The 51st Psalm is directed to be said, not 'said or sung.' Singing, therefore, appears to be excluded, as it was, in the similar place in the old English Office, by the direction to say the Psalm _sine nota_. 281. And the people shall answer and say. Amen. 282. Then shall they all kneel upon their knees, and the Priest and Clerks kneeling (in the place where they are accustomed to say the Litany) shall say this Psalm. Have mercy upon me, &c. 283. Then shall the people say this that followeth, after the Minister. Turn Thou us, &c. 284. Then the Minister alone shall say, The Lord bless us, &c. Printed by Parker and Co., Crown Yard, Oxford. Notes: [a] "The Act of Uniformity is to be construed by the same rules exactly as any act passed in the last session of Parliament. The clause in question, by which I mean the rubric in question (the Ornaments Rubric), is perfectly unambiguous in language, free from all difficulty as to construction. It therefore lets in no argument as to intention other than that which the words themselves import. There might be a seeming difficulty in fact, because it might not be known what vestments were in use by authority of Parliament in the second year of the reign of King Edward the Sixth; but this difficulty has been removed. It is conceded in the report that the vestments, the use of which is now condemned, were in use by authority of Parliament in that year. Having that fact, you are bound to construe the rubric as if those vestments were specifically named in it, instead of being only referred to. If an act should be passed to-morrow that the uniform of the Guards should henceforth be such as was ordered for them by authority, and used by them in the 1st George I., you would first ascertain what that uniform was, and having ascertained it, you would not enquire into the changes which may have been made, many or few, with or without lawful authority, between the 1st George I. and the passing of the new act. All these, from that act specifying the earlier date, would have been made wholly immaterial. It would have seemed strange, I suppose, if a commanding officer, disobeying the statute, had said in his defence, 'There have been many changes since the reign of George I., and as to "retaining," we put a gloss on that, and thought it might mean only retaining to the Queen's use; so we have put the uniforms safely in store.' But I think it would have seemed more strange to punish and mulct him severely, if he had obeyed the law and put no gloss on plain words.