New-York tribune., 1902-03-25

correct version Of the passage which she has
distorted and robbed of its point. But where is
the prooIreaderE has ne oeSh 1T as 80
sandwich men who carried the letter ii were
handled by Mr.. Punch's sandwich board con-
tractor: The public don't want you ana
don't want you, so hof you go : Lazy ~ goes
on: 1T savOrs Of the cottage, condescensloh'
and the Lady Bountiful when you insist upon
the relationship Of and TO the person you are
addressing" The relationship Of what or OF
whom? The prOofreader would nave relIlarkeo
the amazingly elliptical character Of Lady n.
phrase, and would have drawn the attention OF
the author to the more than merely meta
physical ObsCurity of her style. Let me, 10 De
fair, give the whole sentence: II person mas
got name, II is just as well 10 use II "heH
inquirng after him, and 1t saVorS or the COZ
tage, condescension, and the Lady Bountlfui
when you insist upon the relationship OF ana
to the person you are addressing" One thus
sees. after studying the phrase, mot without
some fever of the brow that the meaning
probably is when you insist upon the relation
ship of the person about whom you are inqulrlng
of and to the person you are addressing.
Here "Of and appears TO me redundant. l
must confess. The proofreader WouId Propaoly
agree with me- for even If this "of and mas
sense (and perhaps it has that sense is evasiVe'
and TO discover it needs ingenuity of which
l cannot boast. Is this the meaning when you
insist upon the relationship tof the person
after whom you are inquirlngI to the person
to whom you are addressing the questionI?"
Perhaps that is correct. The sentence, thus
unfolded is inelegant, but II has a meaning.
Next in this literary paper l find that another
author who contributes to the magazine
adorned by Lady X. is cited as writing about
scott and HaZlet But mere Ine pTOOlIedueA
of the literary paper Gf such a man exists is
to blame. The contributor to the magazine
writes "Hazlitt' like other mOrtals; the maga-
zine is not to blame this time. The literary
paper is at fault.
Perhaps proofreaderS have become scarce
owing the progress of society. The proof
reader must be a who read, write and
spell. He must know a thing or two, must re-
member stock quotations from Browning and
familiar things in Thackeray, must he aware
that Hazltt did not spell his name with an
"e' Moreover. he must have a genius for con-
jectural emendation when author writes
difficult hand. He may carry emendation too
wrote that. If any would know Love, II faut
| sortir de sol. The proofreader, seeing no sense
I in this. altered II TO IF any one would know
Love. Il faut sortir le soir," he must go out in
the evening" which is very true, but not what
/ the philOsophic author meant To say. Perhaps
work, "a plain covered with erratic blocks into
"a plain covered with eTrOtiC blacks" Blocks
are not erratic. he doubtless argued but negroes
are amOrOus. This a brilliant emendatiOn,
better than the German editors emendatiOn of
he SmOte the siedded POlaCk the ice into
He sTnOte his loaded pOleaxe on the ice" But
brilliance is not everything, and l trust that
I have given examples of sane and conservative
conjectural emendation in reading risen" for
men and leave" for have in the obscure
passage cited from a literary contemporary.
But a proofreader with all those accomplish
ments a proofreader who can hazard a plausi-
bic theory Of what the phrases Of Lady x. really
mean is a man who may soar TO being writer
of his own bat or who can teach English Htera-
ture in University Extension lectures. Such
man, knowing his value, deserts. I pre-
sumo, the thankless drudgery of correcting
Payments. But we miss him sorely from his
accustomed place.