PRINTERS’ ERRORS.

Globe, Volume XXIII, Issue 2202, 17 March 1881, Page 3

PRINTERS’ ERRORS.

There is a tradition current among printers to the effect that each "proof" o£ each column of the London" Times ” posses through three hands those of a first, second, and third “ reader,” _tl a last named being a specially qualified University man, the terras of whose engagement are a salary of £IOOO a year, with the proviso that for every “ literal ” (wrong or misplaced letter) he overlooks, be is liable to a fino of three guineas. Whether this be the case or not every reader of the “ Thunderer” knows that suoh errors are exceedingly rare—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, varyi.ig in gravity from a " turned letter ” to egregious mis spelling. What makes it more remorkublo is that the blunders escaped correction in tho weekly edition, the one most generally circulated in the colonies. There must have been a screw loose somewhere on tho occasion of that “ dirty proof ’ escaping the Argus eyes of readers and subeditors. Had the thing occurred to any other Eaper it would scarcely have called for notice, ut in tho case of the one that has so long claimed something like typographical infallibility, it is quite justifiable. « all-round men ” on the colonial press, who are sometimes twitted by lynx eyed subscribers for a few misprints may take heart of grace, and when again hauled over the coals point triumphantly to tho “ Times” issue of the 14th January, 1831, if not in justification, at least in proof that "mistakes do sometimes occur even in tho best regulated 'typo ’ families.”—“ Bonfh)nnd News.”