The second of the rules of the committee was as follows:--"To limit, as far as possible, the expression of such alterations to the language of the Authorised and earlier English versions." This rule was carefully attended to in its reference to the Authorised Version. I do not however remember, in the revision of the version of the New Testament, that we often fell back on the renderings of the earlier English versions. They were always before us: but, in reference to other versions where there were differences of rendering, we frequently considered the renderings of the ancient versions, especially of the Vulgate, Syriac, and Coptic, and occasionally of the Gothic and Armenian. To these, however, the rule makes no allusion. The third rule speaks for itself:--"Each Company to go twice over the portion to be revised, once provisionally, the second time finally, and on principles of voting as hereinafter is provided." The fourth rule refers to the very important subject of the text, and is an amplification of the last part of the third fundamental rule. The rule of the committee is as follows:--"That the text to be adopted be that for which the evidence is decidedly preponderating; and that when the text so adopted differs from that from which the Authorised Version was made, the alteration be indicated in the margin." The subject of the text is continued in the fifth rule, which is as follows:--"To make or retain no change in the text on the second final revision by the Company except _two-thirds_ of those present approve of the same, but on the first revision to decide by simple majorities." The sixth rule is of importance, but in the New Testament Company (I do not know how it may have been in the Old Testament Company) was very rarely acted upon:--"In every case of proposed alteration that may have given rise to discussion, to defer the voting thereupon till the next meeting, whensoever the same shall be required by one-third of those present at the meeting, such intended vote to be announced in the notice for the next meeting." The only occasion on which I can remember this rule being called into action was a comparatively unimportant one. At the close of a long day's work we found ourselves differing on the renderings of "tomb" or "sepulchre" in one of the narratives of the Resurrection. This was easily and speedily settled the following morning.