The value--may I not say, the use?--of these delicate differences of detail becomes apparent whenever the genuineness of the text is called in question. Take an example. The following fifteen words are deliberately excluded from St. Mark's Gospel (vi. 11) by some critics on the authority of [Symbol: Aleph]BCDL[Symbol: Delta],--a most suspicious company, and three cursives; besides a few copies of the Old Latin, including the Vulgate:--[Greek: amen lego hymin, anektoteron estai Sodomois e Gomorrois en hemerai kriseos, he te polei ekeine]. It is pretended that this is nothing else but an importation from the parallel place of St. Matthew's Gospel (x. 15). But that is impossible: for, as the reader sees at a glance, a delicate but decisive note of discrimination has been set on the two places. St. Mark writes, [Greek: SodomOIS E GomorrOIS]: St. Matthew, [Greek: GE SodomON KAI GomorrON]. And this threefold, or rather fourfold, diversity of expression has existed from the beginning; for it has been faithfully retained all down the ages: it exists to this hour in every known copy of the Gospel,-- except of course those nine which omit the sentence altogether. There can be therefore no doubt about its genuineness. The critics of the modern school (Lachmann, Tischendorf, Tregelles, Alford, Westcott and Hort) seek in vain to put upon us a mutilated text by omitting those fifteen words. The two places are clearly independent of each other. It does but remain to point out that the exclusion of these fifteen words from the text of St. Mark, has merely resulted from the influence of the parallel place in St. Luke's Gospel (ix. 5),--where nothing whatever is found[225] corresponding with St. Matt. x. 5--St. Mark vi. 11. The process of Assimilation therefore has been actively at work here, although not in the way which some critics suppose. It has resulted, not in the insertion of the words in dispute in the case of the very many copies; but on the contrary in their omission from the very few. And thus, one more brand is set on [Symbol: Aleph]BCDL[Symbol: Delta] and their Latin allies,--which will be found _never_ to conspire together exclusively except to mislead. Sec. 7. Because a certain clause (e.g. [Greek: kai he lalia sou homoiazei] in St. Mark xiv. 70) is absent from Codd. [Symbol: Aleph]BCDL, Lachmann, Tischendorf, Tregelles, Alford, Westcott and Hort entirely eject these five precious words from St. Mark's Gospel, Griesbach having already voted them 'probably spurious.' When it has been added that many copies of the Old Latin also, together with the Vulgate and the Egyptian versions, besides Eusebius, ignore their existence, the present writer scarcely expects to be listened to if he insists that the words are perfectly genuine notwithstanding. The thing is certain however, and the Revisers are to blame for having surrendered five precious words of genuine Scripture, as I am going to shew.