_"Ought" and "Aught."_--I regret to observe that _ought_ is gradually
supplanting _aught_ in our language, where the meaning intended to be
conveyed is "anything." Todd's _Johnson_ gives authorities, but may they
not be errors of the press? I am aware that use has substituted _nought_
for _naught_ in the sense of "not anything", the latter now expressing only
what is "bad," and convenience may justify that change, _nought_ being not
otherwise used. Let me add that I am the more {420} in fear for our old
servant _aught_, who surely has done _nought_ worthy of excommunication,
from observing that such a writer as the Rev. Chevenix Trench has
substituted _ought_ for _aught_ to express "anything." If convenience is
allowed to justify our having _nought_ and _naught_, it surely claims that
we should keep _aught_ and _ought_ each for its appropriate signification
in writing, impossible as it is to distinguish one from the other in
speech.
[Upsilon].
Nilbud.
_Walton._--The following note is written on the fly-leaf at the end of
Hieron's _Sermons_, 1620:
"Mr. Gillamour.--I pray you be entreated to lend my wife what silver
you think fittest upon this or other bookes to supplie our present
wants, soe as I may have them againe when I restore it to you; you
shall doo mee a greate curtesie, and I shall be very thankfull to you.
Yours to his power to be co[=m]anded,
JOHS' WALTON, Cler."
I have no information as to either party, and no date is affixed to the
request.