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.