ol. i, p. 647.
OBS. 2.--I do not deny that great respect is due to the authority of our lexicographers, or that great improvement was made in the orthography of our language when Dr. Johnson put his hand to the work. But sometimes one man's authority may offset an other's; and he that is inconsistent with himself, destroys his own: for, surely, his example cannot be paramount to his principles. Much has been idly said, both for and against the adoption of Johnson's Dictionary, or Webster's, as the criterion of what is right or wrong in spelling; but it would seem that no one man's learning is sufficiently extensive, or his memory sufficiently accurate, to be solely relied on to furnish a standard by which we may in all cases be governed. Johnson was generally right; but, like other men, he was sometimes wrong. He erred sometimes in his principles, or in their application; as when he adopted the k in such words as rhetorick, and demoniack; or when he inserted the u in such words as governour, warriour, superiour. Neither of these modes of spelling was ever generally adopted, in any thing like the number of words to which he applied them; or ever will be; though some indiscreet compilers are still zealously endeavouring to impose them upon the public, as the true way of spelling. He also erred sometimes by accident, or oversight; as when he spelled thus: "recall and miscal, inthrall and bethral, windfall and downfal, laystall and thumbstal, waterfall and overfal, molehill and dunghil, windmill and twibil, uphill and downhil." This occasional excision of the letter l is reprehensible, because it is contrary to general analogy, and because both letters are necessary to preserve the sound, and show the derivation of the compound. Walker censures it as a "ridiculous irregularity," and lays the blame of it on the "printers," and yet does not venture to correct it! See Johnson's Dictionary, first American edition, quarto; Walker's Pronouncing Dictionary, under the word Dunghil; and his Rhyming Dictionary, Introd., p. xv.
OBS. 3.--"Dr. Johnson's Dictionary" has been represented by some as having "nearly fixed the external form of our language." But Murray, who quotes this from Dr. Nares, admits, at the same time, that, "The orthography of a great number of English words, is far from being uniform, even amongst writers of distinction."--Gram., p. 25. And, after commending this work of Johnson's, as A STANDARD, from which, "it is earnestly to be hoped, that no author will henceforth, on light grounds, be tempted to innovate," he adds, "This Dictionary, however, contains some orthographical inconsistencies which ought to be rectified: such as, immovable, moveable; chastely, chastness; fertileness, fertily; sliness, slyly; fearlessly, fearlesness; needlessness, needlesly."--Ib. In respect to the final ck and our, he also intentionally departs from THE STANDARD which he thus commends; preferring, in that, the authority of Walker's Rhyming Dictionary, from which he borrowed his rules for spelling. For, against the use of k at the end of words from the learned languages, and against the u in many words in which Johnson used it, we have the authority, not only of general usage now, but of many grammarians who were contemporary with Johnson, and of more than a dozen lexicographers, ancient or modern, among whom is Walker himself. In this, therefore, Murray's practice is right, and his commended standard dictionary, wrong.
OBS. 4.--Of words ending in or or our, we have about three hundred and twenty; of which not more than forty can now with any propriety be written with the latter termination. Aiming to write according to the best usage of the present day, I insert the u in so many of these words as now seem most familiar to the eye when so written; but I have no partiality for any letters that can well be spared; and if this book should ever, by any good fortune, happen to be reprinted, after honour, labour, favour, behaviour, and endeavour, shall have become as unfashionable as authour, errour, terrour, and emperour, are now, let the proof-reader strike out the useless letter not only from these words, but from all others which shall bear an equally antiquated appearance.
OBS. 5.--I have suggested the above-mentioned imperfections in Dr. Johnson's orthography, merely to justify the liberty which I take of spelling otherwise; and not with any view to give a preference to that of Dr. Webster, who is now contending for the honour of having furnished a more correct standard. For the latter author, though right in some things in which the former was wrong, is, on the whole, still more erroneous and inconsistent. In his various attempts at reformation in our orthography, he has spelled many hundreds of words in such a variety of ways, that he knows not at last which of them is right, and which are wrong. But in respect to definitions, he has done good service to our literature; nor have his critics been sufficiently just respecting what they call his "innovations." See Cobb's Critical Review of the Orthography of Webster. To omit the k from such words as publick, or the u from such as superiour, is certainly no innovation; it is but ignorance that censures the general practice, under that name. The advocates for Johnson and opponents of Webster, who are now so zealously stickling for the k and the u in these cases, ought to know that they are contending for what was obsolete, or obsolescent, when Dr. Johnson was a boy.
OBS. 6.--I have before observed that some of the grammarians who were contemporary with Johnson, did not adopt his practice respecting the k or the u, in publick, critick, errour, superiour, &c. And indeed I am not sure there were any who did. Dr. Johnson was born in 1709, and he died in 1784. But Brightland's Grammar, which was written during the reign of Queen Anne, who died in 1714, in treating of the letter C, says, "If in any Word the harder Sound precedes (e), (i), or (y), (k) is either added or put in its Place; as, Skill, Skin, Publick: And tho' the additional (k) in the foregoing Word be an old Way of Spelling, yet it is now very justly left off, as being a superfluous Letter; for (c) at the End is always hard."--Seventh Edition, Lond., 1746, p. 37.
OBS. 7.--The three grammars of Ash, Priestley, and Lowth, all appeared, in their first editions, about one time; all, if I mistake not, in the year 1763; and none of these learned doctors, it
