self in favour of a new translation of the whole Bible. This was accordingly determined on, and the King soon after wrote to Bishop Bancroft to announce that he had appointed fifty-four learned men to translate the Bible; and forasmuch as divers of them had no preferment, his Majesty proceeded to enjoin on the Bishop and the other prelates "that whenever a living of twenty pounds per annum was vacant, they should inform the King thereof, to the intent that he might commend one of the said translators to hold it, as his reward for his service in the translation." Beyond this generous consignment of the translators to the liberality of others for their recompense, James, as might have been expected, took no further interest in that great work with which, from that day to this, his name has been inseparably connected. Although in the King's letter to Bancroft he mentions fifty-four as the number of those to whom the new version was entrusted, yet in consequence of seven of them having either died or declined the responsibility, the actual number of persons who engaged in the work was only forty-seven, divided into six companies, two to meet at Westminster, two at Oxford, and two at Cambridge. These six companies included amongst them men to whose competency for the discharge of their sacred trust, both on the score of learning and piety, we have ample and most conclusive testimony, while the instructions furnished by the bishops for the execution of their task sufficiently attest the care and wisdom with which the plan was matured, and the admirable means adopted to

secure, as far as possible, perfect accuracy and success. Of these companies, the first, which consisted of ten persons, met at Westminster, and to them was entrusted for translation the Pentateuch, with the other historical books, as far as 2nd Kings. The second company, consisting of eight members, met at Cambridge, and undertook the translation of from 1st Chronicles to the Song of Solomon inclusive. Over this department presided Dr. Lively, Regius Professor of Divinity at Cambridge, a man of profound learning and great scholarship. The third company assembled at Oxford, under the direction of the Regius Professor of Hebrew; it consisted of seven members, who were to translate the rest of the Old Testament, from Isaiah to Malachi inclusive. The fourth company, also convened at Oxford, consisted of eight persons, who had the Four Gospels, Acts of Apostles, and Revelation of St. John entrusted to them. To the fifth company, which met at Westminster, and numbered seven persons, were committed the Epistles; and, finally, the sixth party, who sat at Cambridge, and consisted of seven members also, undertook as their portion to translate the Apocrypha. Such was the distribution of the various persons engaged in the work, with the portions of the task severally assigned to them.

And now let me say a word as to the way in which the work, thus distributed, was carried on by those to whom it had been entrusted; for thus you will perceive at once the vast amount of labour involved, and the wise precautions taken to ensure in every particular accuracy of

expression and fidelity of translation.

The order of

procedure, according to the instructions issued to the translators, was as follows:-In the first instance, each individual member of a company translated every book

which was allotted to his division.

Next, these several renderings were compared by the whole company assembled together, and the reading to be adopted was agreed on by the entire body. The Book, thus finished, was sent to each of the other five companies, to be again examined, when, as Selden describes it," one read aloud the translation, the rest holding in their hands some Bible, either of the learned tongues, or French, Italian, Spanish, &c. If they found any fault they spoke: if not he read on." When the whole Bible had been thus translated it was sent to London, where a committee of six-two from Westminster, two from Oxford, and two from Cambridge-again reviewed and amended the whole work; and once more it was finally revised by Dr. Miles Smith (afterwards Bishop of Gloucester), by whom, in conjunction with Dr. Bilson, Bishop of Winchester, it was edited, and given to the public in A.D. 1611. The time occupied in the translation was altogether almost three years; for, as Dr. Smith observes in his preface, "The work was not huddled up in seventy-two days (referring to the haste with which the Septuagint was said to have been executed), but cost the workmen, as light as it seemeth, the pains of twice seven times seventy-two days and more." Such was the happy issue of that great undertaking to which we are indebted for "Our English

Bible." The care and patience with which the work was executed, even in its minute details, are apparent from the fact that the Pentateuch and other entire books of the Old Testament were revised-every chapter and verse of the same-no less than sixteen times-and the other books, some thirteen, others fourteen times (according to the number of the company to which they were entrusted) before being committed to the press. The fruit of all this labour we now possess in that Book which was in its birthday the watchword of Reformation, and has been long England's crown and glory-" Our English Bible." On the much-debated question of a new revision, which personally, under existing circumstances, I am disposed to deprecate-it is not my purpose nor my province to enter on the present occasion. I shall content myself with referring you for a character of this volume, for an estimate of its beauty, worth, and power, to one well qualified to speak, but who has, alas! long since become the open enemy of that Book, whose music seems to haunt his memory still! The writer to whom I allude is Dr. Newman, formerly a member of our communion, now in avowed league with those who would, if they could, rivet once again the chains of Papal slavery on England. His celebrated critique on the English Bible is, I am aware, familiar to some of you. For the sake of those to whom it may not be known, I shall introduce it here, as a more graceful and eloquent testimony than any that could emanate from my own pen. "Who will say," writes Dr. Newman in the Dublin Review :—

"Who will say that the uncommon beauty and marvellous English of the Protestant Bible is not one of the greatest strongholds of heresy in this country? It lives on the ear like a music that can never be forgotten-like the sound of church bells which the convert hardly knows how he can forego. Its felicities often seem to be almost things rather than words; it is part of the national mind, and the anchor of national seriousness; the memory of the dead passes into it; the potent traditions of childhood are stereotyped in its verses; the power of all the griefs and trials of a man is hidden beneath its words. It is the representative of his best moments, and all that there has been about him of soft, and gentle, and pure, and penitent, and good, speaks to him forever out of his English Bible! It is his sacred thing, which doubt has never dimmed and controversy never soiled. In the length and breadth of the land there is not a Protestant with one spark of religiousness about him, whose spiritual biography is not in his English Bible!"

God grant that what with this mistaken man was a beautiful romance, may be to us a noble and enduring reality. And now, as to our own concern in this subject. First of all, I would have you remember-what I firmly believe that "Our English Bible" has been our national glory. There are men in our very midst who would rob us of it some by endeavouring to shake our faith in its authority; others, again, who profess to admit its authority, by putting it under lock and key, and trying to stifle its utterance. But let us never forget that England's glory has been England's open Bible—that England's mission has been to carry that book and its glad tidings-that book and its joyful message-that book and its civilising influences-abroad under her banner to the remotest parts of the earth. This, I do believe, has been England's mission; for this it is,