The democrat. [volume] (Weston, W. Va.) 1868-1874, 1871-04-03
The TormentS of Typography.

A case recently tried in the Supreme
Court Of New Hampshire brought to a
legal test the popular proverb that
printers can read any thing" and
forcibly illustrated the cruelty of authors
who intlict their staircase wit upon the
the long-sufferiug composltor.
An eminent lawyer, who had been on
the bench, prepared digest OF the New
Hampshire Reports, for the printing OF
which he made u contract with firm
acknowledged to be the best typograph-
ers in the State, who agreed TO do the
work for so much a printed page. 1t was
distinctly specified that the copy must be
very good, as the abundance of proper
names, technical terms, Authorizations,
figures, etc, would make it impossible
for the compositor to produce fair proof
unless the copy were distinct and leSible
in every separate word. 1t was even
stipulated that the manuscript must no,
be in the authors hand, rs these printers
had had experience with il, and knew it
to be unusually bad. II was also told
him, in letter which was produced in
evidence on trial, that any alterations he
should make, after the type was set,
would be very costly. The copy pre-
sented for the first sixteen pages was in
a clerks hand, and was pronounced sat
isfactory, and the work OF composition
was begun. After that, the copy fur
nished was partly in the authors own
hand, partly in the clerks partly printed
and partly written, pasted together in
irregular shapes, interlined, and edge
written. The printers made complaint
to the author, but kept their compositors
at work on whatever copy was furnished.
1t was in evidence that the compositors
had spent much time in consultations as
to the probable Specification OF illegible
passages, and had even, in few cases,
been obliged to leave the Office and seek
out lawyer, to read their copy to them
When the proofs were returned. they
had been freely marked ut variance with
the copy. New matter was added in
many places. old matter marked ont, and
all sorts Of lamentations required. An
account was kept of the time spent in
correcting these proofs, and 4 charge was
made for it at the usual rate, fifty cents
an hour. \ charge was also made for
the time spent in deciphering illegible
copy These charges, which amounted
to several hundred dollars, the author
refused to pay. Hence the suit. He
refused also to pay full rates for the
pages that had hut little matter on them.
or to pay any thing for the blank page
backing the title-page. A large mass of
the copy was brought in as evidence,
and submitted to the inspection of Judge
and jury. The plaintiffs offered to bring
in n page Of the matter III type, with the
marked proof, and have n compositor go
through the process of correcting it be-
fore the jury, that of single new word
after the type Is set But the court
ruled it out, rs unnecessary. The main
reliance of the plaintiffs was upon usage
and equity. The plea of the defence
was that, if the copy offered was not
such rs the contract specified, the remedy
Of the plaintiffs was in refusing to accept
it that, by accepting it and working
from it, they admitted its fairness. The
jury gave verdict for the plaintiffs,
allowing the propriety of all the charges
in the bill. but reducing the amounts
charged for dcciphering copy and cor
recting authors proofs.