank'is left for the “reader” to fill up. The latter, having an experienced eye, after a little hesitation, manages to find out what the word or scrawl indicates, or substitutes another word in its place, or perhaps conics to the editor, with a despairing look, to ask what the author means. This all consumes time—time which is as valuable to the editor or sub-editor, the compositor and reader, as the time of the author is to him, and to our thinking it is downright impolite, to say the least of it, for certain literary men, and women too, to write in such a manner as to involve the unnecessary consumption of other people’s time. What may lie gain to them is loss to others. But writers arc not always gainers by -slovenly writing. Very frequently a letter or an article is passed-by on account' of the difficulty of reading it. We have dropped many a manuscript into our capacious wasce-paper basket which might have contained the brightest thoughts, because the writer was so thoughtless, so careless, or so impolite as to unnecessarily trespass on our time and patience by bis bad writing. If editors adopted a more rigid rule in this matter, and acted on it, they would save much valuable time and prevent many provoking mistakes.