"While one with moderate haste might tell a hundred,"

should substitute--

"While one with modern haste might tell a hundred."

And yet such substitution of one word for another is a constant anxiety to
every editor. Some may consider that a competent editor would detect such a
gross blunder. Unfortunately, the more familiar the mind is with the
correct reading, the more likely is such an error to escape the eye. Your
correspondent who did me the favour to point out this blunder will, I
trust, receive this explanation, as also your other readers, in a candid
spirit. The error has run through three editions, from the circumstance
that the first edition furnished the copy for the subsequent ones. The
passage in question was not a doubtful text, and therefore required no
special editorial attention. The typographical blunder is, however, an
illustration of the difficulties which beset the editors of our old
dramatists especially. Had the word _modern_ occurred in an early edition
of Shakspeare, it would have perplexed very commentator; but few would have
ventured to substitute the correct word, _moderate_. The difficulty lies in
finding the just mean between timidity and rashness. With regard to
typographical errors, the obvious ones naturally supply their own
correction; but in the instance before us, as in many others, it is not
easy to detect the substitution, and the blunder is perpetuated. If a
compositor puts _one_ for _won_--a very common blunder--the context will
show that the ear has misled the eye; but if he change an epithet in a
well-known passage, the first syllable of the right and the wrong words
being the same, and the violation of the propriety not very startling, the
best diligence may pass over the mistake. It must not be forgotten that