LIBRARY OF PRINCETON SEP 5 2003 THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY ^i ADDITIONAL MEMORIAL I - ON i FEINTING AND IMPORTING BIBLES: CONTAININtt REMARKS ON THE ANSWERS roR SIR DAVID HUNTER BLAIR, BART. AND J. BRUCE, ESQ. HIS majesty's printers, TO THE PETITION OF GEORGE BUCHAN, ESQ. AND OTHERS. WITH A CONTINUATION OF THE APPENDIX TO THE FORMER MEMORIAL. FOR THE USE OF COUNSEL ONLY. JOHN LEE, D.D., LL.D.,F.R.S.E. A MEMBER OF THE EDINBURGH BIBLE SOCIETY. EDINBURGH : PRINTED BY A. BALFOUR AND CO. 1826. This pamphlet is a sequel to the Memorial for the Bible Societies, printed in 1824. It denies that the power of conferring an exclusive privilege of printing the Bible is a legitimate branch of the royal prerogative. It proves that recent claims to the monopoly of the Bible are not supported by the prac- tice even of the most despotic periods of our history. It exposes the in- accuracy of many editions published by privileged printers, and maintains that the greater the restraint on competition, -the less must be the security either for cheap or correct impressions of the Scriptures. The Appendix is a continuation of that which was annexed to the former Memorial, and which ended at the 94th page. The Tables at the end con- tain proofs of the practice of importing copies of the English Bible, ever since it was translated, and proofs not less ample, of the unrestrained liberty which all printers enjoyed, of printing the other books used inpubuc worship, and in religious instruction, such as the allowed version of the Psalms, the Westminster Confession, and the Catechisms of the Church. REMARKS, &c. It is Stated in the commencement of this paper, that as the real defenders in the case between the respondents and the Booksellers of Edinburgh, were the King's printers of England, who were at the sole expense of the suit, the success on the part of the petitioners would be entirely for the benefit of the English patentees ; and though it is not di- rectly asserted, it appears to be insinuated that these persons, who are represented as having so deep an interest at stake, have still a concern in the proceedings for which the members of the Bible Societies are alone responsible. So far, however, are we from being countenanced or supported by the English patentees, that the grounds on which we are most disposed to make a stand, are such as they have never thought it pru- dent or safe to venture upon. We cannot, how- ever, perceive how it is possible that the success of our plea should be for the benefit of the English patentees, if it be true, as is stated in the third page of the answers, that " the Bibles furnished by the respondents are, in point of neatness, accuracy, B 2 variety, and cheapness, equal, if not superior to any that can be got in England." If the respon- dents furnish an equally good, or even better arti- cle, at an inferior price, is it conceivable that we should be so capricious, or so lavish of the funds contributed by our constituents, as in direct oppo- sition to our own interest and theirs to go to a dis- tant market for what we might so easily obtain at home ? It has uniformly been our object to em- ploy our limited resources with the strictest regard to economy ; and in the present case, we do not overlook the temporal interest of the poorer classes of the community. But it is chiefly for their spi- ritual benefit that we are concerned ; and even if it were true, that in all past time the Bibles printed in Scotland have been better and cheaper than those which have been imported from England, we would still account it our duty to resist the attempt to esta- blish a monopoly which has never existed in Scot- land before, and which, if once established, would leave the public at the mercy of one or two indi- viduals, not merely with regard to the price, (which, though of great moment to the poor, is still a mi- nor consideration,) but in the far more important article of correctness. On the quality and prices of the editions furnish- ed by the respondents, as compared with those which have been imported from England by the petitioners, w^e repeat our former assertion, that we have obtained our supply from England on terms much more favourable than we could have done by going to the King's warehouse in Edinburgh. Pos- sibly we maybe persons of very weak judgment, and still meaner taste ; but, to our unrefined appre- heiisions, the Bible printed at Oxford in 1823, and sold to us in sheets at fourteen shillings, while we dui'st buy them, appears in every respect as good, and as handsome, and as accurate, as the boasted royal quarto printed by the respondents in 1822, and sold by them for £.1, 6s. without apocrypha. In the same manner, we were accustomed to re- ceive Oxford, Cambridge, and London Bibles, of various sizes, some of them 30, and others 40 per cent below the Edinburgh prices ; and be- sides this, we had the opportunity of supplying our subscribers with several useful editions, print- ed in a size of letter, which the respondents did not think fit to employ. We are certainly not a little astonished at the grave asseveration of the respondents, that their editions, in point of variety^ are equal, if not supe- rior to any that can be got in England. No doubt they have exhibited at the end of their appendix two tables, the Jij'st containing a catalogue of Bi- bles and New Testaments printed by Sir David Hunter Blair, and John Bruce, with the wholesale prices, August 1825 ; and the second table con- taining (they do not say a catalogue, but simply) Bibles and New Testaments printed by Messrs. Eyre and Strahan, with the wholesale prices, August 1825. Any ordinary reader would suppose that this second table is a transcript of one of the lists published by the English patentees, exhibiting all the varieties of forms in which they publish the sa- scred books. It so happens, that in each table, the number of Bibles is ten ; but in the first, or the ta- ble for Scotland, the number of New Testaments is five, and in the second, or that for England, the number is only four. Is it then so that the King's printers for Scotland, print as great a variety of Bibles as the King's printers for England, and a greater variety of New Testaments ? We dare not venture to answer, as we may not be permitted to produce the Bibles printed in London, to verify our assertion. But if we can trust the catalogue of Messrs. Eyre and Strahan, they print exactly double the number of English Bibles, and double the num- ber of English New Testaments, which the respon- dents have been pleased to ascribe to them, namely, twenty Bibles and eight New Testaments, besides a Bible in Manx, and another in Welsh, as well as a New Testament in Welsh. Moreover, it so hap- pens, that the first table dignifies some of its articles by the epithet superfine, without deigning to admit, in the corresponding part of the second table, the humbler term^w^, or some other characteristics of the paper and ink, which the London printers may have been too presumptuous in claiming. In the catalogue of Messrs. Eyre and Strahan, several ar- ticles are represented as being of Jifie wove royal paper, best ink, cold pressed — circumstances which add prodigiously to the expense, we imagine, as we observe that the last article in the Edinburgh list is double the price of the immediately preceding article, as being of superfine paper, cold pressed, without claiming the advantage of the best ink. We say farther, that few of the articles in the two tables can be fairly represented as corresponding in quality. The Edinburgh quarto, demy paper, small pica letter, being the second article in the first hst, is not to be compared with the London quarto, (the second in the second list,) which, besides being print- ed on a very superior paper, is quite a diiferent type. Pica is a type so much larger than small pi- ca, that a page of the latter contains nearly as much as two pages of the other, and accordingly the Bi- ble printed in the one type, requires nearly double the quantity of paper. Another circumstance wor- thy of notice, with regard to Nos. 2, 3, 5, and 6, in tlie first table is, that they are said to have marginal references ; but they are not said, like Nos. 2, 4, and 5, of the second table, to have Dr. Blaney's mar- ginal references, which being greatly more numerous than the common references, fill a much larger space, and occasion a very considei'able addition to the expense of printing. No 6 of the Edinburgh list, dees not correspond with No. 5 of the Lon- don editions enumerated by the respondents, either in the references, or the quality of paper. The one paper is medium, and the other, though ho- noured with the title of superfine demy, is not near- ly so good as medium. The prices charged by the London printers are therefore not nearly so extravagant as the compa- rative view presented hy the respondents would lead us to infer ; for the commodity furnished by them is decidedly superior. But the prices paid by the Bible Societies, owing to the great numbers which they have purchased, have been 30, or 40, or some- times 50 per cent, lower than the quotations in these lists. And, besides the advantage of cheap- ness, they have had a much greater choice in the articles furnished in the English market. Messrs. Eyre and Strahan, for instance, have in their cata- logue ten octavo Bibles, in place of the three oc- tavos of the respondents, one of which is only in 6 the press. Two of the London octavos are in small i^ica type, without references, — two in long 'primer type, without references, — two in brevier type, without references, — two in minion type, without references, — and two in brevier type, with Dr. Blaney*s marginal references. Of the twenty- fours, two of the London editions are in minion type, which the Edinburgh printers have used only in one of their New Testaments. But the varieties of English Bibles are much greater than any one would imagine, who contents himself with an in- spection of the list of Messrs. Eyre and Strahan's editions. At Oxford the Bible is printed in several sizes and types, not advertised by Messrs. Eyre & Strahan ; as royal folio, double pica letter, medium quarto, crown quarto, medium octavo, small pica type, and crown octavo, with references. At Cam- bridge, several editions are produced, to which no- thing parallel can be obtained either at Oxford, or at the depository of Eyre & Strahan in Paternoster- row, — for instance, a demy folio, as well as a royal folio, a demy quarto, inferior, at 6s. 5d., a medium octavo, small j^^ca, with references, and several others, with parallel passages and marginal readings. Messrs. Eyre & Strahan, on the other hand, furnisli a variety of Bibles which cannot be procured from either of the University presses ; and if wc were required to match the Bibles of the Scottish paten- tees, we could produce thirti/ varieties for their ten. The various forms of the Cambridge Bible at pre- sent are at least seventeen, and of the New Testa- ment five, — of the Oxford Bible at least seventeen, and of the New Testament seven, — of the London Bible not fewer than twenty, and of the New Tes- tament eight. * It does not, perhaps, belong to us, as a Bible Society, to take notice, that instead of four or five sizes of the Book of Common Prayer, to be had at the King's Warehouse in Edinburgh, such of us as are of the communion of the Church of England had formerly the power of obtaining nearly thirty various forms and sizes of that book, of which Messrs. Eyre & Strahan print ten, while Oxford furnishes eighteen varieties, and Cambridge more than twenty. If it were only a matter of luxury, we might consider it as no small hardship to be precluded from indulging it, in the same manner as a man of fashion would wince at the indignity of being compelled to array himself, Sunday and Sa- turday, in Galashiels gray, or some other plain ap- parel of home manufacture, sufficient, no doubt, for all the purposes of comfort, but not so becoming oi" agreeable as the cold pressed superfine cloth of Spanish wool, and English or French workmanship. The King's printers tell us, that their books are equal or superior in quality to any which we can bring iiom the south ; but we know that they are mistaken : and, however unreasonable it may ap- pear to them that we should not be satisfied with their manufacture, we cannot help telling them, that for more than 280 years the people of Scot- land have generally given a preference to English printed Bibles, and that though there liave been periods of no small extent, during which they could not obtain any Bibles printed in their own country, there never has been a time when they were pre- vented from availing themselves of the privilege of * See Appendix. importing Bibles from England, even when it was a hostile kingdom. With regard to variety, we are aware that the Bible and the New Testament may be procured from the respondents in two or three forms, which were not to be seen in their warehouse sixteen years ago, when the Edinburgh Bible Society began its operations. But the most elegant Bible included in their list at the commencement of the present action, is not now to be procured from them, (a Bi- ble of the size called eighteens) — not because the impression is exhausted, but because they sold the whole stock to Mr. Lumsden, a bookseller in Glas- gow, who now, enjoying a monopoly of this size of Bible, has raised the price. All other booksellers in Scotland consider this a hardship, more especially as they are given to understand that it is not to be reprinted at all, and that its place is to be supplied by one of the less acceptable size of twenty-fours. The variety, however, is of much less consequence than the accuracy. And here we do not mean to say that any of the printers of the Bible are invul- nerable. If the patent has been granted for the purpose of securing accuracy, the object has never been attained, and least of all in Scotland. The assignees of the printer whose patent expired in 1798, printed a folio and a royal quarto Bible five years before they went out of office, and after more than thirty years elapsed, thousands of these Bibles remained unsold, — a proof that, for some reason or other, they were not much in demand. This very circumstance may have contributed, in some degree, to lower the price of the Bibles of the present paten- tees, and also to stimulate them to greater exertions. But we cannot compliment them on the superior accuracy of their quarto Bibles. Mark and Charles Kerr published a respectable looking Bible in 1791, with the following among many other errors : — 2 Sam. iii. 29, on for or ; 2 Sam. xxiii. 39, the word all omitted; 1 Kings xxi. 15, his for is; 1 Kings xxii. 38, the dogs liked for the dogs licked ;* 2 Kings vi. 27, the for thee ; Ezek. iii. 9, l^e use for because ; Ezek. v. 9, thejbrehead for thy forehead ; Psalm cxix. 35, 7nake me not to know for make me to know. All this is very bad ; but the quarto Bi- ble of the present patentees, printed in 1808, does not appear to us, on a hasty glance, to be much better. We see, for instance, the following mis- takes in five of the books : — Job vi. 30, it for is ; Job xxiv. 8, shelter for a shelter ; Daniel ii. 20, hename for the name ; John v. 47, shll for shall ; Acts vii. 31, sai/ for saw; Acts xxii. 5, both for doth ; 2 Cor. x. 1 1. indeed for in deed. Their quar- to Bible, 1811, contains several egregious blunders, as sto7ie for storm, that for not, &c. In their pocket Bible, 1816, besides other mistakes, we observe the following ungrammatical expression in Psalm Ixvi. 14, ** which my lips have uttered, and my mouth have spoken." If we chose to dwell on this subject, we could easily show that we have too good cause for anxiety on the point of correctness. To proceed, however, to the merits of the ques- tion of law, we beg leave to begin by observing, that the prerogative of the Crown, though said in page 3 of the answers to be a matter so clear that * It might disturb the gravity even of well-disposed persons to hear that the doers liked blood. 10 it was deliberately and expressly given up by the counsel for the booksellers, has never been admitted by us at all. The question before the Court is said in page 4 to divide itself into two branches. 1. Has his Ma- jesty, as king of Scotland, the right or prerogative of the exclusive printing of the Bible, prayer-books, &c ; and of preventing the importation thereof from other countries ? 2. Has he granted such exclu- sive rights to the respondents ? I. The first question is said to have been less en- larged on than it would have been in the case of the booksellers, from the thorough conviction which seemed to impress every one that the matter was too clear for argument or dispute. It is then said that the defenders are mistaken in saying that the numerous grants and licenses cited in the petition had not been discovered at the time of that hearing. " Every one of those documents, (it is said,) ex- cept two or three, which are quite insignificant, were produced in process during the course of that hearing." With regard to this matter, we beg leave to say, that a complete series of grants and licenses was certainly not exhibited in the former process, so as to be in view of the Court ; and if the whole of the grants, with the exception of two or three, were in the possession of the counsel for the respondents, the circumstance must have dropped out of their memories when they prepared their Appeal Case, as in that paper, page 5, after referring to the first patent granted to Chepman and Millar in 1507, they say, " The next patent extant, and the first which has been found in the record of the great 11 seal, where there are many omissions, is that to Robert Young and Evan Tyller, dated the 30th June, 1641. There appears from the preamble of this writ, to have been former patents granted, one to Robert Young solely in 1632, and one of a prior date to Thomas Finlawson, neither of which has been discovered,** During the long period of one hundred and thir- ty-four years, intervening between the date of the grant to Chepman and Millar in 1507, and that to Young and Tyler, we have referred to a series of more than twenty documents, which appear to us to be of great importance, and among the rest we have referred to two grants in favour of Thomas Finla- son, neither of which is by any means insignificant, — as we trust we shall be able to shew in the sequel of this paper. Before we refer to these successive grants, it will be necessary to make a few observations on the statements contained in the 5th and 6th pages of the Answers. It is there said, that on the first discovery of printing, it seems to have been generally held that a right of controlling the press existed in the crown, and that no person was entitled to print without a special licence to that effect. We do not know on what authority this is asserted. We rather under- stood that in most of the kingdoms of Europe, des- potic as they were, the only restraints which were attempted to be imposed on the liberty of the press, at least during the first sixty years of the existence of the art of printing, proceeded entirely from the clergy, particularly from the Court of Inquisition, and ^rom some of the imiversities. The council of 12 the Lateran in 1515, under Leo the X. required all books to be submitted to the revision of the Pope's vicar, or to the bishop and inquisitor of the city, and afterwards the council of Trent authorized a more extensive establishment of censors and in- spectors of the press. It is needless, however, to inquire what was the state of things in this respect before the Reformation of religion in the l6th cen- tury, as the practice of these times of spiritual bon- dage can be no law to us. It was indeed a matter of great difficulty to obtain books relating to reli- gion, or almost to any subject, in such a country as Scotland. Even when books were allowed to be printed, or brought into the country, they were not allowed to be read, except by certain privileged or- ders of persons ; and nothing is more certain than this, that whenever the civil power interfered, so as tolimit the right of printing, it was at the insti- gation of the church, whose concern was not so much to secure the purity of religion, as to prevent the laity from speculating on articles of faith. When, for instance, the privy council in the reign of James IV. gave the sole privilege of printing books to Walter Chepman and Andro Millar, we know very well that the leading members of the privy council were churchmen, who filled also the liighest offices of the state. Forman, bishop of Moray, was Lord Chancellor; Beaton, abbot of DunfermUng, afterwards primate, was Lord High Treasurer ; the Abbot of Melrose was Secretary of State ; the Archdeacon of St. Andrews, afterwards Bishop of Aberdeen, was Lord Clerk Register; and Elphinstone, Bishop of Aberdeen, who had formerly been Lord Chancellor, was now Lord 18 Keeper of the Privy Seal. This prelate was per- sonally interested in the grant bestowed on Chep- man and Miliar. He was the author or compiler of all the books specified in the gift, which are sup- posed by the respondents to bear the closest analo- gy to the Bible, and the other books of devotion now in use. The Aberdeen Breviary, containing the offices of devotion after the Scottish use, with the legends of Scottish saints, is said in the body of the book itself, as well as in the letter of privilege, to have been the composition of " our traist coun- salour, William, Bishop of Aberdeen,'* assisted by others ; and it is not much less certain, that the book of Chronicles, once intended to be printed by Chepman and Miliar, was also the work of that emi- nent prelate. If the book had been printed, we know very well from the use which Hector Boece professes to have made of it, and from all the ac- counts of the manuscript itself, that it would have added very little to the amount of our historical knowledge, and that its affinity with the standards of the true faith, and the rituals of spiritual worship, would have been no greater than the communion of light wdth darkness. * * The period of our history, from which the respondents draw the earliest example of a king of Scotland taking charge of the interests of religion, is certainly not the most favourable for the purpose. During the reign of James III. and James IV. according to the account of Spotswood, (Hist. p. 69, 60.) " All things in the church went daily from ill to worse. At court, benefices were sold, or then bestowed as rewards upon flatterers, and the ministers of unlawful pleasures ; and in the church, canonical elections, especially in the monasteries, were quite abrogated. The king presenting abbots and priors unto the the Pope; none were refused that came with his recommendation. The monasteries which were founded for pious and charitable uses, came by little and little in the hands of secular men, who, having had 14 If after all it shall be deemed a matter of any consequence that the king's name was used in the letter of privilege, we trust it will not be forgotten that James IV. had been much courted by Pope Julius II. who by his legate declared the king of Scotland protector of the Christian religion. In this capacity James might venture to exercise a function which in those days was never considered to be included in the kingly prerogative. And as a farther proof that the authorising of books of re- ligion either to be used or printed, was not suppos- ed to belong to the king or the civil government in times of popery, we need only refer to the well known facts connected with the introduction of the book known by the title of Archbishop Hamilton's Catechism. This work was authorised by a pro- vincial council, which met at Edinburgh in 1551, of which an account may be seen in Lord Hailes' Historical Memorials. The council authorised the printing of this work, but when it was printed, every precaution was used, as appears from the l6th canon, to prevent it from coming into the possession of secular persons ; and though it was to be read to the people, all the copies not required for the use of the clergy were to be kept in strict custody by the archbishop himself. When it was printed, in the year 1552, it bears on the Colophon, that it was by the command and at the expense of the archbishop, and it bears no manner of trace of their education in the court, brought with them from thence the man- ners thereof, shaking off all care of discipline, and neglecting the du- ties of hospitality. The whole ecclesiastic state became also infect- ed, ignorance and impiety every where prevailing ; till in the end, the laity putting their hands to the work, made that violent and disorder- ed reformation, whereof in the next book wc shall hear." 15 licence from the king or any secular power. The authority under which it was promulgated is more clearly described in the title — " The Catechisme, &c. set furth be the maist reverend father in God Johne Archbischop of Sanct Androus Legat nait and primat of tlie kirk of Scotland, in his provin- cial counsall haldin at Edinburgh the xxvi. day of Januarie, the zeir of our Lord 1551, with the ad- vice and counsale of the bischoippis and uthir pre- lates, with doctours of theologie and canon law of the said realme of Scotland present for the tyme." This book was published subsequently to the act 1551, against printing without licence ; but, though other works by the same printer were published cum pi'ivilegio regali^ it is notorious that the books of almost every Scottish author of that period, on the subject of religion, were printed abroad, and^ then imported into Scotland. It is said in page 5 of the answers, that *' Henry VII. and Henry VIII. (before the latter pretended to be head of the church) were perpe- tually issuing licences to allow certain books to be printed, and prohibitions against others, and all the books printed in those days bear on the title-pages to have been printed cum iirw'ilegio regali. It is well known how strictly the Star Chamber enforced these pretensions." We cannot help shuddering at the inauspicious men- tion of a court which Hume has pronounced to have been one of the most illegal and despotic tribunals ever known in any of the most absolute govern- ments of Europe. But it is a new thing to us to be told of the perpetual licences of Henry VII. and Henry VIII. before the latter pretended to be head 16 of the English church. The numerous works print- ed by WilHam Caxton bear no trace of any royal licence. " The first printers (says the late Sir Hay Campbell in a very able paper on the subject of Literary Property,) carried on their business as a lawful employment without any patent or licence. Caxton's title-pages never bear cuniprivilegio, but only these humble words " Imprinted by me, sim- ple man William Caxton." Though Caxton was patronised and befriended by Edward IV. no one has ever pretended to find the title of king's printer earlier than 1504-, when it seems to have been granted to William Fanque. Wjnkyn de Worde is generally allowed to have possessed the title in 1509. But be it remembered that this honourable distinction neither restrained other printers from printing books, nor prevented the importation of foreign books. The act 1 Rich. Ill, c. 9- gave a right to strangers to bring in primed or written books for sale, and to exercise the art of printing in England. This liberty was restrained for the first time by the act of the 25th Hen. VIII. c. 15. which imposed a fine of six shillings and eight pence, to be paid for every bound book brought from any parts out of the king's obeisance. By the same act it was provided, that the prices of books were to be regulated by any two of the great officers, so that booksellers and printers were not to enhance the prices at their own discretion. This act was passed about the time of the king's final breach with Rome, and fully three years after he had been recognised as sole protector and supreme head of the church, by the clergy assembled in their convocations, who at the same time paid a 2 17 fine of more than L. 100,000 to obtain a pardon for the offence of having submitted to the legatine au- thority of Cardinal Wolsey. It was in the year 1534 that the ParHament declared the king to be supreme head of the Church of England, and to have power to visit, order, and correct by spiritual authority. And it is undeniable that Henry VIII. never issued any licence for printing the Bible^ or gave any order concerning it till after he had claim- ed tlie title of head of the church. In the year 1530, accordiij^ to Wake, {State of the Churchy page 473,) the king conferred with the bishops concerning the scriptures, and gave order for a translation of the New Testament. It is said, that in the following year, 1531, (after the submis- sion of the clergy,) he ordered a Bible of the largest volume to be had in every church. Three years afterwards, the debates of the convocation (says Wake, page 587) ended in a petition to the king, that he would direct a translation to be made of the scriptures into the vulgar tongue, and that he would command that none of his subjects should dispute about the catholic faith. Here we may take notice of a very material point in the constitution of the church of England, according to Archbishop Wake. The clergy in convocation may treat about ecclesi- astical matters ; but they must neither treat, nor resolve to make any canons, constitutions, or ordi- nances provincial, without the ki7ig*s authority. At the time, however, when this order is said to have been given, not one of our historians has ever been able to refer to any translation of the Bible which was completely printed. All that is known for certain is, that in 1530, the New Testament of 18 Tindale was ordered to be called in, and a new one was promised ; but if such a Bible was furnished, neither Burnet nor any other writer has been able to discover by whom it was translated. In fact, the Bible was never printed entirely till the year 1535 y when the translation of Myles Coverdale was published, and this, like all the previous editions of the New Testament, and other parts of the Bible, was printed on the Continent. From the dedica- tion to the King, as chief head of the church of England, this edition is supposed to have been al- lowed by the royal authority. About a year after this Bible was published, an injunction was given out by Lord Cromwell, Privy Seal, Vicegerent to the King's highness for all his jurisdiction ecclesias- tical, requiring every one of the clergy to set up a copy of the whole Bible in the church, and to ex- hort every person to read the same. After this, several editions were set forth with the Mug's most gracious licence ; as two or three by James Nicol- son in Southwark, in 1537 and J 538, one by Rich- ard Grafton and Edward Whitchurch, 1538, (cum gratia et ^^rivilegio regis,) and a New Testament by Robert Redman in Fleet Street, 1538. About this time Grafton complained of the importation of Bibles from Holland, and applied for the privilege of the sole printing of the Bible for three years. Grafton and Whitchurch procured the king's let- ters to the king of France for the liberty of print- ing a Bible at Paris. The royal license was grant- ed, but before the impression was finished, the prin- ters were carried before the inquisition under a charge of heresy, and the copies, amounting to ^500, were seized and confiscated. Part of the im- 19 pression was saved, and the types, presses, and workmen were, through the good management of" Lord Cromwell, brought over to England, where the Great Bible was finished in the year 1539. In the course of that year, Henry the VIII. issued letters patent, addressed to all the printers and sellers of books within the realm, specially charging that no person shall attempt to print any Bible in English during the five years next ensuing, but only such as shall be deputed, assigned, and admitted by the Lord Cromwell. The attainder and execution of Cromwell in 1510, gave a severe check to the pro- gress of the reformation. Several editions of tlie Bible were printed in 1539 and 1540, one by Ed- ward Whitchurch, another by Thomas Petyt and Robert Redman, for Thomas Berthelet printer to the king's grace ; a third by John Byddel, besides the Great Bible of Cranmer, in 1539, which bears the names both of Grafton and Whitchurch. But from the year 1541, though small parts of the Bible were print- ed at London by Day, Seres, Hyll, Powell, Herford, Oswan, Jugge, and others, no complete edition was published again till the year 1549. In the short reign of Edward VI. the Bible was printed in whole or part by more than twenty different printers, so that it is evident that no man enjoyed permanently an exclusive privilege. In page 5, it is said, that as soon as the in- troduction of printing became so general as to excite notice, the case in Scotland was the same as in England ; that is to say, a royal privilege was required. The act 1551, cap. 27, entitled Pre7iters suld prent nathing without licence ^ is then referred 20 to. This statute, according to Sir Hay Campbell, was the first restraint on the Uberty of the press in Scotland ; and he observes, that " this was entirely agreeable to the spirit of the established religion in those times, averse to free enquiry, and having no other means left of opposing the reformation, than by obstructing the progress of knowledge and true literature, then fast gaining ground by means of the invention of printing."* This eminent lawyer, with- out subscribing to Sir George Mackenzie's opinion, that printing is inter regalia^ appears to have thought that the power of restraining the press was acknow- ledged to be rather in the parliament than in the so- vereign ; and, with regard to the act 1540, requir- ing the clerk register to appoint a printer to print the acts who must have also the sovereign's special licence thereto, he observes, " that the exclusive privilege even of printing the acts of parliament was limited to six years, and that the authority of parliament was thought necessary to confer this monopoly. At that time, (he observes farther,) it was the custom, in the more absolute governments, to apply for the exclusive privilege of publishing the works of ancient authors, when manuscripts had been searched out and collected at a great expense ; and sometimes such privileges were obtained from several potentates at once. But it deserves to be remarked, (he adds,) that these prwilegia never were perpetual, but always granted for a limited number of years ; sometimes seven, sometimes ten, and seldom if ever exceeding twenty years." * Information for Alexander Donaldson, against John Hinton, bookseller in London, and Alexander M'Conochie writei in Edin- burgh, his Attorney, Jan. 2, 1773, p. 28. 21 The act 1551 evidently applied to all kind of books, but rather to such as were profane than to such as could be called sacred. But it must not be overlooked, that it applied only to the printing of books, and that it did not provide against their importation. Assuredly it did not repeal the act 1542, authorizing the reading of the Bible, — an act, the benefit of which could not be enjoyed by the people of Scotland, otherwise than by the importa- tion of the copies. We cannot perceive how the act 1551 could avail the respondents, even if it were in full force, un- less they could show that its object was to prevent all printers except one to publish or to sell any book. A royal Ucetice to print a book, and an exclusive right to print and to sell, are very different things. Who will now venture to say that printing is in- ter regalia f We do not believe that any one law- yer in England or , Scotland has ventured to avow such an opinion for more than 1^0 years. If the act 1551 be worth any thing, it must re- strain all those who have not the royal licence, from printing ony buikes, ballads, sangs, blasphemations, rimes or tragedies, alsweill of kirkmen as temporal, outher in Latine or English tongue ; and as his Majesty's printers are the only persons who possess a royal licence, they must no doubt be entitled to the sole privilege of printing ballads and blasphe- mations, and all the other books. The testimony of Sir George Mackenzie, witb regard to the allowance given to " his own printer only to print Bibles and other school books," does not appear to us to be of much value, not only be- cause he refers to the act 25, pari. 11, James VI. against the sellers of erroneous hooks, as if this for- S2 tified his opinion, whereas it prevents the importa- tion only of such books as are against the true word of God, but chiefly because the law of Scotland, in the time of Sir George Mackenzie, was in various respects very different from what it is now. In his time the king was, by virtue of several acts of parliament, understood to possess a number of powers which were withdrawn after the revolution. Thus the act pari. 1. Charles II. c. 11, "for tak- ing the oath of allegiance, and asserting the royal prerogative," is substantially disclaimed in the de- claration of the estates, or claim of right, April 11, 1689, requiring the abrogation of the former oath of allegiance, and all other oaths and declamations. It is well known that the third act of the first par- liament of Queen Anne, declares that it shall be high treason to endeavour to alter or innovate the claim of right, or any article thereof; and it is equally well known, that the second act of the first parliament of William and Mary, introduced the very form of oath with, which the claim of right concludes, and rescinded all other oaths of alle- giance or supremacy, declarations and tests. A si- milar act of pari. 1. James VI. cap. 17, was rescind- ed by William and Mary, pari. 1. sess. 2. cap. 28. So also the act pari. 2. Charles II. cap. 1, Nov. 16, 1669, "asserting his majesty's supremacy over all per- sons, and in all causes ecclesiastical," was rescinded by pari. 1. William and Mary, sess. 2. act 1. April 25, 1690, and declared to be in the whole heads^ ar- ticles, and clauses the7'eqf, to he of no force or effect in all time coining* Let us here consider what were the articles of this act : — they were these, — " that his majesty hath the suprem.e authority and supre> * See Appendix^ No. I. macy over all persons, and in causes ecclesiastical ; and that by virtue thereof, the ordering and dispos- ing of the external government of the church doth belong to his majesty and his successors, as an inhe- rent right of the crown ; and that his majesty and his successors may alter^ enact,, and emit such con- stitutionSy acts, and orders, concerning the admi' nistration of the external government of the church, and the persons emploijed in the same, and con- cerning all ecclesiastical meetings, and matters to be proposed and determined therein, as they in their royal wisdom shall think fit ; which acts, orders, and constitutions being recorded in the books of coun- sel, and duly published, are to be observed and ' obeyed by all his Majesty's subjects — likeas his Majesty doth rescind and annul all laws, acts, and clauses thereof, and all customs and constitutions, civil or ecclesiastical, which are contrary to, or inconsistent with his Majesty's supremacy." This was law in the time of Sir George Mackenzie ; but it is not now the law of Scotland, having been utterly abolished by the act 25th April 1690, which, it must be observed, is subsequent in date to the act abolishing prelacy ; and thus the whole force of the reasoning of the respondents, p. 32 and 33, with regard to the import of the word allanerly, is entirely annihilated. But farther, it appears to us very material to observe, that in Sir George Mackenzie's time it was considered as law, that his Majesty having in his hands the whole or- dering and disposal of trade with foreign nations as an undoubted privilege and prerogative of the crown, might prohibit the importatio7i of foreign commodities if he thought fit, or might lay on them such impositions and restraints as he pleased. Thus, in the language of the claim of right, had a legal limited monarchy been altered to an arbitrary despotic power. This was done in the time of Sir George Mackenzie ; but we have the happiness of knowing that this act, asserting his Majesty's pre- rogative in the ordering and disposal of trade with foreigners, was rescinded by King William's first parliament, and declared to be void and null in all time coming.* In page 6, it is said, " that the sole and exclusive right of printifig' all books whatever, and, of course, of preventing importation from other countries, was vested in the crown, and that no one could print or * About the same time with Sir G. Mackenzie's observations, ap- peared a work entitled '' iS'co^jcE Indiculum; or the Present State of Scotland, by A. Mudie, printed at London, 1682." The author, fol- lowing the plan of Chamberlayne in his " Angliw Notitia, or the Present State of England," describes, in his second chapter, the power and prerogatives of the king in very high terras, saying, that " the king is an absolute and unaccountable monarch — that he is defender of the faith — that the prerogatives of the crown are great, as power of peace, and war, &c.;" and then he proceeds, in a new paragraph, to which is prefixed the words Church Government : " But to these, since his Majesty's happy restoration, great additions have been made. In the reign of King James the Sixth, the power of General Assemblies was raised very high by law, which occasioned the sad disaster in the church, and laid a foundation to all the late troubles of the state, not- withstanding the supremacy in ecclesiastical affairs was always in the crown, since the Reformation. Yet it was pretended as contrary to law, for the king to introduce any thing into the church without the consent of the General Assembly: it was, therefore, enacted in Parlia- ment, Act 1, 2d Pari, held by the Duke of Lauderdale: That the ex- ternal government and polity of the church was wholly in the king's power ; and that his orders sent to the Privy Council, and published by them about all ecclesiastical matters, meetings, and persons, were to be obeyed by his subjects, any law or practice to the contrary notwith- standing : so that in all matters that relate to the church government, the king's power is absolute." The author then goes on to state, al- most in the words of Chamberlayne, various respects in which the king's prerogative is exercised in ecclesiastical matters. He only hath 25 import without a special licence from the crown. This (they say) is founded on clear statutory enact- ment. The progress of time, and more Just notiojis of constitutional law, have made this right fall into desuetude in regard to all other books ; but in re- gard to the Bible, and other privileged hooks, the statute law has been retained, and even confirmed, and strengthened by the most constant and unin- terrupted consuetude that can possibly exist in any branch of the law." the patronage of all bishopricks, he is the nursing father of the church, &c. and, after saying that there still remained a shadow of the General Assemblies which in King James's time had the supreme authority about all church matters, he adds, " nothing is to be proposed but by the king or his commissioner, nor can any thing that they do be of force till it be ratified by the king ; but of this synod there is no need, seeing the king's supremacy is so large, it is evident that the king is over all persons, as well in ecclesiastics, as civil, supreme." The whole of this statement is copied from Middleton's Appendix to Spotiswood's History, printed at London 1677. Yet neither Middleton nor Mudie ventured to transcribe all that was said by the English writer, who thus concludes the corresponding paragraph in his work. " The king hath power to call a national or provincial synod, and by commissioners, or by his metropolitans in their several juris- dictions, to make canons, orders, ordinances, and constitutions, to intro- duce into the church what ceremonies he shall think fit ; reform and correct all heresies, schisms, punish contempts, &c. and therein, or thereby, to declare what doctrines in the church are fit to be published or professed, what translation of the Bible to be allowed, what books of the Bible are canonical, and what apocryphal, &c." Chamberlayne applies other extravagant titles to the king, calling him " pontifex maximus, and supreme pastor of England, having not only right of ecclesiastical government, but also of exercising ecclesiastical function, &c."(p. 128, edit. 4, 1670— p. 77, edit. 16, 1687.) Granting that the account of the prerogative of the king of Scotland, in the reign of Charles II. has been correctly given by Mudie, no man will now be bold enough to say that, by the law/of Scotland, the king can either originate or conclude any ecclesiastical statute, — or that he has any power to introduce ceremonies, or to prescribe forms of wor- ship, or that none of the acts of the church are of force till they are ratified by his Majesty. The king never so much as claims the power of ratifying the laws of the church ; and it would be a violation of the constitution \f he were to attempt to exercise such a power. The Con- 26 Even granting this last statement to be true, we would fearlessly maintain that the consuetude of importing books, and particularly JBibles^ has been at least as constant as that of printing them at a privileged press. We assert that this consuetude of importing Bibles has been much more constant than the other, — for there have been periods, some- times of long duration, when the Bible could not be procured in Scotland, in any other way than by importing it; and there has been no time when any variety of editions could be had otherwise than by importation. From the year 1542 till the year 1579, no Bibles could be had in Scotland but such as were imported. From 1579 till 1633, no Bibles could be had in Scotland, without importing them, except two editions, both of a folio size, and of the Geneva translation. From 1633 till 1649, no Bibles, of a large size, were printed in Scotland, but many were imported. From 1649 till I67I, fession of Faith has been ratified by the state, but this was done not by Royal proclamation, or by an order in Council, but by an act of Parliament, 7th June, 1690, and 12th June, 1693, on which last oc- casion it is ordained, that uniformity of worship, and of the administra- tion of all public ordinances within this church, be observed by all ministers and preachers, as the same are at present performed and al- lowed therein, or shall be hereafter declared by the authority of the same.''' Every Sovereign of Great Britain at his or her accession swears to iTiaintain and preserve inviolably the foresaid settlement of the true Protestant religion, with the government, discipline, worship, rights and privileges of this church, as established by the laws of this king- dom, in prosecution of the Claim of Right. In the Claim of Right it was declared by the estates of Scotland, " That prelacy, and the su- periority of any office in the church above presbyters, is, and hath been a great and insupportable grievance and trouble to this nation, and contrary to the inclination of the generality of the people ever since the Reformation ; (they having reformed from Popery by Presbyters) and, therefore, ought to be abolished." If the king be in any sense the Head of the Church, he must hold an office in the church above Presbyter «. 27 no Bibles were printed in Scotland by any King's printer, — and both before and after I67I, during the arbitrary government of Charles II. and James VII. not only were New Testaments printed by a great number of printers, but in spite of the exor- bitant terms of Anderson's grant. Bibles were al- lowed to be imported, of every letter or size, at least different from those which were furnished by the King's printer. Is it possible that it shall be said that though importation was allowed in those times, and has continued ever since, the King may now exercise the power of prohibiting importation, unless for the sake of consistency it shall also be said, that in spite of a\\ just notions of constitutional law, his Majesty may also resume the exclusive right of printing all books whatever, and unless booksellingy as well as printing, be inter regalia ? But we say further, that the consuetude has not been uninterrupted in regard to the Bible, and other privileged hooks, as they are called. Even in Anderson's time the New Testament was printed by many printers who had no special licence. It appears, from an act of the Privy Council, Feb. 9, 1671, that many printers were accustomed to print parts of the Bible. We have seen various New Testaments by Watson, before he was King's printer. During the whole period of the gifts to Freebairn, Basket, and Watson, we know that the New Testament was frequently printed at Glasgow and elsewhere, though we cannot point out more than one edition by Alexander Carmichael and Alexander Millar, 1737> and another by John Robertson and Mrs. M'Lean, I748. One edition by James Watson, in Craig's close, Edinburgh, 1706, is superior to any which was ever published by the person who then held the patent ; and ano- 28 ther good one was printed by Ruddiman in 17^5. A^ith regard to the Confession of Faith, the Cate- chisms, and the Metrical Psalms, we are sure that thev were much less frequently printed by the King's printer than by others, till Sir D. Hunter Blair and Mr. Bruce came into office. We can produce more than seventy editions of the Confession of Faith, be- tween the years l650 and 1785, many of them very excellent, and almost all of them equal or su- perior to any which have yet been printed by the present patentees, and yet not one of them was printed by a King's printer. Some of these edi- tions are used bv presbyteries, when members sign the formula.* We defy the respondents to point out one tenth of the number of good editions print- ed by all their predecessors in office. The Cate- chism is a book which happens not to be very care- fully preserved, — but we can point out three dozen of editions printed at Glasgow and Edinburgh, not by any King's printer. It is still more universally known that the Psalms in metre were printed by all and sundry till the year 1799, when the re- spondents began to print Bibles. We can produce 12o editions by private printers. In some of the pocket Bibles o£ 1799, we see Psalms printed at Edinburgh by D. Schaw Sf Co. for James Gillies, Glasgow ; and whether they were dearer or cheap- er we do not know, but they appear to be much finer than the Psalms printed the same year by his Majesty's printers. We know that several copies of the Psalms, printed by persons who had no pa- tent, are used at this moment in the established Churches of this city, both in the pulpits and the precentors' desks. Some of the editions to which * See Appendix. 29 we allude were printed by James Dickson, printer to the church of Scotland, who also continued, as long as he held that office, to print the Translations and Paraphrases from Scripture, which are as much used in worship as the Psalms. This collection was set forth in I78I, by authority of the General Assembly, which gave the printer to the Church the exclusive privilege of printing it for five years, and afterwards repeatedly extended this term, till at last, in 179o, it was prolonged for fourteen years, so that it must have expired, if we are not mistaken, in ISO9. Long before that time the King's printer be- gan to print the Translations and Paraphrases^ and the printer for the Church discontinued the practice ; though we understand that W. & J.Deas, as assignees to the late ^Ir. Dickson, printed them as lately as the year 1808. It has been currently said among book- sellers, and we know it to be a fact, that his Ma- jesty's printers have made an annual allowance to the printer for the Church to induce him to relinquish his claim. The Church has been no party to the bargain, and the public has not been a party, — so that neither the Church nor the public can be de- frauded of their rights by a clandestine transaction. If the patentees had been convinced that whatever books are used in public worship, or even in private devotion, are comprehended in their gift, or that the king has at any time a right to dispose of the printine;^ of such books, they might have saved themselves this expense. But without dwelling longer on this part of the question at present, we peremptorily challenge the respondents to prove the uninterrupted consue- tude which they say has been established with re- gard to all privileged books. The New Testament, a most essential part of the Bible — the Psalms, and the Proverbs, also very important parts of it — the 30 Confession of Faith— the Catechisms, larg-er and shorter, were printed in Scotland by many different printers before Anderson's patent commenced in 1671, and during- the whole time of its continuance till 1712, and likewise during the whole time of the subsequent patent or patents which expired in I757. The Psalms, the book of Proverbs, the Confession of Faith, and the Catechisms, were printed during the whole period of Kincaid's patent by many other printers. And in Kincaid's time, the books called Apocrypha were often printed by Colin Macfarquhar and others. We do not consider these books as form- ing a part of the sacred canon, or as possessing any authority in matters of faith ; but we believe they are understood to be included in the grant to his Majesty's printers, at least in England, where, to a certain extent, these books are used in the service of the church. And we cannot help adding, that many Bibles have been printed in Scotland till within the last forty years, some containing Oster- vald's notes, and others containing the notes of anonymous authors ; and notwithstanding the in- terdicts granted against the sale of such Bibles, when they have not been printed by the King's printers, we do not know that the law of the case has yet been settled, and as little do we know any good reason for allowing the king's printers, for their private emolument, to print notes and com- mentaries possessing no authority whatever, or even contradicting the standards of the national church. And we will remind them farther, that several trans- lations of the Bible into English have been printed in Scotland since the commencement of their pa- tent ; for instance, one edition of the Douay Bible, in five volumes, printed at Edinburgh by John 31 Moir in 1805, and at least two editions of a trans- lation by Dr. David Macrae, both at Glasgow, one in 1799, and another in 1815. If the propagation of error be what is feared, if the printing of the Bible were thrown open, this evil may result as effectually from tlie publication of new translations, as from the indiscriminate liberty of printing an old one • and the evil will not be averted, if, in order to en- title any man to print a new edition of the version in general use, care shall only be taken to annex notes or illustrations, orthodox or heterodox, of suf- ficient length to occupy a greater space than the text. We now proceed to take some notice of the va- rious grants and licences to which we formerly re- ferred, and concerning most of which, the respon- dents appear to us to entertain a very erroneous opinion. On the case of Chepman and Millar, we think it unnecessary to say more than that the licence in their favour was evidently intended to secure them against loss in the prosecution of an undertaking which was new and somewhat hazardous. It is not pretended that the religion of the people would be contaminated by the importation of books of Salis- bury use into the church of Scotland, which had borrowed from the constitutions of Sarum the en- tire model of the canons by which it continued to be governed, from the time of the provincial coun- cil of Perth in 1242, down to the establishment of the reformation. But it is easy to perceive how antipathy to every thing English might at that pe- riod conspire with the prevailing horror at every practice which had the effect of carrying the coin 32 out of the kingdom, so as to determine the king and his council to try the experiment of supplying the lieges with books for the service of the church, and the purposes of education, as well as of amuse- ment. The experiment did not succeed. Few as were the books at that time required in Scotland, the king's printer could not supply them. They might furnish the necessary number of copies of Donat and one or two other grammatical works for the eldest sons of barons and freeholders, who were in that reign required to be put to the grammar schools and the schools of art and jure. But from the year 1512 to the year 1536, all the writers of this nation whose names have descended to our time, certainly did take or send the copies of their books " furth of the realm to ger imprent the samyne in utheris countreis, to be brocht and sauld again within the realm," and this without having incurred any penalty of which any record can be discovered.* Well do we know that " no transla- * Not long after the date of Chepman and Millar's grant, a num- ber of books written by Scottish authors were printed on the contin- ent ; and of most of these books, a much greater number of copies may now be found in this country than of any of the works of the first king's printers. We are pretty sure that there is not more than one complete copy of the Aberdeen Breviary in Scotland ; and we have never heard of a complete copy of any other book printed by Chep- man. But not to mention such writers as Alexander Aless, who early embraced the reformed religion, we could easily produce copies of the works of David Cranstoun, George Lockert, Hector Boece, John Mair, William Manderston, Adam Elder, Patrick Cockburn, John Rutherford, Henry Scrimger, John Vaus, Edward Henryson, Florence VTilson, and several others, all printed in France, within forty years after the date of the first patent, and most of them detli- cated to Scottish statesmen or dignitaries of the Scottish church ; so that we are quite sure that there was nothing surreptitious in this mode of publishing and importing them. Some of these works were 33 tion of tbe Bible was at the period of the grant permitted to be either printed or read." This ad- mitted fact is sufficient to show how absurd it is to seek, in a period of such utter darkness, for the foundation of a right of the crown, said to be vest- ed in it for the conservation of the purity of the true reHgion. We next refer to the case of Thomas Davison, who, though honoured by the title of His Ma- jesty's Printer, derived his right to print the sta- tutes, not from the king, but from the parliament. But as he printed no Bibles, any more than Chep- man and Millar, because, at the date of his grant, the Bible, though translated, was not allowed to be read in the vulgar tongue — we need not dwell on this case, though perhaps it may not be amiss to observe, that if, (as the respondents have said, p. 8.) " it is very material to remark, that the books spe- cially enumerated in the grant (in favour of Chep- man and Millar,) besides the laws and acts of par- liament, are the religious books then in use, vi%. Chronicles, Mass Books, Manuals, Matyne Books, with additions and legends of Scottis Sancts, which certainly bear a strong analogy to the Bibles, Psalm grammatical and were used in the schools (as the well-known work of VausJ others related to the higher branches of liberal study, and were used in universities, as the writings of Cranstoun, Lockhart, iVIander- ston and Rutherford — others were theological, as the books of Wilson, Elder, Cockburn, and the numerous volumes of Mair, which went through a rapid succession of editions ; one or two related to subjects of law, as the books of Scrimger, and several were of the nature of Chronicles, particularly the History of Hector Boece. Two of the in- dividuals here mentioned were appointed by Elphinstone to profes- sorships in the university which he founded at Aberdeen ; and it is not likely that such men would have violated a law which was under- stood to prevent the importation of books. D 34r Books and Prayer Books, the religious books now in use, specified in the patent of the pursuers ;" it was rather unfortunate that it did not occur to Thomas Davison, that the Bible authorised to be introduced into Scotland in 1542, when he was king's printer, was much more unequivocally a re- ligious book than the Chronicles, which he printed without discovering that they had any claim to the character of sacred books ; and accordingly that the regent, instead of applying to Sir Ralph Sadler to send to England for copies of the Bible, ought to have employed Davison to print the Bible, — a task which no man who has seen his works can for a moment hesitate to say that he would have ex- ecuted as well as Richard Grafton, or Edward Whitechurch, or John Biddel, or Thomas Barthelet, or any one of more than a dozen of printers who at that time printed Bibles in England. The gifts in favour of the printers who succeed- ed Davison might require more particular notice, but we must be brief. The licence to Robert Lekprevik, dated Jan. 14, l-^Sy, gives him authority to print for twenty years, not only the laws, "but all sic godhe works and volumis as tends to the glorie of God'* — but it must be observed that, with the exception of the Psalms, the Homilies and Catechisms, none of the books were intended for the service of religion, but were either law books or histories, or grammars for the use of schools. The respondents say, (p. 8. and 9-) that in con- sidering Lekprevik's gift, we have mixed up a total- ly different matter, namely, the leave granted to all the people of Scotland to read the Bible in the 35 vulgar tongue, by the parliament 154S-3. We mentioned this fact to show, that when the people of Scotland were first supplied with Bibles, it was % impoi'tatioii from England, and that the prac- tice of importing Bibles must undoubtedly have continued through all the period which intervened from 1542 till the first Edinburgh edition was print- ed long after the date of Lekprevik's grant, though in that interval many books of great size were printed in Scotland. The respondents seem to have doubts with regard to the passing of the act, — a fact scarcely ever doubted before. It is men- tioned by Sir Ralph Sadler, in his letter to the king of England, (March 20, 1543,) who says, that open proclamations are made, " That it shall be lawful to all men to read the Bible and Testament in the mother tongue.*' It was a fact which Keith was not very likely to have recorded without the strongest evidence ; and it is mentioned expressly by Knox, who says, that *' the Commissioniers of Burghis and a pairt of the nobilitie," required the enactment to be made, but that the clergy did not yield till they were *' convicted be reasonis and be multitude of votis in thair contrair — and so by act of parliament it was maid free to all men and women to reid the scriptures in thair awin tongue, or in the Inglische tongue." The respondents then proceed to say, that *' the clergy, and especially Cardinal Beaton, prevailed with the regent to dis- countenance the circulation of Bibles by the most severe measures ; and accordingly they add, there were very few copies introduced into Scotland till the Reformation was finally completed." 36 How do the respondents know this ? The regent, indeed, acted a perfidious and illegal part, and by his connivance severities were inflicted on persons who were accused of " disputing about the scrip- tures," — but that the Bible was imported and read to a great extent, we are assured by the most direct and unimpeachable testimony. Knox says — " This (the freedom of reading the scriptures) was na small victorie of Christ Jesus, fechting agains the con- jured enemies of his veritie ; not small comfort to sic as befoir war haldin in sic bondage, that they durst not have red the Lord's prayer, the ten com- mandmentis, nor articles of their faith in the Inglische tongue, bot they sould have been ac- cused of heresie. Then mycht have been seen the ^ijh'ill lying upon almaist every gentlemannis table. The New Testament was born about in mony menis hands. Then war set furth warkis in our awin tongue, besydes them that cum from England, that did disclois the pryid, the craft, the tyrannic and abuiss of the Roman antichrist.'* (Knox's Hist, p. S4<, Edin. 1732. A more direct testimony may be produced to prove how extensively the scriptures were read in Scotland before any edition of them was printed in this country. In the Dedication of the first edition of the Bible, published at Edinburgh in 1579, the General Assembly thus addresses the king : — " Cer- tainlie we have great occasion baith to glorifie the gudenes of God toward this countrie, and also iieichlie to extol your Heines most godlie purpose and enterprise. O quhat difference may be seen between thir dayes of light, iche?i almaist in every jmvate house the buike of God's law is red and un- 37. derstand in oui- vulgarie language, and that age of darknes when skarceUe in ane haill citie (without the clostres of monks and freires) culd the biike of God anes be founde, and that in ane strange tongue of Latin not gud but mixed with barbaritie, used and red be fewe, and ahnaist understand or ex- ponit be nane ; and quhen the false namit clergie of this reahne abusing the gentle nature of your Hienes maist noble gudshir of worthie memorie made it an capital crime to be punished with the fyre to have or read the New Testament in the vulgar language." The time to which they refer (that of his " Hienes maist noble gudshir'* James V.) preceded the period when the act allowing the scriptures to be read was passed ; but it is quite clear from the expressions of the church in this dedication (dated July 10, 1579,) that the Bible was already to be found al- maist in every private house, and that the impres- sion then published was intended chiefly " to the end, that in every paroch kirk there suld be at least ane thereof kepit, to be caliit the common buke of the kirke, as a maist meet ornament for sik a place and a perpetual register of the word of God the fountaine of all true doctrine, to be made patent to all the people of everie congregation as the only richt rule to direct and govern them in matters of religion, as also to confirm thame in the trueth re- ceavit, and to reform and redress corruptions when- soever they may crepe in." There is no doubt that Lekprevik's grant, dated January 14, 1567, prohibits the importation of all the books which he was then authorised to print. But tlie next grant to him, dated three months af^ ;?8 terwards, does not prohibit the importation of " the IngHs Bible imprentit of before at Geneva," to which this hcence (of April 14, 1568) apphed. We repeat that this is a circumstance of great import- ance, and we also repeat, that Lekprevik never made use of his privilege of printing the Bible. The respondents demand our authority for this averment. We think it sufficient to refer again to the Dedication of the edition of 1579, from which it is quite manifest, that there had been no previous edition in Scotland. They then allege that such importation as took place in Lekprevik's time must have been carried on under a licence from him. According to one of their doctrines (maintained in the action against the booksellers) none but such editions as are printed within the kingdom can be regarded as authentic ; and surely the licence of a printer cannot render foreign editions authentic, if they are not so before they are imported. But how is it probable that Lekprevik ever granted any such licence? — So long as the act of parliament 1542 was in force, all men must have been entitled to import Bibles ; and no grant under the privy seal could have taken away a privilege enjoyed by the people in virtue of an act of the legislature. If a licence had been necessary to warrant importation, it might have been in the power of an officer ap- pointed hy the king to frustrate the intention of the parliament in authorising the universal use of Bibles. We might next mention a licence by no means of insignificant value, granted to Mr. George Young, to print a grammar, dated February 2, 1575. This grammar was compiled by several of the most 39 eminent scholars, under the direction of the privy council, and was ordered to be universally used throughout the realm.* An exclusive privilege of printing it was granted for ten years, and importa- tion was prohibited ; but though the king and coun- cil exercised at that time a power which the go- vernment of Scotland does not now possess, of or- dering what books shall be used in all schools, it is clear that the perpetual monopoly of this parti- cular book was not contemplated, though it was compiled by the order, and at the expense of the crown. The next licence to which we advert, is one granted to Alexander Arbuthnot and Thomas Bas- sandyne to print Bibles, (dated June 30, 1576.) This licence prohibited importation for ten years, provided the Bibles were sold at the prices appoint- ed, viz. 4 lib. 14s. and 4d. Scottish money for each copy. Before, however, the Bible was published, Bassandyne died, and a new licence was ganted to Arbuthnot, who was then made king's printer, August ^4, 1579, by which time the Bible was completely printed. It must be observed that Lek- previk's licence to print the Bible, and his privi- lege as king's printer did not expire till the year 1588. The second licence to Arbuthnot prohi- bited the printing of the Bible by any other person in Scotland for ten years, that is, till August 1589. But importation was not prohibited^ as it had been in the licence to Arbuthnot and Bassandyne, June 1576, or as it was in the licence for printing the Psalm Book, granted to Arbuthnot in April 1579. * Sfe t^e Order •£ Council in Appendix LVI. 40 The respondents have undertaken to correct our statements with regard to the edition of the Bible to which the Hcences now mentioned have always been understood to refer. They state very decid- edly, that the Bible undertaken to be printed by Arbuthnot and Bassandyne, was not the Geneva JBible, but a new translation, executed under the auspices of, and authorised by the General As- sembly itself. In proof of this assertion, they refer to one authority, that of Mr. Robert Wodrow, whose testimony by his own account must be of very little value, " as he had not seen either the Geneva Bihle, or that published hy Arbuthnot and Bassandyne.^* We are not in the same predicament with the single witness for the respondents ; for we have seen and read the Geneva Bible, and we have also seen and read the Bible published by Arbuthnot and Bassandyne; and in opposition to the mere imagination of Mr. Wodrow, who owns that he may be mistahen, we do positively maintain that the Bible published by Arbuthnot and Bassandyne is verbatim a Bible of the Geneva translation, with all the Geneva notes. The only peculiarities of the edition (besides the dedication) were the calendar, and a few chronological notices, both furnished by Mr. Robert Pont, then one of the ministers of the West Kirk, and at the same time a Lord of Session. Every one who has compared this Edinburgh Bible with the best edition of the Geneva can prove their absolute identity. The second edition of the Bible printed at Geneva in 1561, contains a few errors,* * As Mat. V. 3. Blessed are the place-make7's for peacC'inakers. 41 which are not in the first edition (of 15G0,) and which have been avoided in the Edinburgh edition. But even the second Geneva edition is superior in one respect to the Edinburgh edition, in having the suppHed words carefully distinguished by be- ing included in brackets, which Bassandyne did not begin to use till he had printed off the four Gospels, where he employs no device whatever for indicating such words as are not in the original. The wooden cuts introduced into several parts of the Old Testament are fac similes of the cuts in the Geneva Bible, and in the maps the French words orienty Occident^ aquilo7i, midiy Sec. are all retained. Not a single word has been said by Calderwood, or by any original authority, to lead us to suppose that a new translation was at this time intended, or even that any amendment of the version was in contemplation. If the translation had been a new one, the rapidity of its execution would have been miraculous. The application was given in to the Assembly at the eleventh Session. The day of the month is not mentioned ; but the Assembly began on the 7th of March, 1574-5. The kirk promised to deliver the authentic copy, which they (the printers) shall follow, betwixt and the last day of April. This is an interval of only six weeks ; and it is to be remarked that the Assembly named only six persons, or any three of them, to oversee every book before it be printed, and likewise to oversee the labours of others that have travelled therein, to be given in to the printing betwixt and the last of April. The printers then undertook to finish the work between and the last day of March 1576, that is, in eleven months after the delivery of the authen- 4^ tic copy. Of the six persons nominated to revise the copy, it is not certain how many acted ; but as the church seems to have thought any three of them sufficient for the task, the labour expected from them could not be very great. The church also approved of two persons, or any of them, to perform the office of corrector ; but it is certain that only one of them, namely, Mr. George Young, took any share of the duty, while he was engaged in printing the New Grammar, — and he did not begin to act till after the month of August, if in- deed his services were required so soon. The respondents (at p. 12,) have stated that the first proposal of Arbuthnot and Bassandyne was, that the Assembly should give them authority to print the New Bible, and fix a reasonable price at which it should be sold. They then say (p. IS,) that " the Assembly gave a favourable answer to all the requests of the printers, except the first, re- garding the authority to print the New Bible, and fix the price. Their answer to this is, * to \hQ first article, answered, refers the process to the Council.* This (add they) plainly meant that the Assembly could not give power to print the very translation authorised by themselves, or fix its price, but that it was necessary to apply to the king and council for such permission ; thus plainly acknowledging the crown's prerogative to print all translations whatever of the Sacred Scriptures." This is a very mistaken view of the first of the proposals of the printers, and the deliverance of the Assembly on that article. The printers took for granted that the church would patronize the work, and the proposal was, that they should approve of 4S the price to be charged for a Bible, printed conform to the proof given in, and subscribed with their hands, and that the said proofs should be delivered to the clerk of the Assembly. The Assembly evidently did not consider this mode of proceeding as sufficiently secure, as it was not in the power of an ecclesiastical court to enforce any obligation which could be implied in the mere delivery of the specimens of the work into the hands of their clerk. They, therefore, referred this merely secular matter to the council, a court of re- cord, in whose books it was common to register such obligations, that the authority of the Lords of Council might be interponed thereto. We do not pretend to understand the meaning of the word process as here introduced ; but we see no reason for doubting that the only matter referred to the council related to the price to be paid for a work to be finished agreeably to the contract. It appears, from the obhgation subscribed by Arbuthnot and Bassandyne twelve months after- wards, (March 18, 1575-6,) and registered in the books of Privy Council, July 18, 1576, that " the work had not taken effect in respect of the impedi- ments occurring ;" but they engaged to finish it in nine months from the last day of March 1576, or by the end of December. That this engagement was not fulfilled is very well known, and the reason will appear from a paper printed in the Appendix. The respondents say (page 13,) that when the gift to Arbuthnot and Bassandyne was issued, Lekprevik may have surrendered or forfeited his licence. But his powers (they say) are confined to 44 the printing of the Geneva version ; and, therefore, it might be thought that the king was entitled, at the request of the General Assembly, to bestow the privilege of printing their new translation on a dif- ferent person. A new translation it was not, as we have already shown sufficiently ; but if it had been a new one ex- ecuted by the Assembly, surely the Assembly of 1579 should have known this fact. In their dedi- cation, however, it is expressly ascribed to " the godly men (of the nation of England for the maist part) banished from their country for the Gospel's cause, and convenit at Geneva, quha did faithfullie and learnedhe translate this book out of the pure fountaine of the Hebrew, Chaldaic, and Greek tongues." In page 14 they concede that, in the days of James VI. the office of king's printer does not seem to have necessarily implied the right of print- ing the Bible without a special grant to that ef- fect ; and, consequently, in our apprehension, the king's power must have been considered the same with regard to the Bible and all other books. Ar- buthnot was appointed king's printer for life ; but his licence to print the Bible extended only to ten years ; so that his privilege] expired only a year later than Lekprevik's. Imjiortation was not pro- hibited. The respondents think it likely that the omission was per incuriam. This gratuitous as- sumption is highly improbable, when it is consider- ed how many licences had been granted repeatedly for printing other books, — in which licences im- portation was prohibited ; but it had never been prohibited in the case of the Bible, except in the .45 licence to Arbuthnot and Bassandyne, which did not take effect, as their joint obligation to print the Bible was not fulfilled within the stipulated time. They say that whatever the crown did grant by the preceding deeds, its power to grant is clearly implied in one and all of them. We will not dis- pute what may have theii been in the power of the crown ; but we are quite sure that the crown exer- cised no greater powers in restraining the importa- tion of the Bible than any other book, or rather, that it restrained the importation of other books, while it left the importation of the Bible free and uninterrupted. In page 15, the respondents speak of the edition of the Bible, printed under the sanction of the General Assembly, as different from that which was published in 1579, — at least, they say that we over- look that edition, though they evidently understand us to have mentioned the edition 1579. Of the edition published under the sanction of the Assem- bly, (which is certainly the only one published in Scotland previous to the year 1610,) the title of the New Testament is dated 1576, and the title of the whole book 1579. We are confident that fifty English editions may be found in Scotland, of an earher date than 1611, (not l6lO) when king James's translation was printed in England ; but no Scottish edition has ever been seen any where prior to l6ll, except the edition 1579, and Andro Hart's of l6lO, both in foHo, and both of the Geneva translation. The respondents say that other edi- tions may have been published, though no copy is now extant. How does it happen that English editions should be so numerous, and that nobody 46 has ever seen any Scottish edition, except these two, both of a size, which could not he home about iti many men^s hands f The respondents next say, (p. 15,) that if Bibles, for the use of Scotland, were imported, it must have been under the sanction of the person who enjoyed the king's licence to print Bibles for the time. This is a most unreasonable supposition. No officer was empowered to import, or to license importation, and the king's printer had no power to prevent importation. They talk of the obligation of such a person to procure a proper supply for the country, either printed or imported by himself, and they say that this still remained an undoubted ex- ercise of the crown's preiogative by its iwoper officer, *' The person who had the exclusive right of printing the Bible possessed, (they say) either expressly or by implication, the power of prevent- ing importation, except under his own proper authority ; and both the one power and the other were uniformly exercised by the crown.'* We deny that the person who had the right of printing the Bible possessed the power of prevent- ing importation, unless that power was expressly granted to him, and unless it could be shown that when other persons obtained licences to import books, the Bible was always reserved. Now, it so happens that we have clear evidence, that in 1591 John Norton, an Englishman, received a licence to exercise, during his lifetime, the trade of inbringing and selling all sortis of hiikes, in all languages and proven sciences, — a trade which he had previous- ly exercised four years. The Bible is not except- ed ; and, in the preamble, the king professes his 47 desire that his subjects be furnished of all sorts of guid bukis. and that upon guid and easye prices. According to every principle of fair construction, the Bible must be included in this licence, to bring- in and sell all sortis of hooks. On no other prin- ciple tlian this, has the right of the English Uni- versities to print Bibles been established ; their let- ters of privilege bear, that they may lawfully and freely print all manner of hooks or volumes not pub- licly prohibited, or all manner of boohs approved, or to he approved by the Chancellor, c^c. On these expressions, it has been decided that the Universi- ties have a concurrent right with the king's printer in England to print Bibles, — and, on the same ex- pressions, Norton's right to import Bibles might have been, and no doubt was insisted on.* In the same manner, it appears to us undeniable that Andro Hart, (who complained to the Privy Council in February 1589, that John Gourlay, customer of Edinburgh, had exacted custom for books imported from Germany, and then obtained decreit against him,) was in the practice of bringing into the country all sorts of books. The Lords, auditors of Ex- chequer, in June 1597) ordained Gourlay to desist from " asking of ony custome fra the said Andro Hart, complenar, for ony bukes or volumis bi^ocht in, or to be brocht in, or saidd be him within this realme, in ony time coming." Soon after this, (in * In 1.592, Norton was complained of to the Town Council of Edinburgh by seven booksellers, because he and his servants, being unfreemen, sold a great many books bound or unbound in smalls. The bailies ordained him to desist from any sort of books in smalls within the burgh. But his wholesale trade does not seem to have been ob- jected to. Counc. llecordj vol. ix. fol. 183. 48 ICOI,) the Psalms, as sung in the Kirk of Scotland, were printed at Dort, at the expense of the heirs of Henry Charteris and Andrew Hart in Edinburgh.* The respondents, however, have said that the licence to Norton to import books, and the gift to Walgrave, October 9, 1590, constituting him king's printer for all the days of his life, as well as the licence to Zacharie Pont, giving him the office of chief imprentar within the realm during his life- time, dated October 28, 1590, related not to print- ing the Bible, which belonged to Young exclusive- ly, but to the printing and importation of other books. It is immaterial to notice the mistake as to George Young, the Archdeacon of St. Andrews, having any right at all to the printing of tlie Bible in 1590 and 1591. Young had acted as corrector of the press when the Bible was printed by Arbuthnot and Bassandyne. He received a grant September 20, 1585. This he assigned, April 15, 1587, to Gilbert Masterton, who transferred his right to John Gibson, bookbinder to his Majesty, and Gibson received a new gift for 19 years, dated June 20, 1589, and a subsequent gift in 1590, both including a liberty of printing the Bible and other books, either within or without the realm, and a prohibi- tion against all importation, — " notwithstanding of whatever gift granted heretofore in the contrary." But as the king's power is alleged to have been so * Before the time of Norlon, and probably before Hart, Thomas VautroUier, bookseller, brought many books from England. On the 6th of April, 1580, he was charged by the Town Council of Edinburgh to make payment to the treasurer of the custom of all buikes brocht be him within this realm, under the pain of warding. 4g absolute in those days, it is to be presumed that, though the lieges were prohibited to import, his Majesty did not restrain himself, and he did not re- nounce the power of granting to others the liberty of importation. This privilege of his was to endure till the year I6O8, and yet, in 1599, he required a licence to bring home an impression of the Psalms from Middleburg, and a prohibition against all others for seven years, or to the year I6O6, though the Psalms were included in his original gift. But this was not a prohibition which prevented any one from importing Psalms, unless they were of that particular impression and form. But it is not conceivable that there was any in- tention of restraining Walgrave or Pont from print- ing the Bible. The former was authorised to print *' all and sindrle huhis^ quhilks sal be seen allowet and approvit be his Majestic, the presbytery or session of Edinburgh." The latter was entitled, as chief imprentare, to print *' all hijnd of buikis set furth, in ony kind of tongue or language, not Jbr- hidden he the statutis and lawis of his 3Iajesties realme.'* In 1599 also, llobert Smith received licence to print the Psalms, the double and single Catechism, and other books which we find includ- ed in Gibson's gift, — and this was at least nine years before Gibson's gift expired, as appears from the grant to Thomas Finlason in I6O6. The gift to Robert Charteris constituting him printer to the king for all the days of his lifetime, gave him power to print not only acts of parlia- ment, &c. but all and sindrie buikes, volumes, werkes and writtis quhilks sal be seen, allowed, and approved be his majestic, the presbyterie or session £ 50 of Edinburgh — a description which certainly docs not except Bibles. Let it be farther remarked, that instead of appointing one particular officer, even for printing acts of parliament and other acts, proclamations, &c. concerning his majestic and estate, the king seems to have appointed an unli- mited number. It appears from Innlason's gift in 1606, that Robert Walgrave*s right was in force till March 1604 ; and yet we find in December l603, the very same powers given to Robert Charteris (and nane utheris) which had previously been con- ferred on Walgrave. *' The title of king's printer (say the respondents) was understood to be pecu- liarly appropriated to the person who had the power of printing acts of parliament and state papers ;" but we do not know how two or three contempor- ary king's printers, each apparently possessing the sole privilege, contrived to adjust their conflicting titles. And if any thing be more certain than an- other on this subject, it is that the king's printer was not understood to have the power of printing acts of parliament and state papers. The respondents, without stopping to consider the Bible of Andrew Hart, who was not king's printer, and whose licence to print a Bible has never been discovered, have next proceeded to give an account of the translation of the Bible in the reign of King James, after his accession to the EngUsh crown. This account is crowded with the most glaring misrepresentations. They say that this translation was no more con- nected with England than with Scotland — that four clergymen were present who represented the puri- tans — that Mr. Patrick Galloway, minister of Perth, 51 was present as representing the Cliurcli of Scot- land, and that he reguhirly transmitted to his bre- thren in Scotland accounts of the proceedings, (Answers, p. 16, I7.) Now as they seem to know of Mr. Patrick Galloway's account of the proceed- ings, it is very singular, that instead of following this account, which would have shown them that he did not represent the Church of Scotland, they have implicitly followed the narrative of Dr. Bar- low, whose authority has never obtained credit among any of our presbyterian writers. Mr. Patrick Galloway had ceased to be minister of Perth fourteen years before the time now referred to, having been one of the king's domestic chap- lains from 1589 to I607 ; and so effectually did he ingratiate himself, that his son was created a peer of the realm by the title of Lord Dunkeld. Gal- loway, instead of representing the Church of Scot- land, was one of the instruments employed by the king for the very purpose of subverting the original ecclesiastical constitution established at the Refor- mation. It was impossible that he should have had any commission to represent the Church of Scot- land in the conference, as the last General Assembly which sat in November 1602, (before Queen Eliza- beth's death) could not have foreseen that any con- ference was to take place. That assembly had, however, recommended to presbyteries to advertise his majesty's ministers (chaplains) of " such as mis- liked the government or were inclined to novations," and it was also " thought expedient, and concludet that his majesty's ministers, and sic utheris of the ministerie as sail have occasion to be in any charge about his majesty inform the presbyteries of the estate of things so far as it is needful for the Weill of the cause." In this way it was that Galloway WTote to the presbytery of Edinburgh. His account of the Hampton-Court conference is far more worthy of credit than Barlow's ; for Galloway's account was corrected by the king's own hand before it was sent to the presbytery. The letter may be seen in the printed Calderwood, p. 475, &c. and in the fifth volume of his MS. History, p. 593, &c. The se- cond of the articles comprehended in the " note of such things as shall be reformed" was the following : " That a translation be made of the whole Bible, as consonant as can be to the original Hebrew and Greek ; and this to be set out, and printed with- out any marginal notes, and only to be used in all churches of England m time of divine service." It is said by Calderwood, that when the letter of Mr. P. Galloway was read in the Presbytery of Edinburgh, Mr. James Melvin was present. All others keeping silence, he craved two things, first, that they would be grieved with sorrow, with many godly and learned brethren in our neighbour coun- try, who having expected reformation, are disap- pointed and heavily grieved ; and that if no other way could be found for help, that they would at least help them by their prayers to God for their comfort and relief. 2. That as tlie presbytery of Edinburgh had ever been as the Sion and watch- tower of our kirk, and the ministers thereof the chief watchmen, that they would watch and take heed that no peril come from our neighbour kirk." It is said with great emphasis in page I7. that in the Hampton-Court conference, *' four clergymen Avere present who represented the puritaris'' — and 53 that " Dr. Reynolds acted as the spokesman for the puritans— and again, p. 19. that there can be little doubt that several of the translators were of the sect of the puritans — and all this is said as if the puritans had been of the same body as the Church of Scotland, or as if their concurrence in any measure could have bound the people of Scot- land, or at least the members of this national church. We do not consider it correct to speak of the 2^uri- tans as a sect at that period, any more than it would be to stigmatise as sectaries those members of more than one national church to whom the name of the evangelical party is sometimes assigned. The 'pu- ritans all wished to be relieved of certain points of conformity at which their consciences scrupled ; and they wished for farther reformation in the of- fices of divine worship. But it is enough to say that the four clergymen, who are said to have repre- sented the puritans, were not commissioned by the puritans, but nominated hy the king, and that they were all members of the church of England and of the English universities. Calderwood says of the conference, (vol. v. p. 586, 587, MS.) *' The good professors of England were put in hopes of good beginning of reformation, and so much was pre- tended when the conference was appointed. But nothing less meant, yea rather under colour of con- ference to procure further confirmation to the abuses and corruptions. What sincerity was there meant, when for the sincere party were nominate two that were very corrupt appearandly. They ivere nomi- nal only to he spies and to prevaricate.^^ The same account of their characters is given by Mr. William (Scott in his MS. account of the government qf the 51 church. Galloway says, that when the king craved to know of them what they desired to be reformed, it was very loosely and coldly answered. Dr. Hey- lin in his " Quinquarticular History," mentions Dr. Reynolds and Dr. Sparks as being of Oxford, (the former was president of Corpus Christi Col- lege, and the latter Fellow of Magdalen College, and a Professor of Divinity,) and Mr. Knewstubs and Mr. Chatterton as of Cambridge. The last mentioned was master of Emmanuel College. The same author mentions Drs. Sparks and Reynolds as having stood firm to the Church of England. (Quinquart. Hist. c. 21. sect. 7-) Anthony Wood speaks of both Reynolds and Sparks as having writ- ten in favour of conformity.* Fuller, (in his Chiu-ch History Cent. I7. B. 10. p. 48.) says of Reynolds, that '* his disaffection to the discipline established in England was not so great as some bishops did sus- jyecty or as more non-conformists did believe. No doubt he desired the abolishing of some ceremonies for the ease of the conscience of others, to which in his own practice he did willingly submit, con- stantly wearing hood and surplice, and kneeling at the sacrament." Neale, in his History of the Pu- ritans, (vol. ii. p. 22.) says, that Dr. *' Reynolds fell below himself, and lost some part of his esteem with the pnrifans^ being overawed by the place and company, and his sovereign opponent. The puri- tans (he adds) refused to be concluded by this con- * Reynolds wrote a " Defence of our English Liturgy against Ro- bert Browne his schismatical book." Sparke wrote " A Brotherly Per- suasion to Unity and Uniformity, touching the present Ecclesiastical Clovcrnnicnt and the authorised rites and ceremonies of the Church of England." Lond. 1(J07. 55 ference'^ (a mock conference he calls it elsewhere ;) and " they objected to the account of it published by Dr. Barlow, as done without the knowledge, advice, or consent of the other side, and therefore deserving no credit."* The whole account given by the respondents, (p. 18.) with respect to the purpose for which certain bishops and ministers were summoned from Scotland in 1606, is grossly incorrect. They quote Spots- wood ; but we do not find in Spotswood or any- where else, that " one point of dispute was on this very subject of the authority due to the different translations of the Bible.'* How should this have been a point of dispute if the Church of Scotland had been bound by the Hamptoun-Court confer- ence ? " The new translation, (it is then said,) was a matter of arrangement between both parties of the church, and both kingdoms of England and Scotland ; and, as has been mentioned, the pro- posal did originally come from the puritans, who supported the doctrines of the Scottish Presbyteri- ans." We maintain that the purpose for which the Scottish di\dnes were summoned had no connection "with the translation of the Bible j and so far was this from having been a matter of arrangement, that nothing was arranged at all. One of the ques- tions proposed to the Presbyterian divines related to a matter of some importance in this case, nanie- ly, the power of the king to convoke, prorogue and dissolve ecclesiastical assemblies. This they all re- * See also Peirce's Vindication of the Dissenters, p. 154; where it is said that Dr. Sparke afterwards wrote for Conformity, and that he said not a word in the controversy ; also that Dr. Reynolds, and the other supposed Non-conforroists, were all called to the conference by the king. 5G fused to acknowledge, notwithstanding tlie elo- quent and learned sermons delivered on the sub- ject in their hearing by four dignified clergymen of the Church of England, namely. Bishop Barlow, Dr. Buckeridge, Dr. King, and Bishop Andrews ; the last of whom " teaching upon the tenth of Numbers, discoursed upon the two trumpets, and proved, as he could, the convening and discharg- ing of councils and assemblies to belong to Christ- ian kings and emperors." Calderwood, p. 542. (See M'Crie^s Life of Melville, vol. ii. ; Melville's De- cHning Age ; Scott's Historical Narration ; Report of the Conference, I6O6, MS. Advocates Library; Heylin's Hist, of Presbyterians, p. 379.)* The only arrangement and accommodation that fol- lowed these conferences was this — the eigJit minis- ters (Spotsw^ood omits one) were never more per- mitted to attend the church courts, and some of them were imprisoned and banished the country. In p. 19, the respondents seem to insinuate, that possibly some of the translators of the Bible might be from Scotland ; but at any rate, (they say,) se- veral were of the sect of puritans. Now, if they would only look at the list of the translators in Ful- ler's History, or in Lewis, (to whom they refer,) or in Mr. Todd's Vindication of our Authorised Trans- lation, (Lond. 1819,) they would perceive that all the translators were of Oxford, or Cambridge, or Westminster, and that both Reynolds and Chaterton * Heylin says, " Neither the learned discourses of these four pre- lates, nor the arguments of the Scottish bishops, nor the authority and elocution of the king could gain on these deaf adders, who came re- solved not to hear the voice of those charmers, charmed they never so U'iscli/." 57 (or Cliaderton,) the only puritans in the list, weve masters of colleges in the English universities. That tlie translators were all members of the church of England^ appears from his Majesty's letter to the Bishop of London, the bishop's let- ter to the university of Cambridge j and the Earl of Salisbury's (Cecil's) letters to that university, all mentioned by Lewis, p. 312 — 316. — (See Wil- kin's Concil. vol. iv. p. 407, Todd's Appendix No. iv.) His Majesty required the Bishop of Lon- don, (at that time promoted to the see of Can-' terbury,) to write in his name to the other bishops, signifying to them that his Majesty did strictly charge them that all excuses set apart, when any prebend or parsonage, rated or valued in the king's books at L.20 a year or upward, should happen to be void, they should admit none into it till his Ma- jesty was certified of the vacancy, (avoidance,) that he might commend for the same such of the learn- ed men whom he had employed about making this new translation as he should think fit to be prefer- red. And that his Majesty had taken the same or- der for such prebends and benefices as should be void in his own gift. Seven of the translators were created bishops in a very few years. The account given by the respondents, p. 19, as if it were in the words of AVodrow, they ought to have known is copied verhatim from Spotswood, whose statements on this matter do not agree with other parts of the narrative of Wodrow, who speaks of the assembly at Burntisland, at which the amend- ed translation was proposed, as a corrupt assembly, and who does not give much credit to the king for his views. "The king, (he says,) being a piece of 58 a poet, was fond to have some psalms turned in metre by himselfj brought into pubhc worship, and was not unwilHng to have our translation brought as near as might be the Enghsh translation, where, as has been observed on Knox*s life, several words and phrases used in the English edition and that of Geneva, were altered in favour of the government and ceremonies of England. Whatever were the motives, the motion was made at that meeting." Wodrow then proceeds to extract the account given by Row in his MS. history, together with Bishop Spotswood's, being all (he says) that he had met with on that subject. Calderv;ood's account of the proposals at Burntisland do not agree with Spots- wood's. But Spotswood's testimony, if it is to be implicitly received, proves at least that nothing was done in Scotland either in the translating of the Bible or the Psalms : and that the persons employ- ed by King James were the most learned of the di- vines of the church of' England. That King James's Bible was intended for Eng- land alone, and translated solely by English divines, appears sufficiently from the dedication to King James. In the first sentence the translators speak of the " great and manifold blessings bestowed on us the jDCople of England^ when your Majesty was sent to rule and reign over us." In the last paragraph but one, they say, *' and now at last, this work being brought to such a conclusion, as that we have great hope that the chnrch of England shall reap good fruit therchij^ we hold it our duty to offer it to your Majesty, not only as to our king and sovereign, but as to the principal mover and author of the work." In the epistle of the translators to the reader, the 59 puriians are repeatedly mentioned, but not as if any of them had really been engaged in the work. It is said, that they had used a very poor and empty shift, in refusing to subscribe the communion book on account of the corrupted translation ; and after- wards, that the translators avoided on the one hand the scrupulosity of the puritans, and on the other side, the obscurity of the papists. The respondents say, p. 19, that not one word of objection or difference ever occurred either in Eng- land or Scotland on the subject of the new transla- tion of the Bible. This representation does not agree with what is stated in the epistle of the translators to the reader, where they speak of many mouths having been open and not yet stopped, and where they endeavour to answer " the speeches and rea- sons, both of their brethren and of their adversaries, against this w^ork." Fuller also says, that " some of the brethren were not well pleased with this translation, suspecting it would abate the repute of that of Geneva." But with these scruples we have little occasion to concern ourselves. We deny, however, that the translation *' appears to have re- ceived the most immediate and cordial reception into this country, at a time when almost every other point or doctrine of religion was disputed." If it received immediate admission into Scotland, (as we have no doubt many copies of it reached this country at that time,) it must have been by impor- tation of copies. We defy the king's printers to produce a copy of it printed by any of their prede- cessors in Scotland prior to the year 1633, a period of twenty-two years after the first English edition. There was indeed an Edinburgh edition of the New 60 Tesstiiment in 1C!28, but this was printed by An- drew Hart's heirs, who were not king's printers. They then say, that a more distinct and clear authority occurs '^ in regard to Scotland, than in regard to England, as this particular translation is recognised and ordered to be used in King Charles I.'s ecclesiastical canons for Scotland in the year 1636, whereas it seems to have crept into general use in England merely by common acquiescence, and without any express authority civil or ecclesias- tical." They then say that " the English book of canons was promulgated by authority of the king and the church in 1603, at which time the author- ised translation was that called the Bishop's Bible. This accordingly is the translation authorised by the English canons, and from this translation the Psal- ter, embodied with the English liturgy, is. taken," (a mistake ; the Psalter is from an older transla- tion, quite different from tlie Bishop's, and from that older translation the gospels and epistles were also taken, till the restoration of Charles XL) They then quote Dr. Brett as saying, that " the clergy give their consent to the old translation, and not to the latter, which is in our Bibles." Dr. Brett might be a very well-informed man on some points; but innumerable divines of greater name have conceived that the king's authority, whe_ ther it bound the laity or not, certainly bound the clergy to use the translation of King James. We can produce copies of the Articles of En- quiry required to be answered at the J^piscopal vi- sifatiQ7i in almost every diocese in England during the reigns of Charles I. Charles II. James II. and '\Vilham and Mary ; and in all of them one of the questions is, " Ha\e you a large Bible of the last 01 translation ?" or, *' Have you the Bible in folio fairly bound of King James his translation ?'* Did the bishops in those reigns presume to in- sist on the use of a translation of the Bible, which tlie clergy were not obliged to use by the canons ratified by the king ? Was Heylin (the chaplain of an archbishop) mistaken in saying that the canons authorise this very Bible ? Dr. Heylin was in the confidence of many who had taken a part in the proceedings which led to the establishment of the canons in 1603, and surely should have known which translation was understood to be authorised- He says, " For the new translation of King James his time, to shew that the translation of Scripture is no work of parliament, as it was principally occa- sioned by some passages in the conference at Hamp- ton Court, without recourse unto the parliament, so was it done only hy such men as the Jmig appointed, and hy his authority alone imprinted, pidylished^ and imposed: care being taken by the canon of the year 1603, that one of them should be provided for each several church at the charge of the parish." {HeyVuis Tracts, the Reformation of the Church of England Justified, p. 9, 10.) If Dr. Brett admitted that the canons of 1603 bind the spiritualty, (a point on which we have not understood that there is any legal doubt,) he could not deny that the king's authority, as defined by these canons, was quite sufficient to bind every clergyman of the church of England to receive and use any translation of the Bible which the king may be pleased to authorise. (See Burn's Ecclesiastical Law — Convocation — and also the general preface to the work.) &2 What have been called the Canons of the Churcli of Scotland are on a very different footing. The respondents, in p. 20, mention, that in 1606 and 161S, "episcopacy was fully established in Scotland." But these acts, however, were repealed in 1G90. They then say that '* the king and bishops had ample powers to regulate the religious doctrine of the country ; but no canons or liturgy were promul- gated till the years 1635 and 1636." Before this period an act had been passed in 1633 ratifying and asserting the royal prerogativey a word whicli, according to Mackenzie, had never been used in any act of parliament till the year 1606, when it was introduced by King James, in the act preced- ing that by which episcopacy was then established. The church had no hand in the preparation of the Book of Canons, and so far were the members from having given their consent to the liturgy, that they were commanded by a royal proclamation to re- ceive it not only before they had ever seen it, but even before it was prepared. In the same manner the canons were ratified by the king's " royal pre- rogative and supreme authority in causes ecclesi- astical," on the 23d of May 1635, and by the same authority ordered to be strictly observed in all points, under severe penalties, many months before they were printed, and while some of them were not finally settled, as appears from one of Laud's letters, dated September 1635, printed by Lord Hailes, in the memorials and letters relating to the reign of Charles I. p. 13. A full account of these proceedings of the king and the archbishop of Canterbury, may be found in most of the histories of that period. 63 The whole body of the presbyterian ministers disclaimed the canons, because they were imposed without their consent, and without any authority of a synod, but merely by the power of the king and the advice of the prelates. (See Heylin*s Life of Laud ; Colliers Eccl. Hist. ; The Charge of the Scottish Commissioners against Canterburie ; Troubles and Trials of Laud ; Baillie's Letters ; The King's Large Declaration ; Stevenson's His- tory of the Church ; Craufurd's MS. History, &c.) This Book of Canons required that " in every church there shall be a Bible of the largest volume^ with the Book of Common Prayer and Psalms newly authorised. The Bible shall be of the translation of King James.'''' We cannot help saying that if this had ever been received as law, it was a law requiring the use of imported Bibles in the churches ; for prior to that time there had been no Scottish edition of the Bible of King James's translation of the largest volume. There had been an edition in 1633, in duodecimo. There was no quarto Bible printed in Scotland for many years afterwards, and no folio edition of King James's translation was printed in Scotland during the whole of that century. " It appears, therefore, (say the respondents, p. 21.) that King James's translation was originally authenticated and introduced into public worship in a fully more authoritative and formal manner in Scotland than in England." We ask then, " What was the translation used before this original intro- duction of King James's in 1636, and how were the copies procured ?" After telling us that the king at that time was head of the church in Scotland as much as in Eng- G4 land, and that every minister was required to ac- knowledge upon oath, that the king was *' the only lawful supreme governor of this realm, as well in matters spiritual and ecclesiastical, as in matters temporal," an oath imposed by an act which has been long repealed, they say that " there seems to have been no express or authoritative introduction of the new translation when it first came out in 1610, (iCll they mean,) by order of the crown, either in England or Scotland. It was at once re- ceived by general consent in both countries." What then is the meaning of the words so conspicuously printed on the title-page of the first, and every subse- quent edition, Appointed to he read in Churches ?- Did ^oZ>^r/J5r/rA'^r his Majesty's printer,insert these words without authority ? Or was there any doubt that in England, before the supremacy was limited and de- fined by the act of settlement at the Revolution, and by the act of union of the two kingdoms, the king had complete power to regulate and prescribe the forms to be used in divine worship ? (See Burn's Eccl. Law, art. Supremacy.^ The respondents say, (page 21.) that some parts of the Ecclesiastical Canons and Liturgy prepared by Charles I. for Scotland, were much disapproved of by the Presbyterians, and that the king found it necessary to issue proclamations suspending these canons in some particulars. Now the truth is, they were totally annulled, and all acts of council and proclamations which had been published for esta- blishing them were rescinded. (See Proclama- tion, June 28, 1638, Sept. 9, 1638, Dec. 8, 1638 ; La7'ge Declaration^ p. 137, &c.) The General Assembly also, by the act Dec. 6, 1638 j reject- 65 ed and condemned the Book of Canons as con- trary to the Confession of Faith, and repugnant to the estabUshed government, the Book of Dis- ciphne, and acts and constitutions of our kirk. The following General Assembly, August 17, 1C39, again condemned the Book of Canons, as without warrant or direction from the General Assembly, establishing a tyrannical power over the kirk in the person of bishops, and overthrowing the whole dis- cipline and government of the kirk by assemblies. It appears from Baillie's account of the Assembly 1 638, that no attempt was made to vindicate or ap- prove any part of the service book or canons. *' These pieces (says he) are so vile, that none of our parties to this day have ever ventured to defend them, except by these parentheses, which they make the king in his proclamations cast in for their commendation." In the MS. History of the As- sembly 1638, it is said that "all the Assembly, without a contrare voice, rejected and condemned them all." The respondents then say, that " even during the whole civil wars and Cromwell's government, when the Presbyterian rehgion was predominant in Scotland, this translation continued to be solely and universally used." They cannot prove this asser- tion ; and we think we could show that, in private families at least, the Geneva translation was not less used than the other. We say however, that, during all that time, there was no authority for using this translation, in the same manner as there was autho- rity for using a particular version of the Psalms. The General AssembHes, from the year 1638 to 1649, never expressly refer to this translation, and in F 66 their quotations of Scripture they do not uni- fprmly follow either the Geneva or King James's version. But they frequently foUov/ the Geneva reading. Thus, Jer. xlviii. 10, they use the Geneva word negligentUj, for deceitfully^ in King James's version j 2 Sam. x. 12, behave valiantly, instead of play the men; Psal. cxix. ISJ, just are thy judg- ments, instead of upright. The Westminster Con- fession of Faith, approved by the Assembly in 1647, and the Directory for public worship, approv- ed by the Assembly in 1615, do not mention any particular translation. It is said in the Directory that " all the canonical books of the Old and New Testament (but none of those which are commonly called Apocrypha) shall be publicly read in the vulgar tongue, out of the best allowed translation." It is to be observed, particularly, that the Scripture proofs referred to were not quoted at length in the original edition of the Confession and other stand- ards ; but the Scriptural expressions used in the text are sometimes taken from the Geneva transla- tion ; thus, chap. i. § 8, " the word of God dwelling ple7itifully in all," (Col. iii. l6,) instead of richly^ as in the translation now in use j and when the words used correspond to the later translation, it will generally be found that they do not vary from that of Geneva. It is not less curious that, to this day, the preface to the Westminster Confession of Faith, first pub- lished in 1647j contains quotations from Scripture in the words of the Geneva translation, as Pro v. xix. 2, Without knowledge the mind cannot he good, ^ passage which, in King James's version, is thus 0? rendered, that the soul he ivithoiit knowledge it is not good. We would not find it very difficult to show that considerable dissatisfaction with King James's trans- lation prevailed among the most learned men in Scotland, even after the restoration of Charles II. We have seen a set of proposals for the bettering of the Enolish translation of the Bible offered in the year 1665 by Mr. John Row, (the well-knwon author of a Hebrew grammar, printed at Glas- gow in 1644,) who was principal of King's College, Aberdeen, till the year l66l, w^hen lie v/as remov- ed, as were all the otlier members of the universi- ties, who retained their attachment to the principles which they had avowed during the interregnum. Fom page 21 to page 29, the respondents j>roceed with the consideration of the various patents, from the accession of James till the Revolution, '* all of which (they say) proceed on the acknowledgment of the same power in the Crown, to give that exclusive right to its patentee ; and all of tvhich relate to the translation of James I. as being the ordinary trans- lation then used and recognised in Scotland." Yet in mentioning the first of these, (the gift to Thomas Finlason in 1606,) they say that " the privi- lege extended to any translation in the vulgar tongue, though that which would probably be printed at the commencement of the patent, would be either the Geneva translation, or that authorised hij the Gene- ral Assembly.'" Thomas Finlason was not king's printer in 1606. Robert Charteris held the office till 1612, with a power granted to him and his servants, (a?idnane uthers,) to print all and sundry books allowed and approved by his Majesty, the presbytery, or session of Edinburgh. But neither 6B Charteris nor F'mlnson i^rinted a Bible of any trans- lation. The licence granted to Finlason certainly applied to any translation. Any foreign book might be printed by any printer, provided he could obtain a licence ; and no book at that time could be print- ed without a licence, though it might be the compo- sition of the printer himself. But is there any thing proved by Finlason's grant except this, that the king was in the practice of conferring such grants on other persons besides his own printer ? But how the sub- jects could be benefited by gifts like these is not very manifest, unless it was considered to be essential to their morals to render it as difficult to procure BibleSy as all " sortis of playing cards,^' which Finlason received the sole privilege of manufacturing and im- porting free of all custom for twenty-five years. While Charteris was still king's printer, and Fin- lason had a licence to print the Bible and innumer- able other books, which he never printed, and while other persons (for instance Andrew Hart,) had a right to import all manner of books, a Bible was printed, or at least published in Edinburgh by Andrew Hart, in 1610, cumprivilegio regicE 3Iajestatis. It will be said by the respondents, that this was done by the licence of the proper officer. But who was the proper offi- cer ? Was it Robert Charteris, who, according to their doctrine, must have been invested with the whole power of the king to print whatever books he allowed and approved ? Or was it Thomas Finla- son, whose right they consider as absolutely exclu- sive with regard to Bibles, ballads, sonnets, play- ing cards, pictures, and the haill workis of Sir David Lyndesay, the very books of ballads, blas- phemations, and other mischievous minstrelsy, 69 against which the act of parliament 1551 is known to have been aimed ? Neither the one nor the other had the honour of licensing Andro Hart's Bible ; for the Privy Council and the Exchequer had long before recognised Hart's right of importation of books, free of custom ; and we know that before this time, while other persons had licences to print Bibles and Psalm Books, of which licences they made little use, Andrew Hart had at least one Bible and one Psalm Book printed for him at Dort* One circumstance concerning Hart's Bible we can state from the most authentic source of information. In 1611, it was concluded, by the diocesan synod of St Andrews, " that every brother sal urge his paro- chiners to buy ane of the Bibles laitlie printed by Andro Hart, and the brother failzing either to caus buy ane, as said is, or ellis to gif in his exact dili- gens, sal pay at the next synod sex lib. money.'* This was an order of a most obsequious synod, which was at that time more observant of the king's pleasure than any other in the kingdom. The next of their ordinances was this, that every brother of the ministry within the bounds of this synod " sal hereafter resort to all yair meetings, als weill in ex- erceis as synod in such habites as are pertaining and prescribed be ye act of parliament, and that under the penalty thairin contained," (the pain of horning, by act 8. Pari. 20. James VI. June 24, l609.)t • " At Dort. Imprinted by Isaac Canin at the expenses of the aires of Henry Charteris and Andrew Hart in Edinburgh. Anno 1601." + The act of the appai-el of Judges, magistrates, and kirkmen, seems to have taken for granted that the regulation of dress is one of the privi- leges of the Crown. It is insinuated^ that the judges had been rather 7<) The Bible required by the synod was to be a codi- 7)10)1 Bible for every Mrk ; but though the records of the synod, which descend to April 1636, occasional- ly require parishes to provide a common Bible, they never once allude to any change of the translation. The next grant in favour of Thomas Finlason, dated June 17, 1612, confers the title of His Hienes Printer on Finlason, because Mr. Robert Charteris had been denounced rebel, that is, he had unfortu- nately remained a year and day at His Hienes horn for a debt, said to be due to George and Margaret slovenly, so as to obtain little reverence from the ccmmon people, and the circumstance was " greatly censured by strangers resorting in these parts." Some of the ecclesiastical profession, chiefly those having vote in parliament, fell into great contempt "■ by occasion of their light and in- decent apparel." It is then said that the king, '' wha is maist gcdlie, wise, and religious, hating all erroneous and vain superstition, just in government, and of lang experience therein, knowis better than ony living what appertains and is convenient for every estate in their be- haviour and duty," and therefore the apparel of kirkraen, as well as of judges, is referred to the king. We do not know if the king gave an exclusive privilege to his tailor to fiirnish all the suits, prohibiting im- portation from London and other outlandish places ; but the act is fully more strongly declaratory of the power of the king in this matter, than the act of 1551 is in regard to the printing and publishing of books. Sir George Mackenzie thinks, that this act for the apparel of judges, &c. is not in desuetude ; and he says that " having been made in fa- vour of the king and monarchy, it cannot run in desuetude without their consent, and it is thought, that, by virtue of it, none who are lords of the session can be provosts, these being incompatible employments," &c. He does not say, that the ordering of apparel forjudges, magistrates, and kirkmen, is inter regalia ; but he refers to Lampridius in vita Seven, as to the distinction of habits amongst magistrates; and this was probably an indirect way of saying the same thing ; as from the time of Augustus ths Roman emperors exercised unlimited power in this matter. It is curious that the act 1551 immediately preceding that which relates to printing, shows (as Sir George Mackenzie observes) that the " secret council used by their own authority to make sump- tuary laws both as (o meat and clothing." 7i Smith, which he was unable to pay. * Finlason's gift puzzles the respondents, because one clause " ap- pears to excei^t the right of' printing the Bible, after having formerly conferred it in the same grant.'' Now it is only necessary to look at the collocation of the clause, to be convinced that it does not at least prevent Finlason from printing the Bible; but, stand- ing where it does, in the middle of the prohibitory clause, it evidently allows the Bible, New Testa- ment, and Psalm Book, to be printed and imported by others as well as by Finlason. The Bible, New Testament, and Psalm Book, were printed by others, (at least by Hart,) and they were in fact all import- ed at that period too. Nothing is more common than to find Hart's Psalms of a quarto size, par- ticularly his edition of 1615, annexed to English editions of the Bible ; and the separate Psalm Books of Hart and his heirs, from 1611 to l6S6at least, are as well known as any books which were ever printr ed in Scotland. Nearly a year before Finlason was nominated king's printer, he received a privilege for printing acts of parliament ; and all others were prohibited under pain of confiscation. Charteris still held the office. In 1612, (July 2,) it is stated in a proclamation anent printing of books, that " Many books are bought and sold in the kingdom, which are not printed in the same." The proclamation does not prohibit importation, but it charges all book- * The casualties of single and liferent escheat incurred by horning and denunciation for civil debt in Scotland, were taken away and abo- lished for ever by the Act 20. Geo. II. c. 50. Charteris was a victim to the old statute. sellers that when they bring home books to be sold, they do no way presume to utter any writ- ten hy any popish or suspect writer, without licence from his Majesty's secretary, or from the bishop of the diocese. Not a word is said of any other books. But if the doctrine of the respondents be well found- ed, it would have been in the power of Thomas Fin- lason either to print or to import the Rhemish or the Douay Bible, (though written by popish and suspect writers,) and to give licence to any person to import these, or any other editions of " the Auld and New Testaments in our vulgar tongue, or in Latin.'* The proclamation anent the printing of books be.^ yond sea, (June 1615,) does not prevent books from being published and printed beyond sea, if they have been previously approved by the two archbishops and the secretary of state. The licence to Gilbert Dick, (mentioned p. 23,) dated Feb. 10, 1618, gives him the sole power of printing two Catechisms, authorised by the arch- hishops. This was within the period of 25 years, during which Finlason, by his first gift in 1606, was authorised to print Catechisms ; and it was within the period of Finlason's second gift, by which he was constituted king's printer, and had the right of printing all works allowed and approved by his highness, the archhishops of St. Andrews or Glas- j^ow, and all other books agreeaMe with God's word. Is it jiossible, then, that Finlason could be prevented from printing these catechisms ? These catechisms were appointed to he taught within the kirks of the kingdom of Scotland. Why then did not the king*s printer print them ? or why was not 73 his licence sufficient to entitle Dick to print them, if he had not time for a task which could not surely be very laborious ? How did it come to pass too, that after this period, as well as before, Andrew Hart printed Catechisms for the use of the kirk of . Edinburgh, as did also John Wreitton and others ? The same observations apply to the case of the li- cence of June 30, 1619, authorising Dick to print a Book of Common Prayer and two Catechisms. Hart and Raban printed Books of Common Prayer, Con- fessions of Faith, Psalms, and Catechisms ; and in 1633, the king's printers, for the first time in Scot- land, printed the Boole of Common Prayer for the church of England, which the king ordered the dean of his chapel royal at Edinburgh to introduce that year. Row says in his MS. History, that only six lords of the privy council, seven lords of session, two advocates, one writer to the signet, with the clerk to the bills, and two young lords, conformed to the or- der. In Lord Hailes's Memorials, vol. ii. p. 1, 2, we find a scolding letter from Charles I. to the lords of session, (transcribed from the Books of Sederunt,) in which the members of the College of Justice are charged with being leaders of the other subjects in disobeying the orders of the church. The king's su- premacy in ecclesiastical matters was therefore not very generally recognised by one of the highest courts of law in this kingdom, even at the time when the archbishop's son was president of that court. In p. 23, the respondents mention the licence to Walter Finlason, (Jan. 17, 1628,) which, they admit, clearly included the right of printing the Bible ; but as his right extended only to the books included in his father's gifts, the limitation with regard to the • 74 .Bible was unquestionably one of the conditions un- der which he enjoyed the other privileges of his of- fice.* We may almost pass by the licence to Sir William Alexander, (1627). It is well known that he was translator of most of the Psalms in the collection ascribed to king James, and that the alterations made on these Psalms in the successive editions sub- sequent to the death of king James, metamorphosed them so completely as to have made them quite a new book. The people of Scotland were indignant at the attempt to introduce them into the worship of the church. But one thing we must not omit to state. The only edition of these Psalms which was ever destined for the use of churches in Scotland, was printed, not by his Majesty's printers for Scot- land, nor by any such functionary, but by Thomas Harper in London, in 1636. This is the edition which is bound up in the same volume with the Book of Common Prayer, referred to in the canons of l636,--™the two books being jointly designed the Book of Common Prayer and Psalms newly author- ised. If by this canon, during the momentary term while it was in force, the Psalms used in the churches were indubitably an English edition, who can deny that the Bible might as well be English ? In p. 24, Young and Tyler's patent, under the great seal, is mentioned, as having been granted when Walter Finlason's expired in 1641. There was an intervening patent to Robert Young, a printer in London, who published a New Testament and a '* The right certainly was not exclusive, and accordingly during the whole term of its continuance we find books printed by Hart's heirSj or Wrcittonj or Raban, or Bryson, I'or the use of churches. 75 Bible in 1633, with Edinburgh on the title page, and who published, at London, the King's Large Declaration in 1639. We know nothing of the manner in which Walter Finlason's claims were dis- posed of. The patent to Young and Tyler deserves the most particular consideration. It provides that the patentees shall have the common benefit of printing the Psalms in use for the Church of Scotland^ with Testaments and other books for the use of our said kingdom, as other pointers there have : (" habebunt commune beneficium excudendi Psalmos nunc in usu j)ro ecclesia nostra ScoticB cum Testamentis aliisque libris pro usu regni nostri ut alii typographi ibidem habent,") and it ends with these words, " Proviso tamen quod prsesentes sint absque prsejudicio aut impedimento alicui alii typographo infra dictum regnum nostrum Scotise excudere Biblia in folio, vel alios libros impressos in dicto regno nostro quo- cunque tempore ante datam primse nostras dona- tionis prsescriptse in favorem dicti Roberti Young concessse." This clause clearly establishes what we have all along affirmed v>dth regard to Andrew Hart and other printers, who printed Bibles, Psalms, Catechisms, and other books, even before the date of Young's first patent in 1632, the substance of which is recited in the patent of 1641. If the leave of his Majesty's printers had been required for printing these other books — and if, at the same time, Young and Tyler received all the privileges ever enjoyed by their predecessors, it is very strange that this privi- lege, if enjoyed by their predecessors, should have been Avithheld from them. Nothing can be plainer than that here every facility is granted to any print- 76 cr in Scotland to print folio Bibles, as Andrew Hart had done, or to print other books, printed in Scotland beforc the date of the first gift in favour of Young in 163^. It is equally manifest that the only importation prohibited in this grant is importation from France, Holland^ or other places heyond seas. The respondents speak of a power of exporting Bibles from Scotland into England, and say, that " the patentees appear to have consented to the equivalent power of importation from England into Scotland." Their consent, however, could not be the condition on which other printers had a right of printing Bibles before the date of their first patent. We ask too, if a patent under the great seal of Scotland could, of itself, give a right to ex- port into England. They then tell us that the rights of Young and Tyler were never afterwards disputed, even during the commonwealth. No wonder. Tyler was very subservient to a government which was as absolute as the monarchy had been. He did not scruple to print papers reflecting on the king, — such as " The King of Scotland's Negociations at Rome for assist- ance against the Commonwealth of England, pub- lished to satisfie such as are not willing to bee de- ceived — Edinburgh, printed by Evan Tyler, in the year 1650." But we deny that he printed any Bibles after this time in Scotland. He resided in England, where he printed many books, such as " llohertson's Gate of the Holy Tongue, &;c. 1654." And in London too, we find him printing a Bible (with plates) /or a Society of Stationers in 1653. We question if there be more than one copy of thi;^ 77 Bible now to be had in all Scotland ; but hundreds of people possess copies of the Bible printed at that period at Cambridge, — and there are at least three other English editions of pocket Bibles of the year 1653, two by Field, and one by Giles Calvert, which there is no great difficulty in procuring in this coun- try, and which were certainly not imported by Tyler's leave. Concerning Evan Tyler,* we may remark, that for several years he acted as printer for the church. The acts 1638 were printed by Andrew Hurt's heirs in 1639, but the acts of the subsequent years from 1639 to 1649 were printed by Evan Tyler, This must have been under the appointment of the Assembly, as, by the act, sess. 26, Hec, 20, 1638, " the Assembly unanimously, by virtue of their ec- clesiastical authority, dischargeth and inhibiteth all printers within this kingdom, to print any act of the former Assemblies, any of the acts or proceed- ings of this Assembly, any Confession of Faith, &;c. or a7iy other treatise whatsoever Avhich may con- cern the kirk of Scotland, or God's cause in hand, without warrant subscribed by Mr. Archibald John- ston as clerk to the Assembly, and advocate for the kirk."f When the Psalms now used in the Church • Robert Young's name seldom appears after 1641. Evan Tyler was considered as having forfeited his gift in 1650, and Charles If. appointed another who is not known ever to have printed any thing. During the commonwealth Christopher Higgins printed the acts of parliament and other public papers. But Tyler returned to his office n 1660. t In the acts of the General Assembly 1648, it is said (sess. 21.) " the General Assembly and their Commissioners are now deprived of their liberty of printing, confirmed and ratified by act of parlia- ment; there being an inhibition to the contrary upon the Puinter, 78 of Scotland were approved by the Assembly in 1649, Evan Tyler was one of the printers who published them in 1650, both in a separate volume, and in two or three sizes still found in the same vo- lume with English Bibles; but Gideon Lithgow, prin- ter to the city and uni'^ersity, also printed them in various forms, both in that and subsequent years. No copy of the Bible printed in Scotland between 1649 and 1672 is known to exist. And such copies of the Psalms, the New Testament, or the Con- fession of Faith which are to be found of that age, were printed by persons v>'ho pretended to no pa- tent. Evan Tyler, however, j^rinted the acts of parliament from the Restoration to the time of An- derson's appointment in 1671. Of Anderson's patent it is needless to say much. The respondents acknowledge that it contained very improper powers. The report by Lord Fountain- hall, January 5, 1683, Anderson against Lindsay, deserves particular notice. " The Lords (says he) found Anderson's gift contained exorbitant clauses, &c. and therefore they restricted his gift to the style, tenor and books named in Evan Tyler's gift, who was his majesty's father's printer in Scotland." Evan Tyler's gift was that of 1641, which did not prevent importation except from France, Holland, and other places heyond sens, and it gave only a Common right of printing Psalms for the Church of Scotland, with Testaments and other books. It allowed no body else to print Bibles or English under the pain of death, hy the Committee of Estates." In spite of this threat, the acts of the Assembly of that and the following year, with many other papers of the church, were printed byEvan Tyler. 79 Prayer Books for exportation ; but it allowed any printer in Scotland to print the Bible in folio, as has been already explained. The respondents dwell much on Anderson's con- sent to that clause of the decree of the privy coun- cil, December 21, 1671, giving as full liberty to Robert Sanders or mii/ ot/^er printer in the king- dom to print the New Testament and Psalm Book as the king's printer himself possessed. Why did he give his consent ? For no other reason than this, that his opposition would have been unavailing. It is said in the decree of the Court, March 6, 1680, that the concession with regard to this and other books was granted by the king's printer for peace sake. That he should have granted it for peace sake to a rival, is rather surprising ; but that he should have granted it in favour of any printer in the king- dom indiscriminately, was not only a great sacrifice of interest, if he had the monopoly of books so much in demand, but according to the views Sometimes taken by the respondents, a very gross dereliction of his duty. For how could he be responsible for the errors in all these copies, unless he thought that the penalties threatened in the act of the privy council, (February 9, 1671,) occasioned by an in- correct New Testament which he had printed him- self, were sufficient to deter all others from com- mitting errors equally gross ? In that act prohibit- ing any of the printers of this kingdom to publish the Old or New Testament till they be carefully revised and corrected, it is implied that the ])rint- ing of the scriptures was not confined to the king's printer. In page 29. the respondents explain away our su construction of the restriction of Anderson's gift to the styJe^ tenor and hoohs named in Tylers gift. They say that " Lindsay's licence had nothing to do with the Bible ; and the dispute between him and Mrs. Anderson related solely to the printing of ordinary books." Ordinary books ! It contains a right of printing all kinds of books (except acts of parliament, proclamations and such public papers,) provided they contained nothing contrary to the established religion. " Omnia librorum genera cu- juscunque linguae artis sen scientiae," &c. This is as much as the English universities can show for their privilege of printing Bibles. And it concludes with declaring that this letter shall not prejudice the gift granted to the deceased Andrew Anderson, in as far as it can be extended to the privileges con- tained in the gift of the same office to the deceased Evan Tyler. And it is farther declared, that this clause shall by no means render the above excep- tion as to proclamations and acts of parliament null and void. The exception with regard to acts of parliament, bore that they were not to be printed, by Lindsay or any of his heirs, substitutes, or col- leagues without a special privilege. If Lindsay had assumed Anderson's heirs or assignees as partners, he might have contrived, under the protection of a gift in the terms of Evan Tyler's, to print acts of parliament and proclamations. But here we have a farther restriction even beyond the terms of Evan Tyler's gift. And it is impossible to suppose that it was intended that Anderson's heirs, who had proved their unfitness for their dutj% should have greater power in printing the Bible, or preventing its importation, than Tyler had ever possessed. 81 The privy council, it is said, (page 29.) gave " Mrs. Anderson the exchisive right to print Poole's An- notations, and the Works of Durham and Campbell, and prohibited all persons from interfering with the same under pain of confiscation." But it did not pro- hihit the importation of these works. And it allowed some other works claimed by the king's printer, to be printed, imported and sold by any person "whatsoever. In fact, Mrs. Anderson had been at great expense in preparing these works for publica- tion, and the council granted her the sole privilege of printing them for such a number of years as the Committee might think fit, " provided the commit- tee were satisfied as to the fineness and sufficiency of the paper and types." We do not, however, un- derstand that the privy council in this act recognis- ed the right of the crown at all. They gave no de- liverance on the extent of the privileges of his ma- jesty's printer. They could find nothing in the pa- tent entitling his majesty's printer to print Poole's Annotations any more than Flavel's Works, — both being theological works by English authors not published when the patent was granted. The coun- cil indeed did nothing more in this case than they were wont to do to any bookseller who presented what to them seemed a reasonable claim. As Anderson's gift, though ratified by parliament, was subject to their discretionary regulation, they gave a licence for a li- mited time, and as they judged of the manner in which the duty was done, and the reasonableness of the prices, the worst effects of monopoly were pre- vented. We might have mentioned two licences granted by James VII. before the Revolution ; one to James Watson, and, after his death, another to Peter Bruce, G 82 as printer to his Majesty's family and household. In virtue of these licences, they printed a number of popish books at Holyroodhouse. Anderson does not seem to have ventured to challenge their right ; but the estates of Scotland complained of this grant as being a violation of the liberties of the kingdom. King James, if his prerogative was indeed as great as his father and his grandfather wished theirs to be considered, was entitled to introduce Popery by his ecclesiastical supremacy. And one of the methods which he took was to appoint printers according to his own heart in England, as well as in Scotland. It is truly mortifying to think that Bibles were printed by Henry Hills, and at the same time to look into the monstrous doctrines contained in such books as the following: ** The Question of Ques- tions, which, rightly resolved, resolves all our ques- tions in religion ; by James Mumford, priest of the society of Jesus. Permissu Superiorum. London, printed by Henry Hills, printer to the King's most excellent Majesty, for his household and chapel, 1 686-7.** The running title of this book to page 262, is in these words, " The Bible is not our judge f and 260 pages more are employed to show that " the JRoman Church is our infallible judged This book, written before the restoration of Charles II. contains the most violent abuse of all the re- formers, and particularly of the translators of the Bible, and concludes with denouncing damnation against all who, holding the Scriptures to be the certain rule of faith, refuse to submit to the judg- ment of the church of Rome as the only infallible guide. Another more insidious book, published also by H. Hills, printer to the king's most excellent Ma- jesty, 1686, is entitled, " Historical Collections out S3 of several grave Protestant Historians, concerning the changes of Religion, and the strange Confvisions following." Bishop Parker's book, entitled, Reason» for abrogating the Test, reprinted at Holyroodhouse in 1688, was perhaps a still more indecent book, " full of petulant scurrility," calling the test " the sacra- ment of Oatesian villainy — treating the Parliament with a scorn that no Popish writer had yet ventured on — and saying much to excuse transubstantiation and to free the church of Rome from the charge of idolatry." This book was licensed by the Earl of Sunderland, and the stationers were not allowed to print any answer to it ; but Dr. Burnet, then in Holland, wrote an answer, which exposed Parker to merited shame, and utterly ruined his reputation. Another paper, entitled Reasons for abrogating the penal statutes, was printed at Holyroodhouse in 1686. It was supposed to have been the joint pro- duction of a confederacy of Jesuits, and to have re- ceived its last touches from the pen of Sir Roger L'Estrange. (A copy of this mischievous paraph- let, with an answer to it, may be seen in Wodrokw's History, vol. ii. appendix, Nos. 118 and 119.) Such were some of the effects resulting^ from the unbound- ed prerc^ative claimed by the king- at the time when the parliament acknowledged his supremacy ; and such were some of the cogent reasons which induced the parliament of Scotland, after the Revolution, to disclaim his MaJesty^s supremacy. The respondents sum up the i-esult of their de- duction of patents (page 30) in terms which we do not admit to be authorised by the premises. 1. The act, 1551, c. 27, did not declare "the ex- clusive right of the crown to prevent printing of all kinds, except by its own license." Whoever attends- 84 to the words of the act must perceive that only a certain description of books required a licence from the king. It applied only to books which required to be seen, viewed and examined by the superiors, that it might be ascertained if they tended to the " defamation and slander of the lieges." * The Bible is not of the number of sik huMs, Wherever the res- pondents fall in with a licence to print or to import, which mention hooks of all sorts ^ or approved hoohs, or hoohs allowed by his Majesty and the church' courts^ they say that such a licence has no reference to the Bible. But here, when the terms are not nearly so comprehensive, they insist that the Bible is included in a description of books, all of which were understood at the time to be libellous or sati- rical. The act 1551 imposed a restraint on the li- berty of the press which does not now exist with respect to any book of the most objectionable des- cription. The king cannot, by his prerogative, pre- vent the printing of any such books. But, even if he possessed this power, does the act say any thing of importing books ? Was Bishop Douglas' Virgil, which was printed at London in 1553, the year af- ter this act passed, prevented from being brought into Scotland, because it had not been examined by some wise and discreet persons depute thereto, and a special licence obtained ? 2. They say that the uninterrupted series of grants by the crown, for three centuries, *' clearly and demonstrably recognise and establish the com- plete control of the crown over printing." The complete control of the crown over printing ! If they prove this, they prove too much. Does the crown indeed possess a complete control over the press? " See Appendix. 85 " If {say they) the power as to ordinary books has been lost by desuetude, and by the more liberal and enlightened views of modern times, there is not through the whole course of our history for above three centuries, a single instance of Bibles, and other prerogative books, having been exempted from the control of the crown, or of their printing being al- ; lowed to the public at large." Have they then for- gotten the patent to Young and Tyler, and the pre- vious licence to Finlayson in 1612 ? We have al- ready said that, instead of a single instance, innu- merable instances might be produced of prerogative books (as they call them) having been printed by persons who had no patents. Andrew Anderson printed the New Testament before he had a patent ; and though he printed it as ill as possible before he had a patent, he printed it no better afterwards. Watson printed it in 1706, six years before he had a share in any patent. Many others printed the New Testament without patents, or any licences which can be traced, and certainly while others were repre- sented to have exclusive rights of printing. We cannot number the editions of the Confession of Faith, and of the Psalms, which were printed in the last century (many of them within the memory of man) by persons who had no patents. And among these editions, not a few are the best which can still be procured. Such editions of the Confession of Faith are used to this day in some of the church- courts ; and if they are not authentic, it is impossi- ble to say how few of the ministers and elders have subscribed the proper standards. * Many such Psalm * Tlie copy used in the presbytery of Dundee is a quarto, which has on the title. Printed at London for the Company of Stationers, 86 books are still used in the churches of the established church, not to mention those which are used in pri- vate families and dissenting places of worship. But even if it were true that the usage of print- ing had been as uninterrupted as they represent it, and " bottomed on an act of Parliament," which says nothing of importation, we say that the usage of im- portation has been much less interrupted, (for there have been periods when the Bible was not printed, but none when it was not imported), and that this usage of importation had its origin in an act of Parlia- ment, which in giving the people leave to read the Bible in their own tongue, gave them leave to read an imported translation. This leave was never ta- ken away by any subsequent act of the legislature, and the right having thus been exercised through an unbroken series of "the years of many generations," has assuredly not been lost by desuetude. That this constant and uninterrupted consuetude of importing Bibles from England has prevailed, will not be disputed by any one who will take the trou- ble of inquiring, 1. What a variety of English editions are used as pulpit Bibles in all parts of Scotland, and how iew Edinburgh editions, except such as are of modern date; 2. What a great number of the families of all 1658, and reprinted at Glasgow by Robert Sanders, printer to the city and university, 1675. The copy used at St. Andrews, and sub- scribed by the ministers, elders, professors, preachers, and school- masters since the year 1605, is an edition printed in 1GS8, (without any printer's name,) very superior to Anderson's editions of that pe- riod. The copy used in the presbytery of Forfar is the London edi- tion, 1717. See ApjKndix — List of editions of the Confession of Faith. 87 ranks and descriptions of persons in Scotland pos- sess Bibles printed in England, with Scottish Psalms, bound in the same volume. We can produce such Bibles of almost every ten years from the year 1579 to 1799, many of them having inscribed on them names of well known families in Scotland, and a great proportion of them being such as must have been imported in the time of Finlason's, Young's, Tyler's, and Anderson's patents ; 3. What a number of editions, printed in Eng- land, may be seen in the seats of different public bodies in the churches. We may produce other proofs in the sequel, par- ticularly one which may be drawn from the cata- logues of the principal booksellers in Scotland. The respondents, in p. 30, deduce a third infer- ence from the series of patents, viz. That the right of the crown was not confined to any particular edi- tion or translation of the work. They then say that during the l6th century "the kings of Scotland re- cognised and included in their grants, Cranmer^s Sible, the Geneva Bible, and the General As- semhhfs Bible, none of which, except the last, had been translated in this country." We say that there never was any grant in the 16th century which ap- plied to any except the Geneva ; for the General As- sembly's, as they call it, was the Geneva Bible. No grant ever applied either to Cranmer's or to the Bishop's Bible. And the licences for printing the Geneva Bible were no more necessary than the licence for printing any book whatever. In the l6th century only one edition of any translation was printed in Scotland ; but during 58 years of that century the people were supplied with Bibles. 88 The respondents then say, that it has been seen, with regard to King James's translation, that " it was as much designed for Scotland as for England, — that it was introduced into this country more solemnly and more authoritatively than into Eng- land, — that it has been universally received by all sects and parties since that time, and that it has been recognised in every successive royal grant since it was executed." The first and second of these positions have been disproved, — the third is immaterial, but not alto- gether correct, if Papists and Unitarians be includ- ed among the sects and parties ; and it cannot be said to have been received even by the numerous indi- viduals of the established church who do not under- stand the English language. As to the last posi- tion, we see no reason for saying that it has been re- cognised, as the words Blhlia sacra in lingua Anglicana apply equally to all translations into the English language. The reasoning which follows in pages 31 and 32 rests on a very unstable foundation. They tell us that King William was strongly in- clined to continue Episcopacy as the established re- ligion of Scotland as well as England, if he could have prevailed on the people to agree to it, but was persuaded to give up the attempt ; and when the crown of Scotland was offered to him by the con- vention of states, he objected to the oath to preserve Presbyterianism as originally framed, as it carried the authority of the church too far — and he adjected an explanation of the oath ; thus showing his deter- mination to preserve the necessary prerogatives of 89 the crown, and to secure religious toleration to all his subjects. On these moderate views, they say, the acts 1689, c. 3, abolishing Prelacy, and 16"90, c. 5, establishing Presbyterianism, and ratifying the Confession of Faith, were framed ; so as to do what was necessary for the establishment of Presbyterian- ism, but no more. The acts and proclamations es- tablishing Episcopacy, are recited in the act 1690 ; but they are not repealed in tofo. There is this important qualification, they say, in the act, " And that in so far allenarly as the said acts and others generally and particularly above mentioned are con- trary or prejudicial to, inconsistent with, or deroga- tory from the Protestant religion, and Presbyterian government now established." Every power and prerogative therefore (they say) held by the crown in ecclesiastical affairs is reserved entire by this saving clause, provided they be consistent with Presbyterian government. Now (add they) it is impossible to contend that the crown's prerogative as to printing the Bible is inconsistent with this form of worship, or that its establishment is pre- judicial to the authority of King James's transla- tion. They then repeat a number of their mistaken statements as to the translations formerly in use, and the exclusive grants of imprinting and importing to a variety of persons, whose grants, we have seen, were not exclusive. The account of King William's hesitations is little to the purpose, as it cannot be denied that, whatever his private inclinations might be, he declared, in the act abolishing Prelacy, that with advice and consent of the estates of Parliament he will settle by law that church government in this kingdom which is 90 7nost agreecible to the inclinations of the j^eople. The respondents refer to M'Cormick's Life of Carstairs ; but that author, so far from saying that the king was inclined to have Episcopacy continued in Scot- land, if he could have prevailed on the people in this country to agree to it, says (p. 43,) that presbytery would have been more agreeable to his own princi- ples than episcopacy, — yet if the church of England could have been brought to lov/er their terms of communion, so as to comprehend the bulk of non- conformists in that kingdom, he was fully determin- ed never to abolish episcopacy in Scotland. M'Cor- mick says nothing of the king's objection to the oath, — and though Burnet says that he gave a ver- bal explanation (a very proper one we think) of the clause by which he was bound to repress heresies, — observing, that he did net bind himself to persecute any for their consciences ; it is certain that, in his own letter to the estates, he signified no scruple, but expressed himself thus, " we did take and sign the oath tendered to us by your commissioners, which (by God's assistance) we will religiously observe." Do the respondents mean to insinuate that, by a mental reservation, he resolved to preserve any pre- rogative disclaimed in his oath ? Most certain it is, that his transient explanation of the oath had no re- ference to any branch of the prerogative. It is quite incomprehensible how they could say that every power held by the Crown, in ecclesiasti- cal afiiilrs, is reserved entire by the saving clause, which they suppose to be implied in the word alle- narhj ; for it cannot be admitted that if any of these acts assert the King's supremacy, thatiyartci the acts remained in force, in spite of the act of the same Par- 91 liament, in which it is declared, that the supremacy is abrogated as being *' inconsistent with the esta- blishment of the church government now desired." On the words, " in so far allenarly," &c. nothing like the prerogative now claimed can be supported, as " all superiority of any office in the church in this kingdom above presbyters," is expressly abolished in the act abolishing prelacy. The only thing worthy of notice under the third inference, p. 32, is the usage of the Crown, from the Revolution to the present time ; but to this we op- pose the unrestrained and uninterrupted usage of importing Bibles during the whole of that period. 4th, With regard to the ground or principle of expediency, the respondents deride the opinion of Blackstone, though we find his opinion still main- tained by the latest English writers on the law of prerogative, (particularly Chitty.) Their historical statements are very erroneous. King James was not the head of the church in Scotland, as much as in England, when the new translation was executed. He was never acknow- ledged in Scotland as Henry VIH. had been in Eng- land, by the expressed submission of the clergy. Their next statement, about Henry VIH. having first granted his licences to the Universities for printing in general, before he assumed the character of head of the church, proceeds on a palpable and glaring anachronism. The earliest licence to the University of Cambridge was granted in 1535. Ac- cording to Burnet, in his History of the Reforma- tion, (Part iii. Book ii.) the King claimed the cha- racter of head of the church, and was acknowledged in that capacity by the clergy in 1530. The final 92 submission of the convocations, both of Canterbury and York, was concluded in 1531. The first act of the Parliament, 1534, confirmed what had been al- ready acknowledged by the clergy, that " the King was the supreme head in earth of the Church of England." This was a year before the licence to Cambridge, and by that time an order had been given for printing the Bible. The respondents next quote Bankton, who says, that " the King or other sovereign power, as the fountain of all jurisdiction, may justly be denomi- nated head of the national church," in a sense which is not very consistent with the doctrines of this na- tional church, or supported by any legislative enact- ment. But, after all, Bankton says no more than this, Book i. tit. 2. sect. 25. (p. 51.) " The establish- ed church is a great corporation, whose representa- tive is the General Assembly, &c. Their spiritual power to instruct, exhort, bind, and loose the in- ward man, and exercise other parts of the ministerial function, is no doubt derived from the divine com- mission, (Mat. xxviii. 19.) ; but the privileges com- petent to them as an aggregate body, or a national church, certainly proceed from the sovereign power establishing the true religion and presbyterian church government amongst us, in virtue whereof the mi- nisters of it enjoy the benefices, parish churches, and the exercise of ecclesiastical power in this country." He then says, (Book iv. tit. 22. sect. l.)that "as the national church is a great body politic, all the au- thority and jurisdiction they are entitled to exercise in this or any other country is derived from the so- vereign power of the nation where they are esta- blished. In this sense, the King, (or other sovereign 9'3 power,) as the fountain of all jurisdiction, may just- ly be denominated the head of this national church. And the jurisdiction of the clergy in that respect, so far as concerns the exercise of the same in this coun- try, is of the nature of a civil right. But as to their spiritual powers, the same are derived from a higher fountain, viz. the divine Founder of our holy reli- gion. This must extend to their successors — that being the implied quality of the grant, which is to the end of the world. This I conceive is the only meaning of the hitrinsic power of the church ; and in this sense it is justly declared by our legislature, that Christ alone is the Head of the church.'* It is evident, that the sense in which Bankton views the term, the sovereign power, applies rather to the le- gislature than to the supreme magistrate. But, if we contrast what Bankton says of the Church of England, with what he says of the Church of Scotland, we shall more clearly perceive how dif- ferent is the relation in which the King stands to the one church and to the other. Speaking of ecclesiastical jurisdiction in England, he says, " The highest ecclesiastical court is the convocation of the clergy, called likewise a national synod. It is convened by the king's writ. As to the making of ?ieiv canons, they are to have the king's licence to that purpose ; and, when made, they must have his royal assent for putting them in execution." On the Church of Scotland, he says, " When the Episcopal church subsisted with us, the king, by his proclamation, did appoint the time and place of their national or Assembly's meeting ; nor could they treat of any thing but what was authorised under his royal hand ; and their canons, acts, and ordi- 94 nances behoved to be confirmed by liis Majesty.'* (Pari. 1663, c. 5.) He then adds, " It may there- fore be questioned, how at present we are safe against such abuses by our General Assemblies : as perhaps they may usurp a jurisdiction that does not belong to them, against which there does not lie an appeal," &c. After mentioning the act 1592, to which reference is had as the rule in the act 1690 restoring presby- tery, he says, " the privilege here granted to the ge- neral assembly to appoint its oivn meetings in the above case, (the case of the absence of the king's commissioner,) and that its acts shall he good with- out the royal assent^ is higher than the church in the Roman empire, which was their national church, was indulged in ancient times." " The jurisdiction of the general assembly is either constitutive or judicial. The first consists in making acts and canons^ ordering the method of procedure in cases before them, and other affairs touching the discipline and government of the church, in the same manner as other corporations make bye- laws," &c. The quotation from Erskine (p. 34.) may be an- swered by a reference to Pardovan's " collections and observations concerning the worship, discipline, and government of the church of Scotland," a book of high authority in matters of church law, recom- mended by the General Assembly 1709. " Though the sovereign's person be sometimes represented (in the assembly,) yet his name cannot be joined with the general assembly in making of acts : be- cause the civil magistrate, considered as such, is neither head nor member of the church, nor of any 95* of her judicatories ; and it is the authority of the general assembly of this national church that can alone bind her members. And though ecclesiastical constitutions should be enacted in the sovereign's name and authority, yet these could never bind the subjects as such, because the legislative power is lodged in the sovereign and estates of parliament, and in them only. Hence all petitions to the gene- ral assembly are only addressed to the moderator and members thereof, and not to the sovereign nor his commissioner though present. For petitions can be presented to none but to such as those in whose name and authority they are granted." The king's commission to his representative in the assembly does not profess to give him any power of interfering in the acts or proceedings ; and no ra- tification of the acts is necessary, as is the case with all canons and constitutions of the church of Eng- land before they can bind even the clergy. The presence of the king or his commissioner is not ne- cessary to the constitution of a general assembly, according to the act 1592, ratified by the act I69O. The quotation of part of the 23d chapter of the confession proves nothing to the purpose, if the whole of this chapter and other parts of that book be taken into consideration.* It is not said that the civil magistrate has the sole authority to take order that unity and peace be preserved, the truth kept pure and entire, blas- phemies and heresies suppressed, corruptions and abuses in worship and discipline prevented or re- formed, and all the ordinances duly settled, admi- • See Appendix. 96* nistered and observed. The second Book of Disci- pline, (c. 7-) ?-i^ti the act of parliament 1592 still in force, have said, " It appertains to the eldership to take heed that the word of God be duly preached v/ithin their bounds, the sacraments rightly minis- tered, the discipline rightly maintained," &c. The Confession of Faith (c. 31.) has said, " It belongeth to synods and councils, ministerially to determine controversies of faith and cases of conscience, to set down rules and directions for the better ordering of the public worship of God and government of his church, to receive complaints in cases of mal-admi- nistration, and autJioritatively to determine the sameT &c. The same chapter admits that magi- strates may lawfully call a synod of ministers, and other lit persons, to consult and advise with about matters of religion ; but if magistrates be open ene- mies to the church, the ministers of Christ, of themselves, by virtue of their office, or they, with other fit persons upon delegation from these churches, may meet together in such assemblies. This chapter is particularly explained in the act of as- sembly approving the Confession of Faith. The 23d chapter '* of the Civil Magistrate," which is quoted by the respondents, evidently does not relate altogether to the chief magistrate. But if it did, the concluding part of it would completely stand in the way of the interpretation which they put on their cj^uotation. " Infidelity, or difference of reli- gion, does not make void the magistrate's just and legal authority, nor free the people from their due obedience to him ; from which ecclesiastical persons are not excepted." It is not for a moment to be sup- posed, that the framers of this confession meant to say that an infidel or a heretic must be obeyed, if he attempt to settle ordinances of worship, or determine questions of faith. The government of the church appointed by Jesus Christ the king and head of the church, is declared in the 30th chapter, to be in the hand of church officers distinct from the civil magi- fttrate ; and the first chapter of the second book of Discipline has still more exactly defined the separate functions of the magistrate and the minister. It is indeed the right and duty of the king and all other magistrates, to preserve the purity of the gospel and the general interests of religion ; but the magistrate is not the only person who possesses this right, any more than he is the only person bound to this diiti/, which is more specially committed to the spiritual office-bearers.''' The respondents in page 34, &c. dispute Black- stone's opinion as to the right of the crown derived from property. They quote with approbation the opinion of Mr. Justice Yates, who however demo- lishes one favourite dogma of theirs, that the crown has a right of control over the press. We see no ma- terial difierence between the opinion of Yates and that of Blackstone (who followed Lord Mansfield,) except this, that Blackstone describes the kino-'s rio-ht as not only a right of property, but one which he pos- sesses as head of the church and government, and Yates says that it is only as head of the church and the government that the king possesses the right. Yates's opinion was not found to be correct witli regard to one class of books, viz. almanacks, con- cerning which he had as little doubt as the rest. * Sec Appendix. H *98 The respondents say, however, that the maxims of Yates apply to Scotland equally as England; forget- ting surely that in England no canon or constitution is valid without the king's ratification, and that he can even make constitutions without the convocation. Even Atterbury admits this, and still more clearly is the fact established by Kennet, Wake, Gibson, and the other writers on ecclesiastical law. The other opinions quoted, however they may be received in England, can have no weight in Scotland, where the ecclesiastical constitution is so essentially different. On the sixth branch of the argument (p. 38.) their assertions are not more accurate than on the fifth. The decisions of the privy council scarcely ever sus- tained the right of the grantee to the extent speci- fied in the gift. But we do not hold the decisions of the privy council to have settled the law of the case. Most of the prohibitory clauses in question, referred to other books than Bibles, and were in- tended to secure the property of the persons who undertook editions of expensive works. If the right of the crown be as boundless as the respondents as- sert, it appears to us to involve the right of sup- pressing the Scriptures altogether. The presumption, that when importation was not prohibited, it v/as permitted only under the sanction of the privileged grantee, is quite unsupported by evidence, or even by probability. On the second branch of the case, the respon- dents first recite their patent as printers, and secondly their patent as booksellers. With regard to the lat- ter, not one word of it applies to the case of Bibles, unless it might be construed to infer, that if the king, while residing in Scotland, required a Bible, *99 or if Bibles were wanted for the excise-office, or the post-office, they ought to be siijiplied by the respon- dents. We do not believe that the patents would bear them out in any such claim. It would not be found either in England or Scotland, that Mr. Free- ling, who is a great collector, must buy his Bibles, or any other books, from the king's booksellers, and much less can it be found that such of his Majesty's subjects as are not employed in the post-office, or other public offices, must be provided with such articles at the king's warehouse. In their capacity of book- sellers they can show no long series of patents. The first commission of this kind was granted by Geo. I. in 1718, to George Redpath and three other persons residing in England, who were thus rewarded for their loyalty and their zeal for the reformed religion and the Protestant succession. We have little doubt that the respondents conceive, that the power of the king is such, that he might have extended their pri- vilege to an exclusive right of selling stationary and books to all the subjects in the realm, and exercising all the other parts of the trade and mystery of book- sellers, bookbinders, and stationers. And, to say the truth, we cannot find out any better reason why the lieges should be required universally to supply them- selves with Bibles printed by them, (if indeed they be so required,) than why they should purchase all their paper, vellum, wax, quills, and ink, from the king's warehouse. The printing patent (they say) gives " the office of king's printer generally ;" but this to our ears is as unintelligible as if they were to say king's architect generally, which would be a great office if it involved the sole power of planning and building all churches and chapels, as well as all castles, prisons, bar- racks, courthouses, and public offices. " Whatever the king's right may be, it is conveyed (they say) in the most ample and unlimited terms to the respondents." If, then, the king's right belong to him as head of the church, does his Majesty consti- tute Sir David Hunter Blair and Mr. Bruce as heads of the church ? From some of the statements it may be concluded, that his Majesty may appoint an unli- mited number either conjunctly or severally. It is not necessary for the king's printers to be of the communion of the church, or of any religious pro- fession ; and they will no doubt say, it is not neces- sary for the Idng to be of the communion of this church. This is indeed true ; but for this reason, among many others, the king cannot be head of this church. The church of England, which acknow- ledges a secular head, does not acknowledge a head who does not join in communion with that church; and why should things that are incompatible in England be compatible in Scotland ? The distinction which the respondents attempt to draw between the office of king's i^rinter generally, and the special right of printing the Bible and all pri- vileged books, is to us not very intelligible. The office of king's iw'mte?' generally, reminds us of the inge- nious conception of a universal lord mayor in Mar- tinus Scriblerus. Our argument on the discrepan- cies among the successive grants, did not proceed on the supposition, that the title of king's printer in- volved any substantial privilege. We rather thought it a mere honorary distinction, such as that of king's apothecary or watchmaker, or tailor, conveying no right except perhaps some trifling immunities annex- ed to the members of the household. We would just wish to know what is included in the general *101 idea or a king's printer ? The respondents admit, that it does not necessarily involve the right of print- ing the Bible ; and we have seen that it does not ne- cessarily involve the right of printing acts of parlia- ment or proclamations, or any one of all the descrip- tions of books included in the present licence, or in any former licence. For all of these have been occa- sionally granted to persons who had not the title of king's printer. If the mere office oi hinges 'printer generally involves any obligation, it is one of a very indefinite, variable, and fugitive nature, sometimes having nothing to do with sacred books, at other times having nothing to do with law books, and oc- casionally claiming an exclusive right to all pa- pers, pamphlets, and volumes, from a play bill to a polyglot. The general office then is a mere empty name, and no man can say beforehand what duties are implied in it, and what qualifications are neces- sary for its proper discharge. The special right again has no foundation that we can see, unless ei- ther all printing be inter regalia^ or at least the printing of certain books be inter regalia. But though Bibles, acts of parliament, and a few other books of authority, have formed the whole sub- ject of the grant for a century back, it v/as not inva- riably so ; and not only is there no evidence of im- portation of Bibles having been prevented in the 17th century, but it is clear from the terms of the li- cences to Finlason and Young and Tyler, that im- portation was not intended to be prohibited ; and as Anderson's gift was restrained by the council to the terms of Evan Tyler's, it is plain that whatever other books might be excluded, the Bible was not. We need not dwell on what is said, p. 42, con-^ *102 cerning the jealousy subsisting among the three partners of Freebairn's patent of 1711. The opinion of Sir James Stewart about the articles of Union and the practice of importation be- fore the Union, is said, (p. 43.) to have been clearly proved to be wrong. Sir James said that importa- tion from England was never prohibited. He ought to have known, for he had some experience both in writing and importing books. No man possessed more minute information concerning the state of the government and the country during the reigij of Charles II. Mackenzie speaks of one of the books ascribed to him, {Jus po^ndiy the book cou.- demned along with Anderson's New Testament,) as if it contained inflammatory and mischievous ex- pressions which are not to be found in it ; but an- other of his reputed writings, on account of which he found it prudent to retire from the kingdom, has received from Sir George a high, though not an in- tentional compliment, in having been transcribed with very few material alterations into his History of Scotland. This was the spirited and unanswer- able tract, entitled, " The Account of Scotland's Grievances under the Duke of Lauderdale, 1678." We cannot believe that a man whose intelligence was so extensive and so accurate could have spoken unad- visedly when he said that " for certain, the importa- tion of Bibles from England hath not hitherto been prohibited in Scotland, whatever might have been the conception of former gifts." It is to be remark- ed that Mr. Solicitor-General Kennedy does not af- firm that importation from England had been pro- hibited. The respondents (p. 45, 46.) deride the opinion, that importation from England was permitted by ( *103 Basket and Campbell's patent 1716, with a view to encourage competition between the patentees of England and Scotland. Their ^r*^ reason for saying that this conjecture is improbable, would not only prevent the English printers from sending Bibles into Scotland, but would prevent the Scottish patentee from licensing importation. We do not see how Bibles imported under his authority, can be more secure from error than those imported by authority of the king himself. Their second reason is intended to be an argu- mentum ad ahsurdum. They say that " Basket, who was to receive the new gift (of 1716) was at that very time king's printer for England, and farm- ed the university press. The theory of the peti- tioners then is, that he having got the entire mo- nopoly of the English market, also obtained the mo- nopoly of the Scottish market by way of establish- ing a free trade ; in other words, that the power of preventing importation from England was struck out of the Scottish patent, in order to confer upon Scotland the boon of a competition between Mr. Basket and himself — to allow his English Bibles to compete with his Scottish Bibles for the purpose of keeping down the price, and securing a due supply ; and this, while it is plain that he would have had a reciprocal power of licensing importation in both countries, although his patent had been as exclusive as Freebairn's. The history of the petitioners would certainly require some external aid to fortify it, for it has not the merit of possessing any internal evi- dence of probability or consistency." If the facts be as they are here stated, that Bas- ket had the entire monopoly of the English market, *1C4 and also of the Scottish inarket ; and if the crown was aware of the fact after the last of the gifts had been conferred, j^robably pe?' incuriam, it appears to us to have become doubly necessary in the case of the patent for Scotland, that a clause should be introduced for the purpose of preventing future pa- tentees (whose grants would probably be formed on the model of that which was about to expire) from claiming such an extensive right as might have ter- minated in a perpetual monopoly in a kingdom where no such permanent bodies as the universities enjoyed the concurrent privilege of printing Bibles, But the history of the case of Basket is very in- completely stated by the respondents. We do not know how he insured the monopoly of the English market by " farming the university press" of Ox- ford, or rather by farming a single division of it for the term of twenty years. We^suppose the uni- versity of Cambridge could print Bibles ; for we trust it will not be said that they surrendered their right to Basket. But even if it were true that Basket had the monopoly in England during the greater part of the time when he had also a privi- lege of printing in Scotland, it is certain that he had not the monopoly in Scotland during any part of that time. In the patent 1711 he had only a third share. For more than forty years after that period Watson and his assignees printed Bibles and acts of parliament ; and so did Freebairn and his assignees. In the patent 1716, Basket had a part- ner, and we believe that in the right of that part- ner another person printed Bibles and acts of par- liament till the year 1757. There were then three or four contemporary prin- *105 lers while Basket held his ofrice in Scotlaiul. And du- ring the whole of that term we think there were al- ways three offices in Edinburgh Vv'here Bibles were printed. Watson printed a great number of ex^ cellent editions in all sizes, folio, quarto, octavo, twelves, and twenty-fours, from 1713 to 1723. In 1724 Mosman and Brov/n succeeded as assigns of the deceased James Vv^atson, and continued to print Bibles, &c. for some years. From 1727 we find Robert Freebairn printing many editions of the Bible, &c. some very inditFerently, and others very well. In 1736, 1737, and 1738, we find sometimes John Nairn, sometimes James Blair, and sometimes Blair and Nairn jointly printing Bibles and Prayer Books. Freebairn's right was adjudged to Nairn in 1737; but before this time Blair and Nairn printed Bibles. We do not think Freebairn ever ceased to exercise the office in person, at least his name appears on Bibles in 1736, the same year with Blair and Nairn.* We do not recollect the exact time when Watkins began, or in vv^hose right ; but from 1739 to 1756 we find almost every year the names of Freebairn, of Watkins, and of Basket, all printing separately ; for the same act of parliament is occasionally print- ed by them all. One circumstance connected with these Bibles deserves to be noticed. All the Bibles, we think, which were printed in octavo or quarto by Basket or by Freebairn, or by Blair and Nairn, and some of the size of twelves, had the marginal notes and * A collection of iiritish Statutes from the time of the Union was begun by \7atson ia 1718, and carried on through a few volumes. Brown and Mosman carried it on from 1725, R. Freebairn from 1730, and Adrian A^atkins from 1748 to 1755, From the year UIO to 1756, single acts are found printed by Freebairn, by Basket, by Richard Watkins, and then by Adrian Watkins. *106 references of the early English editions, very few in number. But the octavo editions, and some of the twelves (we are not so sure of the quarto) print- ed by Brown and Mosman, and by Watkins, had a much more numerous set of references, chiefly taken from John Canne, whose Bibles printed in England and in Holland, were always favourites with the people of Scotland.* At that time the competition certainly produced variety, as well as cheapness. There has not been a tolerable edition of a Bible with Canne's references (much as it is in demand) for more than fifty years ; that which was printed by M. and C. Kerr in 1796 is scarcely legible, and the edition is not yet exhausted. The present pa- tentees have never printed it. Now though Basket in Scotland would not have felt any great inducement to outdo his own per- formances in England, it is very plain that the im- portation of Bibles from England must have stimu- lated Watson, Freebairn, Watkins and others, to aim at a higher degree of excellence than any one of them would have felt to be necessary if he had been secured from all rivalship. It is very evident that Basket's interest would not lead him to try the question of his right to exclude from Scotland Bi- * Mosman and Brown, in their edition 1727, have inserted the fol- lowing note after John Canne's preface : " N. B. There are in this edition of the Holy Bible, several thou- sands of errors amended and corrected in the notes on the Old Testa- ment, which were in all or most of the editions, whether printed at Edinburgh or elsewhere. It was the labour of a judicious gentleman for several years at his leisure hours, who v/as so kind as to make us the offer of them, which we accepted. As for the notes on the New Testament, we were recommended by a learned and worthy gentleman our very good friend, to make choice of those subjoined to Wetstein's edition of his Greek New Testament, printed anno 1711, as the most copious and best extant." *107 bles printed in England. But there were other par- ties who had such an interest during the 40 years or more of his continuance in his office in Scotland. Surely Freebairn, even if his interest had not been concerned, might have felt disposed to humble the person who had attempted to deprive him of the pa- tent 1711 ; but Watson must have felt much more inclined to do it if it had been practicable. Basket had prosecuted him in the English courts, and had succeeded in excluding Watson's Bibles from Eng- land. Watson lost a great sum by this action ; and in a paper which he printed on the subject in 1720, he signified his purpose to make reprisals on Basket if he should lose the cause in the House of Lords, as he seemed to anticipate. But he was better ad- vised. There is no trace of any attempt on his part to keep Basket's English Bibles out of the Scottish market. His successors. Brown and Mosman, appear to have inherited his hostility to Basket; and it is not to be supposed that they would have let him alone if they had entertained any hope of being able to exclude him. In 1725, they attempted to stop his press in Edinburgh, on the ground that he had not taken the oath of abjuration within the time limited by law. But Basket proved to the satisfaction of the court that he was not bound to take this oath, as he was not one of the persons described in the act 1693, as being obliged to take the oaths of allegiance and the assurance. When the Court of Session found that the king's printer was not obliged to take the oaths, is it not wonderful that Watson and Freebairn did not at least try to exclude Basket's Bibles printed in England, especially as their patent was that of 1711, which excludes Bibles from England as much as *108 from France or Holland ? It will be said, that, in spite of their opposition. Basket might have licensed the importation of his own Bibles printed in Eng- land. But we deny that he was entitled to do this without the consent of the other paten- tees, any more than Mr. Strahan v/oukl have been entitled to license the importation of Edinburgh Bibles into England, if the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge felt it, or conceived it to be injuri- ous to their interests. The Scottish printers were aware that they could not stop importation, and Basket, besides printing the more ordinary editions in Edinburgh, where labour was then, as it is still, much cheaper than in England, had all along the advantage of sending his finer Bibles down from London or from Oxford, without any opposition. So far as the people of Scotland were concerned, they must have found that, for ordinary purposes, the necessity of importation was in a great degree superseded by the number of editions published at the rival presses. " A competition between Basket and himself" would not have been any great satisfac- tion to them, but better Bibles than Basket's were at that time printed in this country by persons who were always at variance with him. All this time, too, the New Testament was printed at Glasgow, and elsewhere, by a multitude of printers. And as to all the other books called prerogative books, scarcely a year elapsed in which there were not edi- tions of the Confession of Faith, the Psalms and the Catechisms, printed by various printers in Edin- burgh, Glasgow, and elsewhere ; — many of them much superior to any that have ever been printed by the king's printer to this hour, if we except only *109 Watson's Collection of Confessions in 1719 and 1722 ; and even this edition was never complet- ed. Some of these remarks are intended less as an an- swer to the second observation of the respondents, (p. 45, 46,) than to show how little force there is in their j'Zr^^ remark on usage, p. 59. To their third observation, ]). 46, we have merely to say that the clause cum omnihus jjerquisifls, &c. is the very same in substance as the clause in Yomig and Ti/ler's -pvAent 1641, (each of them containing the words 2J?'iciilegiis, iimnunitatihuSy emolmnenfis, and the patent 1641, containing the words liherfati^ hus, j}7'oJlcuis, Jeodis, et casuaUtatihus instead of percju'isitis, et exemjitionibus in the patent of the respondents. Some of the other expressions in the patent 1641, are stronger than in theirs. Yet Young and Tyler were not allowed to exclude Bibles from England, or even to prevent the printing of Bibles in folio, or of the Psalms and New Testament. And Anderson's patent was afterwards limited to the conditions of Tyler's ; so that nothing can be more manifest than that the clause cum omnihus pcrqui^ sitis, &c. gives the respondents no more power than was given to Young and Tyler, The remark, p. 48, on the clause in the patent of the English king's printers, prohibiting importation from foreign parts out of that part of Great Britain called England, requires only one observation. The dispute in the case of Richardson, they say, was not with the king's printer, but with the Universities ; and on inquiring into the terms of l/ieir authority, the respondents conclude that their own right is stronger than that of the English Univei-sities ; and *110 as the Universities succeeded in excluding these Bi- bles from England, the respondents ought to succeed in excluding the University Bibles from Scotland. Now, will any one say that if the king's printer in England had not been entitled to exclude the Bibles printed in Scotland, the Universities would have been found to have that title ? They had been found long before to possess a right in all respects equal to that of the king's printer in England ; and if he had the right of excluding importation, it is impossible to deny that they must have possessed it too ; other- wise it might have been in his power to secure great profit to himself by licensing the importation of Scottish Bibles, while he never printed any Bibles at all. It was clearly established in Richardson's case that the king's printer in England had avowed- ly exercised the right of restraining the king's printer in Scotland from importing his books into England, ever since the year 1717. In p. 54 they say that " the right of sale, con- ferred by some of the old Scottish grants, truly meant a strict monopoly to the donees ; that no other shop could sell but theirs." We do not know that this ever applied to Bibles ; but we are sure that there was no time when other shops did not sell. There is a very incorrect assertion in p. 55 about the time when the English liturgy belonged as much to Scotland as to England. There never was such a time. For a year or two the English service was attempted in Holyrood-house. The service of the Church of Rome was performed still longer in the same chapel ; and on as good grounds the re- spondents might print the breviaries and missals of that church. *111 The respondents say (p. 56) that we maintain a fallacy in stating that if our claim were sustained, the only effect would be to permit the importation of Bibles " printed by the authorised patentees in England." In answer to this they tell usjiist that the English patentees are aliens to this country, as much unauthorised by the crown of Scotland as any subjects of a foreign state. We must say in reply, that the translation itself is alien, as unauthorised by the church and the legislature of Scotland as the Bibles of Holland, Germany, or Switzerland. The only authority which can be pleaded for its prevalence is usage ; and the same authority of usage entitles the people of Scotland to supply themselves from England as much as they find for their conve- nience, satisfaction, and interest. If we set aside usage, the authority for using the Geneva Bible is stronger and more direct than that for King James's Bible — as this was the translation which was not only named in the earliest patents mentioning the Bible, but also expressly allowed by the church, and it has never yet been disallowed. How do the respondents venture to print the Bible with Blaney's references ? These are altogether of English ori- gin ; and for any thing which we know, they may tend to introduce doctrines inconsistent with the standards of oiu' national church, and at variance with the principles of the majority of the people of Scotland. That they have such a tendency in some instances, we have good reason for affirming ; and many of the authorities to which they refer, as if they were canonical Scripture, are altogether dis- claimed by the church of Scotland, and by almost every class of Dissenters. We allude to the books *112. of Apocrypha, which are declared, in the Con- fession of laith, to be *' not of divine inspiration, and of no authority in the church of God ;" and of wliicli books tlie Directory for public worship pro- hibits any part to be read in the church. How is it that such respect is paid to these references by the king's printers, though they are altogether alien ? And how is it that they are so servilely attached to an alien translation as to include in their editions of a large size a series of uncanonical books, wliich to a certain extent in England are aj)pointed to be read in churches., but which in Scotland are prohibited to be read in churches f From all that we have now said, our conclusion is that no harm surely can en- sue from using the Bibles printed by the alien pa- tentees in England, so long as our own printers fur- nish us with Bibles, the chief recommendation of whicli, according to their own showing, is their en- tire conformity vv'ith the favourite editions of these same alien patentees. If it be said, why should v/e contend for the importation of Bibles containing notes and references which many of us disap- prove ? our answer to this is, we may have good reasons for wishing to possess copies even of the corrupt editions of the Scriptures ; but this is not our plea. We can import li'om England Bibles of almost every size from the smallest up to quarto, without any notes or references at all ; and in Scot- land, so far as we know, there never have been any copies of the Bible printed without references, ex- cept in such small sizes of letter as can scarcely be read by people advanr^ed in years. The second 2iV\.- swerofthe respondents concerning this matter is, that if they cannot exclude Bibles printed by the *113 English patentees, neither can they exclude Bibles printed by others in England. They then make a supposition the most extravagant possible, that any person in England may make an arrangement with the English patentees, to be allowed to print for Scotland, and then they may inundate Scotland with the most improper and inaccurate editions of the Bible. How is it conceivable that the English patentees would do this to the manifest injury of their own traffic ? How could it be w^orth any one's while to run the risk of printing Bibles so improper and inaccurate as probably to be unsaleable, espe- cially when the king's printers can furnish them so cheap ? How could private individuals do it who Jiave to pay the duty on paper, from which we be- lieve all the patentees are exempted ? The amount of this saving to the privileged printers must be very considerable on a large edition. The drawback allowed to Cambridge from 1809 to 1815 was L. 13, 072 ; and to Oxford for the same seven years, L.18,658. The proportion in both cases paid for Bibles, Testaments, &c. must have been nine times more than for all other books. The total value of the Bibles, and other prerogative books, printed at Cambridge, in that period, was L. 149,050 ; and the total value oi' other books distinguished from Bibles, Testaments, and prayer-books, was L, 16,993, 15s, At Oxford, in the same period, the total value of the Bibles, prayer-books, and psalms, was L.212,917; and the total value of all the other books was L.24,776. In the one case the average saving to the University was nearly L.2000 a year, and in the other nearly L.3000. Such an advantage as this must make it no easy matter for persons, who must pay the duty, to undersell the king's printers, even if it were conceivable that the two Universities and 1 •114 the king's printer for England were to conspire to /uin the Scottish patentees in a manner not only discreditable, but manifestly injurious to themselves. We do not subscribe to the opinion of the res- pondents that, in the case of the Bible, competition has not the effect of reducing the price, and im- proving the quality. They seem to admit that Bi- bles for the rich, who can afford a high price, might be as good, if competition were allowed. But not so (they say) in the case of the poor ; for whose use, they allege, that the works ordinarily printed are as defective in accuracy as in appearance. They then assert that they bring copies much cheaper in- to the market than could possibly be offered in a free trade. We are not printers, and have no wish to diminish their profits. We say, however, and we can prove by ocular demonstration, that their common Bibles, when the Edinburgh Bible Society w^as formed in 1809, were as defective in appearance as the meanest of the books ordinari- ly printed for the poor. "We have not proposed that the trade should be thrown open ; but if it were, we do not see that any evils would result from it, or even that any loss could be incurred by the king's printers, so long as they have the benefit of the drawback on paper, and other immunities and advantages which are not inconsiderable. The de- mand for the Greek New Testament is many hun- dreds of times less than the demand for the Bible in English, and it is much more difficult and more expensive to print it accurately ; and yet many printers in Scotland, as well as in England, have ventured to print editions of it, which they have dis- posed of at very moderate prices ; and we are not aware that there ever has been ground for com- plaining that the text has been in any material •115 respect corrupted, in consequence of the complete openness of the trade.* While the catechism was printed by every body who chose, it was in general as correctly printed as it is now, and it was sold at one-half the price which it now costs, f The respondents (p. 58.) take advantage of a ca- sual expression in our petition, in which we dis- claimed any wish to deprive them of the exclusive right of printing Bibles, and expressed an opinion which they have rendered unintelligible by mis- printing it. Our counsel stated in our name, that we think it desirable that the printing (not the pit- rity) of the Bible should not be intrusted to every person who might choose to undertake it ; but that it should be put under the charge of responsible individuals. As members of Bible Societies, and as individuals too, we certainly think that it would be a great loss to this part of the kingdom if the king*s printers were to cease to find it for their in- terest to print editions of the Scriptures, and we would rejoice to know that the demand for their editions increases progressively year after year, in consequence of their increasing excellence. We liave no wish whatever that the Bibles printed in England shall be more in demand than those which are printed here. But, at the same time, we must express our mature and deliberate conviction that the purity of the faith is no more likely to be cor- * The most incorrect edition of the Greek New Testament which we ever saw was printed by one of the patentees of the office of King's Printer in England in 1808. Surely he was under no necessity of printing incorrectly because he had no monopoly in this case. So it is, that we know of no such blunders in any edition by unprivileged printers, t We have mentioned in the Appendix a few editions of the Ca- techism in our possession, some of which are very superior in appear- ance to any of those which we have seen by the king's printers for Scotland. *116 rupted by the removal of all restrictions on printing the Scriptures in our native language, than by the universal liberty of printing them in the original tonffues and in new translations. The national church of Scotland (of which many of us are mem- bers) does not consider any translation as the infal- lible rule of faith, but has stated as a fundamental point of doctrine, that " the Old Testament in He- brew, and the New Testament in Greek, being im- mediately inspired by God, and by his singular care and providence kept pure in all ages, are therefore authentical : so as in all controversies of religion, the church is finally to appeal unto them." And great as is our reverence for the volume which con- tains the substance of divine truth in the tongue most familiar to our ears, we feel a much deeper veneration for the express words of inspiration ; and knowing that on the whole these words have been preserved pure and entire through many generations of gross darkness and superstition, in spite of the carelessness and ignorance of transcribers, and the hostility of infidels and heretics, we are not appre- hensive of any ultimate danger either from the free- dom or the restrictions of the press. We absolutely and utterly deny the position which the respondents maintain, " that, to insure accuracy, the power of excluding importation from abroad is as necessary as the power of excluding printing at home." But we are not by any means to be understood ever to have admitted that the printing at home ought to be confided to one indi- vidual, or to one company. What is said by the respondents (p. 58.) concern- ing the variety of their editions, we have already shown to be erroneous. They say that there are a *117 very few editions printed in England for which there is no demand in Scotland, and which there- fore they do not print. We say that there are three times as many varieties printed in England as in Scotland ; and that for some of them there is a very considerable demand, particularly for octavo edi- tions without references, and for smaller sizes of Bibles in a larger type than is ever used here, either for Bibles in twelves, eighteens, or twenty-fours. The redress to which they refer us in page 58, if the monopoly should produce inaccuracy or exces- sive price, or deficient supply, is one of which those who feel the greatest interest in the matter may not find it very easy to avail themselves. We do not ourselves know in what way it would be practica- ble to compel the respondents to perform their du- ty in such a way as would be altogether satisfac- tory. It would be no satisfaction to us that they were duly censured, or their gift withdrawn, if others might be appointed (as has hitherto been ge- nerally the case) without any possibility of knowing the qualifications of the patentees before they began to exercise them. Much would depend on the ministers of the crown for the time. We know that a short time before the lamented death of Mr. Perceval, when a new patent was about to be issued for the office of printer general for Ireland, he sig- nified his determination to have the grant so worded as not to impede the operations of the British and Foreign Bible Society in Ireland, and accordingly a clause was inserted to prevent the exclusion of Bibles and New Testaments printed by either of the Eng- lish universities.* The patent also gave a concur- *"In the month of October, 1810, by Mr. Perceval's desire Mr. Owen and Mr. Hughes had an interview with him in Downing Street 118 ring right to Trinity College, Dublin, of Bibles and all other books used in divine service ; so that the people of Ireland have now four sources from wliich they can be supplied with Bibles, besides the king's printers in Scotland, who, without any right recog- nised in the patent to Mr. Grierson, are said to sell vast numbers, particularly in the north of Ireland. In this respect Ireland has been particularly favoured by the British government. That country was ori- ginally supplied by importation. A patent granted by James I. to John Francton about the year 16 10 was indeed very exclusive, prohibiting all printing, binding, publishing or selling of Bibles and other books, except by Francton, under severe penalties. It is believed, however, that the terms of this grant were not rigidly enforced ; and the patents grant- ed by King William and George II. were much more favourable to the people. The patent to Boulter Grierson granted by Geo. III. constituted him sole printer general in Ireland, with all profits, commodities, advantages, pre-eminencies and pri- vileges thereunto belonging, and prohibiting all printing of Bibles, &c. by any others within the kingdom, but at the same time providing that this when they were interrogated, whether the patent of the king's printer, then on the eve of being renewed, occasioned any obstruction to the circulation of the Scriptures in Ireland, through the medium of the British and Foreign Bible Society. After expressing his friendship for the society, Mr. Perceval dismissed the secretaries with an assu- rance, that nothing should be allowed to enter into the patent, upon its renewal, which might be likely to interfere with the useful plans of the Society." Owen's Hist, of the British and Foreign Bible Society, vol. ii. p. 299. See three Irish patents in Appendix, No. xxxix. &c. Also the case of Grierson against Jackson, p. 112, &c. It is said that the king's printers for Scotland still import vast numbers of Bibles into Ireland, but it is not known that any are imported from Ireland into Scotland. The Irish may thus be supplied from five sources, while Scotland is expected to be content with one. *119 grant shall not be repugnant to any grant made by the king or any of his progenitors to any of his printers in Great Britain. Here importation was evidently allowed ; but the reservation of a concur- rent right of printing Bibles and other books used in divine service, to the Provost, Fellows, and Scho- lars of Trinity College, was assuredly an additional boon to Ireland j and this boon, as well as the liber- ty of importing Bibles and New Testaments print- ed at the university presses in England, was bestow- ed in the patent 1811. Did this injure the paten- tee, or did it endanger the purity of the text ? It did neither. The people are supplied with Bibles of good quality at a cheap rate ; and as the demand for Bibles has prodigiously increased, the Printer- general sees it to be his interest to print Bibles, (a thing which he did to a very sm.all extent before,) and certainly prints them better than ever. The patent thus granted to a printer in Ireland fifteen years ago expresses, we have no doubt, what has always been the intention of government since the Revolution, that the people in every part of his Majesty's dominions might, if they wished it, be supplied from more sources than one. Is Scotland to be the only part of the three kingdoms in which a monopoly of Bibles must now be introduced after an unlimited practice of importation from the veiy dawn of the Reformation ? And why should his Majesty's printers for Scotland, who, according to their own doctrine, are not amenable to the laws of Ireland, take upon them to inundate that kingdom with books, which in their language are unauthen- tic ? And must it depend on the religious charac- ter and views of the individual who is minister of the crown when a patent is renewed, whether the word of God is to have free course^ or whether the *12U W07'd of God is to he bound by the restrictions of" a monopoly, which, even if it had not fallen into long disuse, is certainly repugnant to the most just and liberal notions of constitutional law ? JJsage^ we maintain, is entirely in our favour. We hold it to be established, that long before the time of Basket, (to whom reference is made, p. 59.) the right of importing Bibles from England had been estabhshed by uninterrupted usage. From 1542 to 1579, the people of Scotland had Bibles supplied to them by importation alone ; from 1579 to 1610, as they had only one edition in folio, print- ed chiefly for the use of churches, they must have been supplied with imported Bibles for ordi- nary reading ; from I6IO to 1633, only one edition of the Bible has ever been discovered, and that edition could not be much more than sufficient for the supply of churches. From 1612 to 1632, the Bible was excepted from the gift of the king*s printer in the prohibitory clause, and thus others were allowed to print and import it. The same must evidently have been the terms of the patent to Ilobert Young in 1632, as appears from the joint gift to Young and Tyler in 1641, which re- serves to any other printer in Scotland the right of printing the Bible in folio. So also in that patent, the printers of Scotland had a common right of printing Psalms, Testaments, and other books for the church of Scotland, and the patentee had no power of excluding foreign Bibles, except from France, Holland, or other places beyond seas. An- derson's grant in I67I was made subject to the or- ders of the privy council, and the privy council re- stricted it to the style, tenor, and books named in Evan Tyler's gift, — a gift under which importation of any books from England was evidently free, and *121 under which certain sizes and parts of the Bible might be printed by all and sundry. We have also the uncontradicted evidence of Sir James Stewart in 1711, that the importation of Bibles had not hitherto been prohibited in Scotland, whatever might have been the conception of former gifts. And then we have the forty-one years of Free- bairn's patent, and four or five years more of Bas- ket's, during which, even if there had been no im- portation, the people would not have been exposed to the danger of a monopoly, as there were during almost the whole of that time three distinct print- ing offices in Edinburgh, and never fewer than two, at which Bibles were printed, and during all that time, Psalms, New Testaments, Confessions, and Catechisms were printed by any one who pleased, as they had been in Anderson's time. The re- spondents speak of the right of the crown not be- ing compromised by the act of temporary patentees, and of the country neither gaining nor losing any right under such a practice. We hold that the right of the country is not a right to exclude im- portation, but a right to import ; and it cannot be at this time of day considered as the right of the crown to abridge the long-possessed privileges of the people. If the right of the crown cannot be lost by usage, may the crown now resume all the powers supposed to be recognised in the act 1551 ? If printing be inter regalia^ can the king renounce this privilege of the crown ? The toleration of importation, say the respond- ents, (p. 59.) was mutual between both countries during the whole of last century, and even later ; at least as many copies having been sent from Scot- land to England as from England into Scotland. *ux: 12^ " This, tliey say, was in virtue of a mutual volun- tary toleration, which would never establish a pre- scriptive usage ; but if it did so, it must be on both sides or on neither. Yet it was held in the case of Richardson that no such right was established against the English patentees.'* Let us observe the difference of the two cases. In 1717> the highest court of law in England had found that the king's printer for England had a right to exclude Bibles printed in Scotland. If during the next forty years any Bibles were sent from Scotland into England, they could only be Basket's own. Now, with re- gard to the usage from 1757 to 1802, no doubt it was averred by Richardson that he had been a book- seller in London forty years, and tliat during the whole of that time, and many years previous, books had been reciprocally sent into and from England and Scotland. But on this part of the answer, the Lord Chancellor said, " I take the answer to this purpose to be not strictly true." Besides, though the Lord Chancellor did not receive the affidavits which were offered, two booksellers who at the time sold more books than any persons in their trade, Mr. Robinson and Mr. Johnson (who had been in business between forty and fifty years,) declared that they never sold these books printed in Scot- land. It was not admitted by Mr. Mansfield, (coun- sel for the universities,) that the usage of bringing Bibles from Scotland into England had prevailed for forty years. The usage, he said, could not have prevailed till the decision in the case of Bas- ket against Parsons had been forgotten. The usage too, he states, had not been public, but clandestine and illicit. On this subject the Lord Chancellor *123 said, " If I find there is a decision that the usage is against law, even if the usage was stronger than I think it can be pretended to be upon this answer, it would not authorise me to declare that that which was three times declared to be law, about I7I8 or I72O, has ceased to be law, and has given way to usage. This might be con- tended in Scotland^ where law goes into desuetude ; an idea that we do not understand here ; but I do not think it can be contended in England. We might have the advantage, perhaps, if arguing this question before the Court of Session, we English- men over the Scotch printers ; but in this country there is no such thing as law going into desue- tude." The allegation with regard to usage may be tried by a very satisfactory test. If there has been fair, open, and honourable usage in the importation of Bibles from Scotland into England, then we may ex- pect to find that the catalogues of the principal Eng- lish booksellers who dealt in theological books du- ring the last century, will contain as large a pro- portion of Bibles printed in Edinburgh, as the ca- talogues of Scottish booksellers of the same pe- riod contain of Bibles printed in England. Now we have examined nearly forty Edinburgh cata- logues from A. Donaldson's in I76I, to the year 1802, including those of Bell, Balfour, Dickson, Gordon and Murray, Creech, Gray, Elliot, Laing, Fairbairn, Duncan, and Constable ; and in these we find in general at least as many Bibles printed in England as in Scotland.* We leave it to the op- • The following specimen from a few Edinburgh catalogues will show some- thing like the proportion of Scottish to English editions sold in Scotland :— . *124 posite party to point out the same thing in EngHsh catalogues, and if they can, they must be more successful in their search than we have been. Alex, Donaldson, 1761. A fine Oxford Bible, with Apocrypha, 4to, Edin. 4to Bible, 1756, fine. Gray, 1787. Bible, 4to, Camb. 1633— ditto Camb. 1639— 4to, Lond. 1577. Charles Elliot, 1778. Bible, fol. Baskerville, Binn. 1769— fol. Edin. 1776 — 4to, large type, Oxf. 1772 — 4to, large type, Camb. 1775 — 4to, large tj^pe, Camb. 1773 — 4.to, large type, Edin. 1769 — 8vo, Edin. 1726 — ditto, 1770, printed by M'Farquhar— 8vo, Lond. 1660— Lond. 1710— Lond. 1693— Oxf. 1764v— Oxf. 1770— Camb. 1764— Lond. Eyre & Strachan, 1772, many copies — Edin. 1772. W. Creech, 1787. Bible, fol. Lon d. 1777— Watson, Edin. 1726— 4to, Oxford, 1769— Camb. 1762— Basket, Lond. 1765— Kincaid, 1762, 1769, and 1775— l2mo. Oxf. 1784— Edin. 1774. Aaron Maulers Books, sold 1782. Bible, fol. Watson, Edin. 1722— fol. Ostervald, (M'Farquhar) Edin. 1776 — quarto, Coverdale's, Lond. — quarto, Bill, Lond. 1693. Books of Rev. R. Kinloch, one of the Ministers of Edinburgh, sold in 1783. Bible, quarto, large print, by Bill, Lond. 1702 — quarto, by Anderson, in. IC 78— Confession of Faith, 1st and 2d Book of Discipline, &c. Lond. 1612^Confession of Faith, with Scriptures at large, Lond. 1675. James Dickson, 1779. Bible, Baskerville, fol. Binning. 1769 — Ostervald's (not by K. Printers) Edin. 1776— 4to, by Field, Camb. 1666— 4to, by Basket, Lond. 1767— 4to, by Basket, Lond. 1767 — 4to, Kincaid, Edin. 17T5 — 4to, Eyre & Strahan's fine ditto, Lond. 1772. Gordon ^Murray, 1782, containing the books of Gordon of Gordonston and Dr. George Wishart. Fol. Bible, Bassandyne, Edin. 1576 — fol. with Apocrypha, Lond. 1679 fol. with Notes, Aberd. 1769 — fol. And. Hart, Edin. 1610 — 4to, Field 3 copies, Camb. 1666 — 4to, Norton & Bill, Lond. 1622 — 4to, Barker, Lond. 1G13 — 4to, Kincaid, Edin. 1775 — royal 4to, 2 vols, (standard edition) Oxf. 1769. John Bell, 1781. Bible, Eyre & Strahan, 4to, Lond. 1778— K'ncaid, 4to, Edin. 1775 — *125 "■"■■^ ^- Let them also look through the churches in Scotland. They will find, particularly in towns, 8vo, Kincaid, Edin. 1772 — 8vo, Basket, Oxf. — 13mo. three Edinburgh editions, one Cambridge, and three London. Fairhairn, 1794. 4to. Edin. 1787— Camb. 1768 and 1788— Oxf. 1790— 8 vo, Oxf. 1786— Lend. 1773— Edin. 1789 and 1791. Elphingtton Balfour, 1787. Bible, fol. Baskerville, Camb. 1763— fol. Basket, Lond. 1769— 4to. Field, 3 copies, Camb. 1668 — 4to, Basket, Edin. 1726 — 4to, Barker, Lond, 1615 — 4to, royal, Lond. 1773 — 4to, medium, Lond. 1773 — 8vo, Lond. 1735 — 8vo, Lond. 1641— 8vo, by Cann, 2 vols. Lond. 1647— 8 vo, Camb. 1765— 12mo, Camb. 1778. Spotiisreood^s Catalogue of the books of Professor Moor, of Glasgow, 1779. Bible, fol. Matthews and Tyndal, Lond. — quarto. Barker, Lond. 1599. Bibles which belonged to the late Mr. Charles Macky, Professor of History in Edinburgh from 1719 to 1765. Bible, quarto. Barker, Lond. 1599 — quarto, Lond. 1648 — 8vo, Lond. 1639— 8vo, Lond. 1679— 8vo, Lond. 1694— 12mo. Field, 1653. Bibles which belonged to the late Mr. Stewart of Spoutwells. 32 copies, all printed before 1790 — only 4 printed in Edinburgh, includ- ing 2 copies of Bassandyne's, the other 28 printed in England, except 2 on the continent. Bell and Bradfute,\\lQi>, 1798. Bible, by Eyre & Strahan, royal fol. Lond. 1772 — fol. by Barker, Lond. 1602— fol. Edin. 1793— fol. with Notes, Lond. 1795— 4to, Lond. 1767— 4to, fine paper, Edin. 1789 — 4to, Lond, 1772 — 4to, by Field, Lond. 1668 — 4to, by Basket, Lond. 1767 — 4to, Camb. 1769— ko, royal, Camb. 1768 — 4to, with Apocrypha and Common Prayer, Edin. 1752 — 4to, Edin. 1726 — 4to, Edin. 1793— 4to, Edin. 1791— 4to, Brown's, Lond. 1791— 4to, Oster- vald's, Edin. 1797 — 4to, Edin. 1796 — 8vo, Bowyer's Unique Cabinet Bible, printed liy Bensley, Lond. 1795 — 12mo, Bowyer, Lond. 1796 — A great variety of Cambridge, Oxford, and Edinburgh Bibles, 12mo. Creech, 1782. Bible, fol. with Rider's notes, Lond. 1770 — fol. with notes, Aberd. 1769 —fol. Ostervtdd, Edin. 1772— 4to, liond. 1766— 4to, Royal, Oxf. 1769— 4to, Oxf. 1773— 4to, Camb. 1762— 4to, Kincaid, Edin. 1762— 4to, Kin- caid, 1769— 8vo, Edin. 1777— 8vo, Loud. 1772- 8vo, with Cann's Notes, Jidiji. 1774. *126 great numbers of Bibles printed in Oxford, Cam- bridge, and London, used in the pulpits, and in the Bible, by Walley, fol. 1575 — old edition, fol. 1539 — Cranmer's, fol. Lond. 1583— printed by Field, 4to, 1668— by Basket, 4to, 1726— Camb. 1786— by Barker, 4to, Lond. 1616. J. ^ E. Balfour, 1784. Bible, 4to, Lond. 1773— Lond. 1772— 8vo, Lond. 1772— Camb. 1773— Lond. 1774— Lond. 1776. Laitig, 1800. Bible, large type, by Field, fol. Camb. 1660— Baskerville, fol. Camb. 1763— 8vo, Lond. 1793. Constable, 1796. Bible, fol. superb edition, Lond. 1772 — 8vo, a great variety, Lond. and Edin. 12mo, Scatcherd, and Whitaker, Lond. 1791. Constable, 1797. Bible, fol. Lond. 1772— Lond. 1793— Edin. 1579. Constable, 1799. Bible, fol. Lond. 1794— Lond. 1772— Edin. 1796— 8vo, Lond. 1774— 12mo. Camb. 1653 — Pasham, Lond. 1776^Strahan, Lond. 1791 — Watson, Edin. 1719— Pine, Bristol, 1774— Canne's Notes, Edin. 1797. Constable, 1801. Bible, fol. Oxf. 1717— Lond. 1607— Lond. 1613— 4to, Edin. 1796— Lond. 1613— 8vo, Lond. 1774— 12mo, Camb. 1653— Lond. 1791— Bristol, 1774. The proportion of Bibles printed in Scotland, observable in the cata- logues of English booksellers of the last century, is exceedingly small. "ITie following specimen is taken at random. Osborne's Catalogue of the libraries of Dr. Mortimer, Mr. Pargiter, Dr. Foster, Counsellor Hamilton and others, 2 vols. 8vo. containing 39,509 books — Lond. 1754. 23 folio English Bibles. — Oxf. Lond. Camb. Geneva, Amst— (Not one Edinburgh.) — 18 quarto Bibles, do Oxf. Lond. Camb.— (None Edin- burgh.) — 8 octavo Bibles, do. — (One Edinburgh, 1649.) Robson's Catalogue of the libraries of Richard Long, Esq. and others. 9 folio editions of the Bible, Lond. Camb. and Oxf. — (None Edinburgh.) 10 quarto editions, Lond. Camb. and Oxf — (None Edinburgh.) — 6 oc- tavo editions, Lond. Camb. and Oxf. — (None Edinburgh.) 6 l2mo. editions, Lond. Camb. and Oxf.— (One Edinburgh, 1764.) *127 seats of public bodies. Will they find in London, or Oxford, or Cambridge, that the Scriptures and the liturgy have been read in the service of the church from editions printed by any of the prede- cessors of the respondents ? Within the last month we have made some inquiry into this matter, by writmg letters to the places where Bible Societies are established. The returns have not hitherto been numerous 5 but the result of the inquiry, so far as it has proceeded, is, that of 320 bibles, report- ed as being used in the established churches, and other places of worship, by the ministers, elders, and public functionaries occupying official seats, 144 have been printed in Edinburgh, and the re- maining 176 almost entirely in England, — a very few of the oldest having been imported from Hol- land. It appears also that a very great proportion Pater sail's Catalogue of above 8000 books, Lond. 1786. Bible, Lond. 1646 Camb. 1648, (4 copies,)— Lond. 1650, Lond. 1698, (9 copies.) Tesseymaii's Catalogue of upwards of 40,000 volumes, York, 1781. 11 editions of tlie Bible in folio— Lond. 1602, 1607, 1613, 1640, 1763, 1774 — Oxford 1680 and 1770— Camb. 1G38 and 1762. 9 Editions in 4to. Camb. Oxf. and Lond. (one Edinb. 1775.) Rolsoti'e Catalogue of 8655 books, Lond. 1784. 10 Bibles in folio, Lond. 1611, 1613 — Camb. 1638 (2 copies.)— Camb. Ifi59, Camb. 1762— Oxf. 1685, 1717, 1769 Birm. 1772. 11 Bibles, 4to. Geneva, 1589— Lond. 1599, 1683, 1677 Camb. 1666, 1745, 1769, &c — Oxf. 1747, 1773, &c No Edinburgh editions. Robson's Catalogue of 7468 books, Lond. 1783. 8 folio Bibles, Lond. 1611, 1613 Oxf. 1717, 1773 Camb. 1638, 1669, &c. — No Edinburgh editions. fVJtitc'g Library of i?ir Richard Jebb and others (above 11,000 books,) Lond. 1778 — 10 folio Bibles, Camb. Oxf. and Lond — 11 quarto Bibles, Camb. Oxf. and Lond. — 5 octavo Bibles, Lond.— No Edinburgh editions. *128 of the psalm books used in the churches have been printed, not by the patentees, but by other printers in Scotland. We are thus more and more convinced, that, till very lately, Scotland was chiefly supplied from England with editions of the Bible of a large size, particularly those which are read in churches ; and if we were to add the communications which enu- merate copies possessed by private individuals, not only of superior station, but in the middle and lower classes, we would be justified in concluding, that much more than half of the Bibles used in Scottish families during the last century were printed in England.* With regard to the Bibles used in churches, it can be proved that some of them were imported at the time when the restrictions on importation are understood to have been the greatest. Thus the Bible of the Old Kirk, Edinburgh, was cer- tainly imported in the reign of Charles II. during " The following may serve as a specimen. They belong to eight families in the small town of Pittenweem, Bible, with Geneva notes, and Baza's to the New Testament liond. 1708 with Edinburgh Psalms 1679 Do. . . . . . . Lond. 1605 Do. ...... Amst. 1640 Do. . ..... Camb. 1637 Do. ..... . Lond. 1639 Do. (with Geneva and Beza's notes) . . Lond. 1708 Do. ...... Lond. 1648 Do. . ..... Oxf. 1682 Do. .... . Oxf. 1733 Do. (New Testament) . . . Lond. 1733 Do. . ... . Oxf. 1750 Do. ...... . Camb. 1780 Do. ..... Heptinstall, Lond. 1795 The Bible used in Bishop Low's chapel, Pittenweem, is a folio without date, printed at Oxford, with Edinburgh Psalms, 1679. The Bible of St. Adrian's Lodge, Pittenweem, Lond. 1599, with Psalms, Edin. 1643. *129 the currency of Anderson's patent. This Bible was printed at Oxford in 1 68^, and was presented to the ministers by the elders in 1684.* If it had been an illegal act clandestinely committed, the elders would not have ventured to print an account of their donation, nor would they have ventured to record it, as they did, on the most conspicuous page of the record of their session. The Bible which has long been used in the church of Old Machar, (formerly the Cathedral Church of Aberdeen,) is a large folio, printed at Oxford in 1685, and it ap- pears from an inscription, and from the stamping in gilt letters on the boards, that it was presented by Dr. Fraser, sub-principal of King's College, in 16Q2 #******* • The following inscription is printed at the beginning of this copy, by Reid, in 1684*. This BIBLE was gifted (in Anno 1684') to the Reverend Mr. ALEXANDER RAMSAY, and Mr. JOHN FAR Q UHAR, Present Ministers of the Old Church of Edinburgh ; and to their Successouris in that Church, By r William Panton. "^ ,, ) John Frank. ( ttu Mr. K.I J T) u >■ Ji his Regentes in his Name, or onie of his Predecessours, to the trew and halie Kirk, presentlie established within this Realme, and declared in the first Acte of his Hienesse Parlia- ment, the twentie day of October, the zeir of GOD, ane thou- sand, five hundreth, threescoir ninetene zeires : And all and quhatsumeuer Actes of Parliament, and Statutes maid of be- fore, be his Hienesse, and his Regentes ; Anent the libertie and freedome of the said Kirk : And speciallie, the first Acte of Parliament, halden at Edinburgh, the twentie foure daie of October, the zeir of God, ane thousand, five hundreth, four- score ane zeires. With the haill particular Actes there mention- ed : Quhilk salbe als sufficient, as gif the samin were here ex- pressed : And all uther Acts of Parliament made sensine in Favour of the trew Kirk : And sik like, ratifies and appreiuis, the general Assemblies appoynted be the said Kirk : And de- claris, that it sal be lauchfull to the Kirk and Ministers, euerie zeir at the least, and often pro re naia, as occasion and necessi- tie sal require, to hald and kepe general Assemblies, providing. 127 that the Kings Majestic, or his Commissioners^ with them to be appointed be his hienesse, be present at ilk general Assemblie, before the dissoluing thereof, nominate and appoynt time and place, quhen and quhair the next general Assemblie sal be halden : And in case naither his Majeslie, nor his said Commis- sioners beis present for the time in that Toun, quhair the said general Assemblie beis halden, then, and in that case it sal be lesum to the said general Assemblie, be theraselues, to nomi- nate and appoynt time and place, quhair the nixt general As- semblie of the Kirk salbe keiped and halden, as they haue bene in vse to do thir times by-past. And als ratifies and appreuis the Synodall and Prouinciall Assemblies, to be halden be the said Kirk and Ministers twise ilk zeir, as they haue bene, and are presentlie in Vse to do, within everie province of this Realme : And ratifies and appreevis the Presbyteries, and par- ticular Sessiones appointed be the said Kirk, with the haill ju- risdiction and discipline of the same Kirk, agried vpon be his Majestie in conference, had, be his Hienesse, with certaine of the Ministers, conveened to that effect : Of the quhilks artickles, the tenour follows. JMaters to be intreated in Provincial as- semblies : Thir assemblies are constitute for weichtie matters, necessar to be intreated be mutual consent and assistance of brethren, within the Provmce, as neede requiris. This assem- blie has power to handle, crdour and redresse all things omitted or done amisse in the particular assemblies. It hes power to depose the office-beareres of that Province, for gude and just cause, deserving deprivation : And generallie, thir assemblies hes the hail power of the particular Elderschips quhairof they are collected. Maters to be intreated in the Presbyteries. The power of the Presbyteries is to giue diligent Laboures in the boundes committed to their charge ; That the Kirkcs be keep- ed in gude ordour ; to inquire diligentlie of naughtie and un- godlie persons ; and to travel to bring them in the way again be admonition, or threatning of Gods judgments, or be correc- tion. It appertaines to the Elderschippe, to take heede, that the word of God be purelie preached within their boundes, the Sacramentes richtlie ministred, the Discipline interteined, and Ecclesiastical gudes vncorruptlie distributed. It belangis to 128 tliis kind of assemblies, to cause the ordinances maid by the As- semblies, Provincialles, Nationalles, and Generalles, to be keen- ed and put in execution, to make constitutions, quhilk concemis T9 "Tc^iTcov in the Kirk, for decent ordour, in the particular Kirk quhair they governe : Providing that they alter na rules maid be the Prouinciall or Generall assemblies ; and that they make the Provinciall assemblies foresaid privie of the rules that they sail make ; and to abolish constitutiones, tending to the hurt of the same. It hes power to excommunicate the obstinate, for- mal Process being led, and dew intervall of times obserued. Anent Particular Kirks, gif they be lauchfullie ruled, be suf- ficient Ministerie and Session ; they have power and jurisdic- tion in their owen Congregation, in maters Eeclesiasticall. And decernis and declaris the saides Assemblies, Presbyteries and Sessiounes, Jurisdiction and Discipline thereof foresaid, to be in all times camming maist just, gude, and godlie in the self, Not-with-standing of quhatsumever Statutes, Actes, Canone, Civill, or Municipall Lawes, made in the contrare. To the quhilkis, and everie ane of them, thir Presentes sail make ex- presse derogation. And, because there ar diuers actes of Par- liament, maid in Fauour of the Papisticall Kirk, tending to the prejudice of the libertie of the trew Kirk of God, presentlie professed within this Realme, jurisdiction and discipline there- of; Quhilk stands zit in the buikes of the actes of Parliament, rocht abrogated nor annulled; Therefore his Hienesse, and Estaites fovesaides, hes abrogated, cassed, and annulled ; and bee ^he tenouv hereof, abrogatis, cassis and annuUis all Actes of Parliament maul be onie of his Hienesse predecessoures, for Maintenance of superstition and idolatrie, with all and quhat- sum-euer Actes, lav.es and statutes, maid at onie time, before the daie and dait hereof, against the libertie of the trew Kirk, jurisdiction and discipline theirof, as the samin is vsed and ex- ercised within this Realme. And m special, that Part of the Act of Parliament, halden at Striviling, tlie Fourt Day of Nouember, the zeir of God, ane thousand four hundreth fortie three zeirs, coramaunding obe- dience to l)e given to Eugenius the Paipe for the time: The acte maid be King James the third, in his Parliament halden at 129 Edinburgh, the twentie four day of Februar, the zeir of God, ane thousand four hundreth, four scoir zeires. And all vtheris actes, quhairby the Paipis authoritie is established. The Acta of King James the thrid, in his Parliament halden at Edinburgh, the twentie daie of November, the zeir of God, ane thousand, four hundreth, three scoir nine zeires, anent the Saiterday, and vther vigiles to be hailie daies, from Euen-sang to Euen-sang. Item, That pairt of the act, maid be the Queene Regent, in the Parliament halden at Edinburgh, the first day of Februar, The zeir of God, ane thousand, fiue hundreth fiftie ane zeires, giuing speciall licence, for balding of Pasche and Zule. Item, The Kingis Majestie and Estaites foresaidis, declaris, that the 129. Acte of the Parliament, halden at Edinburgh, the xxii. day of Maij, the zeir of God, 1584 Zeirs, sail na wise be prejudi- ciall, nor derogate onie thing to the priuiledge that God hes giuen to the spiritual office-bearers in the Kirk, concerning heads of Religion, maters of Heresie, Excommunication, Colla- tion or Depriuation of Ministers, or ony siklike essential Cen- sours, speciallie grounded, and hauand warrand of the V/ord of God. Item, Our Soveraine Lord, and Estaites of Parliament foresaidis, abrogatis, cassis, and annullis, the Act of the same Parliament, halden at Edinburgh, tlie said zeir, 1584 zeires, granting Commission to Bischopps, and vtheris Judges, consti- tute in Ecclesiastical causes, to receiue his Hienesse presenta- tiones to benefices, to giue collation thereupon ; And to put or- dour in al causes Ecclesiastical, quhilk his Majestie and Es- taites foresaidis, declaris to be expired in the self, and to be null in time cumming, and of nane avail). Force nor Effect. And therefore ordainis all presentations to benefices, to be di- rect to the particular Presbyteries, in all time cumming : with full power to giue collation thereupon; And to put ordour to all matters and causes Ecclesiasticall, within their boundes, ac- cording to the discipline of the Kirk : Providing the foresaid Presbyteries be bound and astricted, to receive and admit qubat- sumeuer qualified Minister, presented be his Majestic, or laick patrones. 130 No. XLIII. Proclamation hy Charles I. Charles by the grace of God, King of Scotland, England, France and Ireland, Defender of the Faith, To our Lovites Heralds Messengers, our SherifFes in that part, conjunctly and severally specially constitute greeting. Forsameikle as We are not igno- rant of the great disorders which have happened of late within this Our ancient Kingdome of Scotland, occasioned, as is pre- tended, upon the introduction of the Service BogJ>, Book of Canons, and Hig^h Conimission, thereby fearing innovation of Religion and Laws. For satisfaction of which fears, We well hoped, that the two Proclamations of the eleventh of Decem- ber, and nineteenth of February, had been abundantly suffi- cient : Neverthelesse, finding that disorders have daily so in- creased, that a powerful rather than perswasive way, might have been justly expected from Us ; Yet We out of Our innative in- dulgence to Our people, grieving to see them run themselves so headlong into ruine, are graciously pleased to try, if by a faire way We can reclaime them from their faults, rather than to let them perish in the same. And therefore once for all We have thought fit to declare, and hereby to assure all Our good people, that We neither were, are, nor by the Grace of God ever shall be stained with Popish superstition : But by the con- trary, are resolved to maintain the true Protestant Christian Reli- gion already profest within this Our ancient Kingdome. Andfor farther clearing of scruples. We do hereby assure all men, that we will neither now nor hereafter presse the practice of the foresaid Canons and Service Book, nor any thing of that nature, but in such a faire and legall way, as shall satisfie all Our lov- ing subjects, that we neither intend innovation in Religion or Lawes. And to this effect have give?i order to discharge all Ads of Conncel made i/icrcanent. And for the hiiih Commis- 131 sion. We shall so rectifie it with the help of advice of Our privie Councel, that it shall never inipugne the Lawes, nor bee a just grievance to Our loyall subjects. And what is farder fitting to be agitate in generall Assemblies and Parliament, for the good and peace of the Kirk, and peaceable government of the same, in establishing of the Religion presently profest, shall likewise be taken into Our Royal consideration, in a free Assembly and Parliament, which shall be indicted and called with Our best convenience. And We hereby take God to witnesse, that Our true meaning and intention is, not to admit of any innovations either in Religion or Laws, but carefully to maintain the purity of Religion already profest and established, and no wayes to suffer Our Lawes to be infringed. And although We cannot be igno- rant, that there may be some disaffected persons who will strive to possesse the hearts of Our good subjects, that this Our gracious declaration is not to be regarded ; Yet We do expect that the behaviour of all Our good and loyall subjects will be such, as may give testimonie of their obedience, and how sensible they are of Our grace and favour, that thus pass- eth over their misdemeanours, and by their future carriage make appeare, that it was only feare of innovation, that hath caused the disorders which have happened of late within this Our ancient Kingdome. And are confident, that they will not suffer themselves to be seduced and mis-led, to misconstrue Us or Our actions, but rest heartily satisfied with Our pious and reall intentions, for maintenance of the true Religion and Lawes of this Kingdome. Wherefore We require and heartily wish all Our good people carefully to advert to these danger- ous suggestions, and not to permit themselves, blindely under pretext of Religion, to be led in disobedience, and draw on in- finitely, to Our grief, their own ruine, which We have, and still shall strive to save them from, so long as We see not royall Authority shaken off. And most unwillingly shall make use of that power which God hath endued Us with, for reclaiming of disobedient people. Our Will is herefore, and Wee charge you straightly and command, that incontinent these Our Letters scene, you passe 132 to the market crosse of Our Burgh of Edinburgh, and all other places needfull, and there by open Proclamation make publica- tion hereof to all and sundry Our good subjects, where through none pretend ignorance of the same. The which to do. We commit to you conjunctly and severally Our full power, by these Our Letters, delivering the same by you duely execute and indorsed againe to the Bearer, Given at Our Court of Greenwich the twenty eight day of June, and of Our Reigne the thirteenth year, 1638. Per Regem. No. XLIV. Proclamation by Charles I. rescinding all Acts for esta- blishing the Book of Canons, 8fc. Charles, by the grace of God, King of Scotland, England, France, and Ireland, defender of the faith. To Our Lovites, Messengers, Our SheriflFes, in that part con- junctly and severally specially constitute, greeting. Forso- much as the cause and occasion of all the distractions which have happened of late both in Church and Common-weale of this our Kingdome, have proceeded from the conceived feares of innovation of Religion and Lawes ; To free all Our good subjects of the least suspicion of any intention in Us to inno- vate any thing, either in Religion or Lawes, and to satisfie not merely their desires, but even their doubts, We have discharg- ed, and hy these presents do discharge the Service Booke, Booke of Canons, and High Commission, and the practice of them, or any of them ; and by these presents annidls and rescinds all Acts of Councell, Proclamations, and other acts and deeds what- soever, that have beene made or published, for establishing them, or any of them, and declares the same Jo be null, and to have no force nor effect in time coming. And being informed, that the urging of the practice of the five Articles of Perth Assera- 133 bly hath bred great distraction and division in the Church and State, We have beene graciously pleased to take the same into Our consideration; and for the quiet and peace of Church and State, doe not onely dispense wilh the practice of the saids Articles, but also discharge, like as by these presents We dis- charge all and whatsoever persons from urging the practice thereof, upon either Laick or Ecclesiasticall person whatsoever. And We doe hereby free all Our subjects from all censure and paine, whether ecclesiasticall or secular, for not urging, prac- tising, or obeying the same, notwithstanding of any thing con- tained in the Acts of Parliament, or generall Assembl}', to the contrary. And because it hath beene, to the disgrace of go- vernment, disperst and surmised throughout this Our King- dome, that some of Our subjects have exercised such illimited and unwarranted power, and have held themselves eximed from censure and punishment, to which others Our subjects are lyable. We doe by these presents declare, that if any of Our subjects, whether ecclesiasticall or civill, of whatsoever qualitie, title, or degi-ee, have, or shall at any time presume to doe any such act, or assume to themselves any such exemption or power. That they shall, like as by these presents We make and ordaine them to be lyable to the triall and censure of Parliament, ge- nerall Assembly, or any other Judicatories competent, accord- ing to the nature and qualitie of the offence. And for the free entry of Ministers, that no other oath be administrate unto them then that which is contained in the act of Parliament, And to give Our subjects full assurance, that We never intend to admit of any change or alteration in the true Religion al- readie established and professed into this Our Kingclome, And that all Our good people may be fully and clearly satisfied of the realitie of Our intentions towards the maintenance of the truth and integritie of the said Religion, We have thought fit and expedient to injoine and authorize, like as We by these presents doe require and command all the Lords of Our privie Councell, Senalours of the Colledge of Justice, Judges, and Magistrates to burgh and land, and all Our other subjects what- soever, to subscribe and renew the Confession of Faith, sub- scribed at first by Our deare Father and His houshold, in the 134 yeare of God 1580. Thereafter by persons of all rankes, in the yeere 1581. by ordinance of the Lords of secret Councell, and acts of the generall Assembly. Subscribed againe by all sorts of persons in the yeere 1590. by a new ordinance of Councell at the desire of the generall Assembly, with their general band of maintenance of the true Religion, and the Kings person. And for that effect We doe require the Lords of Councell to take such course anent the foresaid confession and general! band, that it may be subscribed and renewed throughout the whole kingdome with all possible diligence. And because we will not leave in Our subjects minds the least scruple or doubt of Our royall intentions and reall resolutions, We have given warrant to Our Commissioner to indict a free generall Assem- bly, to be holden at Glasgow the twenty first day of November, in this present yeare 1638. And thereafter a Parliament to be holden at Edinburgh the fifteenth day of May Anno 1639. for settling a perfect peace in the Church and Common- weale of this kingdome. And because it is likely that the disorders and distractions which have happened of late, have beene occasion- ed thi-ou^h the conceived feares of innovation of Religion and Lawes, and not out of any disloyaltie or disaffection to sove- raigntie. We are graciously pleased absolutely to forget what is past, and freely to forgive all by-gones to all such as shall ac- quiesce to this Our gracious pleasure, and carry themselves peaceably as loyall and dutifull subjects, and shall ratifie and approve the same in Our next ensuing Parliament. And that this Assembly may have the better successe, and more happy conclusion. Our will is, that there be a solerane Fast proclaimed and kept by all Our good subjects of this kingdome, a foure- teene dayes before the beginning of the said Assembly : the causes thereof to be a begging a blessing from God upon that Assembly, and a peaceable end to the distractions of this Church and Kingdome, with the aversion of Gods heavie judgment from both. And Our pleasure is, that this Fast be kept in the most solemne manner as hath beene in this Church at any time here- tofore upon the most extraordinary occasion. Our will is herefore, and We charge you straightly and com- inandj that incontinent these Our Letters seen, ye passe, and 135 make publication hereof by open proclamation at the market Crosses of the head burrowes of this kingdom, where-through none pretend ignorance of the same. Given at Our Court of Oatlands, the ninth day of Septem- ber, 1638. Per Regem. No. XLV. Assemhly at Glasgow, December 6, 1638. Sess. 14. /. Act concerning the Service-Booh^ Boole qf Canons ^ Booh of Ordination, and the High Commission. I. The Assembly having diligently considered the Book of Common-prayer, lately obtruded upon the reformed Kirk with- in this Realm, both in respect of the Manner of the introducing thereof, and in respect of the Matter which it containeth, find- eth, that it hath been devised, and brought in by the pretended Prelates, without Direction from the Kirk, and pressed upon Ministers without Warrant from the Kirk, to be universally re- ceived, as the only Form of Divine Service, under all highest Pains, both Civil and Ecclesiastical ; and the Book itself, beside the Popish Frame and Forms in Divine Worship, to contain many Popish Errors and Ceremonies, and the Seeds of manifold and gross Superstition and Idolatry. The Assembly, therefore, all in one Voice, hath rejected and condemned, and by these Presents doth reject and condemn the said Book, not only as illegally introduced, but also as repugnant to the Doctrine, Discipline, and Order of this reformed Kirk, to the Confession of Faith, Constitutions of General Assemblies, and Acts of Par- liament establishing the true Religion ; and doth prohibite the Use and Practice thereof: And ordain Presbyteries to proceed with the Censure of the Kirk against all such as shall trans- gress. k 136 II. The Assembly also, taking to their Consideration the Book of Canons, and the Manner how it hath been introduced, findeth, that it hath been devised by the pretended Prelates, without Warrant or Direction from the General Assembly; and to establish a tyrannical Power in the Persons of the pretended Bishops, over the Worship of God, Mens' Consciences, Liber- ties and Goods ; and to overthrow the whole Discipline and Government of the General and Synodical Assemblies, Pres- byteries, and Sessions, formerly established in our Kirk; Therefore the Assembly, all in one Voice, hath rejected and condemned, and by these Presents, doth reject and condemn the said Book, as contrair to the Confession of our Faith, and repugnant to the established Government, the Book of Discip- line, and the Acts and Constitutions of our Kirk ; prohibites the Use and Practice of the same; and ordains Presbyteries to proceed with the Censure of the Kirk, against all such as shall transgress. No. XLVI. Assembly at Edinburgh, Aug. 27, 1647, Sess. 23. Act Approving the Confession of Faith. A Confession of Faith for the Kirks of God, in the Three Kingdoms, being the chiefest Part of that Uniformity in Re- ligion, which by the Solemn League and Covenant, we are bound to endeavour ; and there being accordingly, a Confession of Faith agreed upon, by the Assembly of Divines sitting at Westminster, with the Assistance of Commissioners, from the Kirk of Scotland ; Which Confession was sent from our Com- missioners at London, to the Commissioners of the Kirk met at Edinburgh, in January last, and hath been in this Assembly twice publickly read over, examined and considered ; Copies thereof being also printed, that it might be particularly perused 137 by all the Members of this Assembly, unto whom frequent In- timation was publickly made, to put in their Eoubts and Objections, if they had any ; and the said Confession being, upon due Examination thereof, found by the Assembly, to be most agreeable to the Word of God, and in nothing contrary to the received Doctrine, Worship, Discipline and Government of this Kirk ; And lastly. It being so necessary, and so much long'd for, that the said Confession be with all possible Dili- gCHCe and Expedition, approved and established in both King- doms, as a principal Part of the intended Uniformity in Reli- gion, and as a special Means for the more effectual suppressing of the many dangerous Errors and Heresies of these Times ; The General Assembly doth therefore, after mature Delibera- tion, agree unto, and approve the said Confession, as to the Truth of the Matter (judging it to be most Orthodox, and grounded upon the Word of God) and also, as to the Point of Uniformity, agreeing, for our Part, that it be a common Confes- sion of Faith for the Three Kingdoms. The Assembly doth also bless the Lord, and thankfully acknowledge his gi-eat Mercy, in that so excellent a Confession of Faith is prepared, and thus far agreed upon in both Kingdoms, which we look upon, as a gi'eat strengthening of the true reformed Religion against the common Enemies thereof. But lest our Intention and Meaning be in some Particulars misunderstood, it is here- by expressly Declared and Provided, that the not mentioning in this Confession, the several Sorts of Ecclesiastical Officers and Assemblies, shall be no Prejudice to the Truth of Christ, in these Particulars, to be expressed fully in the Directory of Government. It is further Declared, That the Assembly un- derstandeth some Parts of the second Article of the Thirty one Chapter, only of Kirks not settled, or constituted in Point of Government ; And that although, in such Kirks, a Synod of Ministers, and other fit Persons, may be called by the Magis- trates Authority and Nomination, without any other Call, to consult and advise with, about Matters of Religion ; and al- though likewise, the Ministers of Christ, without Delegation from their Churches, may of themselves, and by Vertue of their Office, meet together synodically in such Kirks, not yet 138 constituted ; yet neither of these ought to be done, in Kirks constituted and settled : It being always free to the Magistrate to advise with Synods of Ministers and Ruling Elders, meeting upon Delegation from their Churches, either ordinarily, or be- ing indicted by his Authority, occasionally and pro re nala ; it being also free to assemble together synodically, as well pro re nata, as at the ordinary Times, upon Delegation from the Churches, by the intrinsical Power received from Christ, as often as it is necessary for the Good of the Church, so to as- semble, in case the Magistrate, to the Detriment of the Church, withhold or deny his Consent, the Necessity of occasional As- semblies being first remonstrate unto him, by humble Suppli- cation. No. XL VII. The CONFESSION of FAITH, agreed upon by the Assembly of Divines at Westminste?', examined and ap- proved^ Anno 1G47, by the Church of Scotland. And ratified by Act of Parliament 1690. CHAP. I. Of the Holy Scripture, VIII. The Old Testament in Hebrew (which'was the Native Language of the People of God of old ) and the New Testament in Greek, (which at the time of the Writing of it was most ge- nerally known to the Nations) being immediately inspired by God, and by his singular Care and Providence kept pure in all Ages, are therefore Authentical ; so as, in all Controversies of Religion, the Church is finally to appeal unto them. But, be- cause these original Tongues are not known to all the People of God, who have right unto, and Interest in the Scriptures, 139 and are commanded, in the Fear of God, to read and search them ; therefore they are to be translated into the vulgar Lan- guage of every Nation unto which they come, that the Word of God dwelling plentifully in all, they may worship him in an acceptable manner ; and through Patience and Comfort of the Scriptures, may have Hope. IX. The infallible Rule of Interpretation of Scripture is the Scripture itself; and therefore, when there is a Question about tlie true and full sense of any Scripture (which is not manifold, but one) it must be searched and known by other Places that speak more clearly. X. The Supreme Judge, [by which all Controversies of Re- ligion are to be determined, and all Decrees of Councels, Opi- nions of ancient Writers, Doctrines of Men, and private Spi- rits, are to be examined ; and, in whose Sentence we are to rest ; can be no other but the Holy Spirit speaking in the Scripture. No. XLVIIL CHAP. XXIII. Of the Civil Magistrate. God, the supreme Lord and King of all the World, hath or- dained Civil Magistrates, to be under him, over the People for his own glory, and the Publick Good : and, to this end, hath armed them with the Power of the Sword, for the Defence and Encouragement of them that are Good, and for the Punishment of Evil-doers. II. It is lawful for Christians to accept and execute the Office of a Magistrate, when called thereunto ; in the managing where- of, as they ought especially to maintain Piety, Justice, and Peace, according to the wholsom Laws of each Common- wealth: So, for that End, they may lawfully, now under the New Tes- tament, wage War, upon just and necessary Occasions. 3 140 III. The Civil Blagistrate may not assume to himself the Administration of the Word and Sacraments, or the Power of the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven : Yet, he hath Authority, and it is his Duty, to take Order, that Unity and Peace be preserved in the Church, that the Truth of God be kept pure and entire, that all Blasphemies and Heresies be suppressed, all corruptions and Abuses in Worship and Discipline prevent- ed, or reformed, and all the Ordinances of God duly settled, administred, and observed. For the better effecting whereof, he hath Power to call Synods, to be present at them, and to provide that whatsoever is transacted in them, be according to the Mind of God. IV. It is the Duty of People to pray for Magistrates, to ho- nour their Persons, to pay them Tribute and other Dues, to obey their lawful Commands, and to be subject to their au- thority, for Conscience sake. Infidelity, or Difference in Re- ligion, doth not make void the Magistrate's just and legal Au- thority, nor free the People from their due Obedience to him : From which, Ecclesiastical Persons are not exempted ; much less hath the Pope any Power or Jurisdiction over them, in their Dominions, or over any of their People; and least of all, to deprive them of their Dominions, or Lives, if he shall judge them to be Hereticks, or upon any other pretence whatsoever. CHAP. XXV. Of the Church. VI. There is no other Head of the Church but the Lord Jesus Christ : Nor can the Pope of Rome, in any Sense, be Head thereof; but is that Antichrist, that Man of Sin, and Son of Perdition, that exalteth himself in the Church, against Christ, and all that is called God. 141 CHAP. XXX. Of Church Censures. The Lord Jesus, as King and Head of his Church, hath therein appointed a Government, in the Hand of Church-Offi- cers, distinct from the Civil Magistrate. CHAP. XXXT. Of Synods and Councils. For the better Government, and further Edification of the Church, there ought to be such Assemblies, as are commonly called Synods or Councils. II. As Magistrates may lawfully call a Synod of Ministers, and other fit Persons, to consult and advise with, about Mat- ters of Religion ; so, if Magistrates be open Enemies to the Church, the Ministers of Christ, of themselves, by vertue of their Office ; or they, with other fit Persons, upon Delegation from their Churches, may meet together in such Assemblies. III. It belongeth to Synods and Councils, ministerially to determine Controversies of Faith, and Cases of Conscience ; to set down Rules and Directions for the better ordering of the public Worship of God, and Government of his Church ; to receive Complaints in Cases of Male-administration, and au- thoritatively to determine the same : Which Decrees and De- terminations, if consonant to the Word of God, are to be re- ceived with Reverence and Submission ; not only for their Agreement with the Word, but also for the Power whereby they are made, as being an Ordinance of God appointed there- unto in his Word. IV. All Synods and Councils, since the Apostles Times, whether general or particular, may err, and many have erred : Therefore, they are not to be made the Rule of Faith or Prap- tice, but to be used as an Help in both. 142 V. Synods and Councils are to handle or conclude nothing, but that which is Ecclesiastical ; and are not to intermeddle ■with Civil Affairs, which concern the Common-wealth, unless by Way of humble Petition, in Cases extraordinary, or by Way of Advice, for Satisfaction of Conscience, if they be thereunto required by the Civil Magistrate. No. XLIX. An Act made in the first Parliament of K. William, and Q. Mary. Act III. Abolishing Prelacy, 22d July 1689. Whereas the Estates of this Kingdom, in their Claim of Right of the eleventh of April last, declared that Prelacy, and the Superiority of any Office in the Church above Presbyters, is and hath been a great and insupportable grievance to this nation, and contrary to the Inclinations of the Generality of the people ever since the Reformation, they having reformed from Popery by Presbyters, and therefore ought to be abolished, our Sovereign Lord and Lady, the King and Queen's Majesties, with Advice and Consent of the Estates of Parliament, do here- by abolish Prelacy, and all Superiority of any Office in the Church in this Kingdom above Presbyters, and hereby re- scinds, casses and annulls the first Act of the second Session of the first Pari, of K. Charles IL and the second Act of the third Sess. of the first Pari, of K. Charles II. and the fourth Act of the third Pari, of K. Charles II. and all other Acts, Statutes and Constitutions, in so far allanerly as they are inconsistent with this Act, and do establish Prelacy, or the Superiority of Church-Officers above Presbyters : And the King and Queen's Majesties do declare, that they, with Advice and Consent of the Estates of this Parliament, will settle by Law that Church 143 Government in this Kingdom, which is most agreeable to the In* clinations of the People. No. L. Acts made Sess. 2. Pari. 1. K. William and Q. Mary. Act I, — Rescinding tlie first Act of the second Parliament, 1669. ^5th April 1690. Our Sovereign Lord and Lady, the King and Queen's Ma- jesties, taking into their Consideration, that, by the second Article of the Grievances presented to their Majesties by the Estates of this Kingdom, it is declared. That the first Act of the second Parliament of K. Charles IL intitled, Act asserting his Majesty's Supremacy over all Persons, and in all Causes ec- clesiastical, is inconsistent with the Establishment of the Church Government now desired, and ought to be abrogat, therefore their Majesties, with Advice and consent of the Estates of Par- liament, do hereby abrogat, rescind and annul the foresaid Act, and declares the same, in the whole Heads, Articles and Clauses thereof, to be of no Force or Effect in all Time coming. No. LI. William and Mary, Pari. 1 . Sess. 2. Act V. Raiifijing the Confession of Faith, and settling Presbyterian Church Government. 1th June 1690. Our Sovereign Lord and Lady, the King and Queen's Ma- jesties, and three estates of Parliament, conceiving it to be their bound Duty, after the great Deliverance that God hath lately wrought for this Church and Kingdom, in the first Place to settle and secure therein the true Protestant Religion ac- cording to the Truth of God's Word, as it hath of a long Time been professed within this Land ; as also the Government of Christ's Church within this nation, agreeable to the Word of God, and most conducive to the Advancement of true Piety and Godliness, and the establishing of Peace and Tranquillity within this Realm ; and that by an Article of the Claim of Right it is declared. That Prelacy, and the Superiority of any Office in the Church above Presbyters, is and hath been a great and unsupportable Grievance and Trouble to this Nation, and contrary to the Inclinations of the Generality of the People ever since the Reformation, they having reformed from Popery by Presbyters, and therefore ought to be abolished ; Likeas, by an Act of the last Session of this Parliament, Prelacy is abolished; Therefore their Majesties, with Advice and Consent of the said three Estates, do hereby revive, ratify and perpetually confirm all Laws, Statutes and Acts of Parliament made against Popery and Papists, and for the Maintenance and Preservation of the true reformed Protestant Religion, and for the true Church of Christ within this Kingdom, in so far as they confirm the same, or are made in favours thereof : Likeas they, by these Presents, ratify and establish the Confession of Faith now read in their Presence, and voted and approven by them as the public and avowed Confession of this Church, containing the Sum and Substance of the Doctrine of the reformed Churches, (which Confession of Faith is subjoined to this present Act) as also they do establish, ratify and confirm the Presbyterian Church Government and Discipline ; that is to say, the Government of the Church by Kirk-Sessions, Presbyteries, Provincial Synods and General Assemblies, ratified and established by the ] 14> Act, Ja. VL Pari. 12. anno 1592, entitled, Ralijication of the Liberty of the true Kirk, &c. and thereafter received, by the general Consent of this nation, to be the only Government of Christ's Church tvilhin this kingdom ; reviving, renewing and confirming the foresaid Act of Parliament in the whole Heads thereof, except that Part of it relating to Patronages, which is 145 hereafter to be taken into Consideration ; and rescinding, an- nulling, and making void the Acts of Parliament following, viz. Act anent Restitution of Bishops, Ja. VI. Pari. 18. Cap. 2. Act ratifying the Acts of the Assembly l6lO. Ja. VI. Pari. 21. Cap. 1. Act anent the Election of Archbishops and Bishops, Ja. VI. Pari, 22. Cap. 1. Act intitled, Ratification of the five Articles of the General Assembly at Perth, Ja. VI. Pari. 23. Cap. 1. Act intitled. For the Restitution and Re-establishment of the antient Government of the Church by Archbishops and Bishops, Char. II. Pari. 1. Sess. 2. Act 1. Anent the Constitution of a National Synod, Char. II. Pari. i. Sess. 3. Act 5. Act against such as refuse to depone against Delinquents, Char. II. Pari. 2. Sess. 2. Act 2. Act intitled. Act acknowledging and asserting the Right of Succession to the Imperial Crown of Scotland, Charl. II. Pari. 3. Act 2. Act intitled, Act anent Religion and the Test, Char. 11. Pari. 3. Act 6. with all other Acts, Laws, Statutes, Ordinances and Proclamations, and that in so far al- lenarly as the saids Acts, and others generally and particularly above mentioned, are contrary or prejudicial to, inconsistent with or derogatory from the Protestant Religion, and Presby- terian Government now established ; and allowing and declar- ing, that the Church Government be established in the Hands of, and exercised by these Presbyterian Ministers who were outed since the first of January 16"61. for Non- Conformity to Prelacy, or not complying with the Courses of the Times, and are now restored by the late Act of Parliament, and such Mi- nisters and Elders only as they have admitted or received, or shall hereafter admit or receive ; and also, that all the said Presbyterian Ministers have, and shall have right to the Main- tenance, Rights, and other Privileges by Law provided to the IMinisters of Christ's Church within this Kingdom, as they are or shall be legally admitted to particular Churches : Likeas, in Pursuance of the Premisses, their Majesties do hereby appoint the first Meeting of the General Assembly of this Church, as above established, to be at Edinburgh the third Thursday of October next to come, in this instant Year I69O. And because many conform Ministers either have deserted, or were removed from Preaching in their Ciiurches, preceding the 13th Day of 146 April 1689, and others were deprived for not giving Obedience to the Act of the Estates, made in the said 13th of April 1689, intitled, Proclamation against the owning the late King James, and appointing publick Prayers for King William and Queen Mary, therefore their Majesties, with Advice and Consent fore- said, do hereby declare all the Churches, either deserted, or from which the conform Ministers were removed or deprived, as said is, to be vacant, and that the Presbyterian Ministers exercising their Ministry within any of these Parishes, (or where the last Incumbent is dead) by the Desire or Consent of the Parish, shall continue their Possession, and have Right to the Benefices and Stipends according to their Entry in the Year 1689, and in Time coming, ay and while the Church, as now established, take farther Course therewith : And to the Effect the Disorders that have happened in this Church may be re- dressed, their Majesties, with Advice and Consent foresaid, do hereby allow the general Meeting, and Representatives of the foresaid Presbyterian Ministers and Elders, in whose Hands the Exercise of the Church Government is established, either by themselves, or by such Ministers and Elders as shall be ap- pointed and authorized Visitors by them, according to the Cus- tom and Practice of Presbyterian Government throughout the whole Kingdom, and several Parts thereof, to try and purge out all insufficient, negligent, scandalous and erroneous Mini- sters, by due Course of ecclesiastical Process and Censures, and likeways for redressing all other Church Disorders : And fur- ther, it is hereby provided, that whatsoever Minister, being conveened before the said General Meeting, and Representa- tives of the Presbyterian Ministers and Elders, or the Visitors to be appointed by them, shall either prove contumacious in not appearing, or be found guilty, and shall be therefore cen- sured, whether by Suspension or Deposition, they shall ipso facto be suspended from, or deprived of their Stipends and Be- nefices. 147 No. LII. Ad XXII. For settling the Quiet and Peace of the Church, im June 1693. Our Sovereign Lord and Lady, the King and Queens Ma- jesties, with Advice and Consent of the Estates of Parliament, ratify, approve, and perpetually confirm the 5th Act of the 2d Session of this current Parliament, intituled. Act ratifying the Confession of Faith, and settling Presbyterian Church Govern- ment, in the whole Heads, Articles and Clauses thereof; and do further statute and ordain, that no Person be admitted, or continued for hereafter, to be a Minister or Preacher within this Church, unless that he, having first taken and subscribed the Oath of Allegiance, and subscribed the Assurance in Man- ner appointed by another Act of this present Session of Parlia- ment, made thereanent, do also subscribe the Confession of Faith, ratified in the foresaid 5th Act of the second Session of this Parliament, declaring the same to be the Confession of his Faith, and that he owns the Doctrine therein contained, to be the true Doctrine which he will constantly adhere to ; as like- ways, that he owns and acknowledges Presbyterian Church Government, as settled by the foresaid 5th Act of the 2d Ses- sion of this Parliament, to be the only Government of this Church, and that he will submit thereto, and concur therewith, and never endeavour, directly or indirectly, the Prejudice or Subversion thereof: And their Majesties, with Advice and Consent foresaid, statute and ordain, that uniformity of Wor- ship, and of the Administration of all public Ordinances, with- in this Church, be observed by all the said Ministers and Preachers, as the samcn are at present performed and allowed therein, or shall be hereafter declared by the Authority of the same ; and that no Minister or Preacher be admitted or con- tinued for hereafter, unless that he subscribe to observe, and do actually observe the foresaid Uniformity. 148 No. LI II. An Act made Sess, 4. Pari. 1. Q. Anne, begun ^d. Octo- ber 1706. Act VI. For securing the Protestant Religion and Pres- byterian Church Government. Our Sovereign Lady and the Estates of Parliament, consi- dering that, by the late Act of Parliament for a Treaty with England for an Union of both Kingdoms, it is provided, That the Commissioners for the Treaty should not treat of or con- cerning any Alteration of the Worship, Discipline and Govern- ment of the Church of that Kingdom, as now by Law esta- blished ; which Treaty, being now reported to the Parliament, and being reasonable and necessary that the true Protestant Re- ligion, as presently professed within this Kingdom, with the Worship, Discipline and Government of this Church, should be effectually and unalterably secured, therefore her Majesty, with Advice and Consent of the said Estates of Parliament, doth hereby establish and confirm the said true Protestant Re- ligion, and the Worship, Discipline and Government of this Church, to continue withodt any Alteration to the People of this Land in all succeeding Generations ; and more especially her Majesty, with Advice and Consent aforesaid, ratifies, ap- proves, and for ever confirms the fifth Act of the first Parlia- ment of K. William and Q. Mary, intitled. Act ratifying the Confession of Faith, and settling Presbyterian Church Governm ment, with the haill other Acts of Parliament relating thereto, in Prosecution of the Declaration of the Estates of the King-* dom, containing the Claim of Right, bearing Date the eleventh of April 1589. And her Majesty, with Advice and Consent foresaid, expressly provides and declares, that the foresaid true Protestant Religion, contained in the above mentioned Confes- sion of Faith, with the Form and Purity of Worship presently in 149 Use within this Church, and its Presbyterian Church Govern- ment and Discipline, that is to say, the Government of the Church by Kirk-Sessions, Presbyteries, Provincial Synods and General Assemblies, all established by the foresaid Acts of Par- liament, pursuant to the Claim of Right, shall remain and con- tinue unalterable, and that the said Presbylerian Government shall be the only Goverjiment cf the Church within the King- dom of' Scotland : And farther, for the greater Security of the foresaid Protestant Religion, and of the Worship, Discip- line and Government of this Church, as above established, her Majesty, with Advice and Consent foresaid, statutes and ordains, that the Universities and Colleges of St Andrews, Glasgow, Aberdeen, and Edinburgh, as now established by Law, shall continue within this Kingdom for ever, and that, in all Time coming, no Professors, Principals, Regents, Mas- ters, and others bearing Office in any University, College or School within this Kingdom, be capable, or be admitted or al- lowed to continue in the Exercise of their said Functions, but such as shall own and acknowledge the civil Government, in Manner prescribed, or to be presci'ibed by the Acts of Parlia- ment ; as also that, before or at their Admissions, they do and shall acknowledge and profess, and shall subscribe to the fore- said Confession of Faith, as the Confession of their Faith, and that they will practise and conform themselves to the Worship presently in use in this Church, and submit themselves to the Government and discipline thereof, and never endeavour, di- rectly or indirectly, the Prejudice or subversion of the same, and that before the respective Presbyteries of their Bounds, by whatsoever Gift, Presentation or Provision they may be thereto provided. And farther, her Majesty, with Advice foresaid, ex- pressly declares and statutes, that none of the Subjects of this Kingdom shall be liable to, but, all and every one of them, for ever free of any Oath, Test or Subscription within this King- dom, contrary to or inconsistent with the foresaid true Protest- ant Religion, and Presbyterian Church-Government, Worship and Discipline, as above established, and that the same, within the Bounds of this Church and Kingdom, shall never be im- 150 posed upon or required of them in any sort ; and, lastly, that after the Decease of her present Majesty (whom God long pre- serve) the Sovereign succeeding to her in the Royal Govern- ment of the Kingdom of Great Britain, shall, in all Time com- ing, at his or her Accession to the Crown, svoear afid subscribe, that they shall inviolably maintain and preserve the foresaid Settlement of the true Protestant Religion, with the Govern- ment, Discipline, Worship, Rights and Privileges of this Church, as above established by the Laws of this Kingdom, in Prosecu- tion of the Claim of Right. And it is hereby statute and or- dained, that this Act of Parliament, with the Establishment therein contained, shall be held and observed, in all time com- ing, as a fundamental and essential Condition of any Treaty or Union to be concluded betwixt the two Kingdoms, without any Alteration thereof, or Derogation thereto in any Sort for ever ; as also that this Act of Parliament, and Settlement therein contained, shall be insert and repeated in any Act of Parliament that shall pass for agreeing and concluding the foresaid Treaty or Union betwixt the two Kingdoms, and that the same shall be therein expressly declared to be a fundamental and essential Condition of the said Treaty or Union in all Time coming. 151 No. LIV. Pari. 1. William §• Mary, Sess. %. Act XXVII. Rescinding the Laws for Conformity, 19/A July 1690. OxTR Sovereign Loi-d and Lady, the King and Queens Ma- jesties, and three Estates of Parliament, considering how ne- cessary it is for the Well and Peace of this Kingdom, and of Christ's Church, within the same, as now by Law established, that the Acts following be rescinded, do therefore rescind, cass, annull and make void the Act Charl, 2. Pari. 1. Sess. 2. Cap. 4. concerning Masters of Universities, Ministers, &c. Act 5. ibi- dem, concerning the Declaration to be signed by all Persons in publick Trust. Act Charl. 2. Pari. 1. Sess. 3. Cap. 2. against Separation and Disobedience to ecclesiastick Authority. Act, Cap. 3. ibidem, additional Act concerning the Declaration. Act, Charl. 2. Pari. 2. Sess. 2. Cap. 5. against Conventicles. Act, Cap. 6. ibidem, against disorderly Baptisms. Act, Cap. 7- ibi~ dem, against Separation and withdrawing from the publick Meetings of divine Worship. Act, Charl. 2. Pari. 2. Sess. 3. Cap. 9. against unlawful Ordinations. Act, Charl. 2. Pari. 2. Sess. 3. Cap. 17. against Keepers of Conventicles, and With- drawers from publick Worship. Act, Charl. 2. Pari. 3. Cap. 4. for securing of the Peace of the Country. Act, James 7- Pari. L Sess. 1. Cap. 6. obliging Husbands to be liable for their Wives Fines. Act, Cap. 8. ibidem, against Preachers at Conventicles, and Hearers at Field Conventicles. Act, Cap. 24. ibidem, or- daining that Tenants be obliged by their Tacks to live re- gularly. And generally all other Acts, Clauses, artfl Provi- sions in Acts whatsoever, made since the year l66l, inclusive, against Non-conformity, or for Conformity to the Church and Government thereof, as then established under Archbishops and Bishops. / 152 No. LV. Pari. 1. William ^ Mary, Sess. 2. Act XXV III. Rescinding several Acts of Parliament. 19t7i July 1690. Our Sovereign Lord and Lady, the King and Queens Ma- jesties, and three Estates of Parliament, considering that, dur- ing these late Years bypast, several Acts of Parliament have been made, which are now either useless, or found to be hurt- ful, do therefore rescind, cass, an null and make void, in all time coming, the Acts of Parliament following, viz. Act, Charl. 2. Pari. 1. Sess. 1. Cap. 17. anent a solemn Anniversary Thanksgiving, with the Act, Charl. 2. Pari. 2. Sess. 3. Cap. 12. to the same Purpose. Act, Charl. 2. Cap. 25. for denouncing excommunicate Persons. And, Pari. 1. Sess. 3. Cap. 23. anent Sentences of Excommunication, with all other Acts of the same Import; and but Prejudice of this Generality, all Acts enjoin- ing Civil Pains upon Sentences of Excommunication. Act, Charl. 2. Pari. 3. Cap. 6. anent Religion and the Test. Act, Cap. 18. ibidem, affecting his Majesty's Prerogative in Point of Jurisdiction, with the Acts following, made during the reign of the late King James, viz. In the first Session of his first Parliament, Act 2. except in so far as concerns the Annexation of the Excise to the Crown. Acts 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 13, 16, 17, 23, 25, 26, 27, 30, 36, 37, 40 and 42, all past in that Session of Parliament. As likeways in the second session of that Parliament, Acts 1, 6, 7, 9, 13, 26, 27, 28, all passed in that Parliament, with an unprinted Act also past therein, re- scinding^a former Act annexing the Lands and Barony of Tar- bet to the Shire of Cromarty : declaring likeas their Majesties, with consent foresaid, hereby declares the whole foresaid Acts hereby above rescinded, to be of no Avail, Force, Strength nor Effect, in Time coming. 153 No. LVI. Brown and Mosman his Majesty* s Printers ^ against Bas- kett of London his Majesty's Printer. July \5, 1725. Mr. Robert Freebairn having in August 1711 obtained a grant from her late Majesty Queen Anne to be sole Master- Printer in Scotland for the space of forty one Years, with an exclusive Privilege to him, his Partners, his Heirs, Assigns and Substi- tutes, during the foresaid Space, of printing Bibles, ^c In the month of November following he conveyed a Third of his Privilege to Mr. Baskett, and in April thereafter he made over another Third of it in favours of James Watson, in imple- ment of Articles of Agreement entered into by the Parties pre- vious to the Grant. The Business of Printing was immediately thereafter begun and carried on by Mr. Watson alone, with good Success, though at great Expence, and at present is managed by Messrs. Brorvn and Mosman, as Assignies to Mr. Watsons Right; but Mr Baskett never implemented any of the Articles upon his Part, nor meddled in the Affair, till of late that he set up a separate Printing-house in Edinburgh, to the prejudice of Brorvn and Mosman : And therefore they brought an Action against Mr. Baskett for stopping his Work ; and the Jirst Point they in- sisted upon was, " That Baskett never had accepted the Gift " and could not now pretend to make any Use of it, not hav- *' ing taken the Oaths, particularly the Oath of Abjuration, " within the Time limited by Statute." For by an Act of the sixth of Queen Anne, entituled, An Act for the better Security of her Majesty's Person and Government, it is enacted. That all Officers Civil and Military within Scotland be obliged to tak the Oath of ABJURATION. In answer to this, Mr. Baskett contended, Imo, That no Person was obliged by the Act sexto Anna: to take the Ahjura^ 154 tion, but he who was by the Act I693 obliged to take the Oaths of Allegiance and Assurance. And 2do, That the Office of King's Printer was no such Civil Office as, by the Intention of the Statute, could subject Mr. Baskett to take the Oath of Abjuration. The Lords found, That the King's Printer was not obliged to take the Oaths. Edgar's Decisions of the Court of Session, No. LVII. Act anient ane incorrect New Testament. Apud Edinburgh duodecimo die January 1671. The Lordis of Councill being informed that there is a New Testament printed by Andro Andersone printer in Edin- burgh full of gross errouris. As lykwayes that there is a se- ditious pamphlett called Jus populi vindicatum latly cum furth in print Doe therefore Appoynt the Archbishop of St Andrewes the Earls of Argyle and Kincardin and the Lord Advocat to call for the said new testament and the printer thereofF and to examine the said matter As also to inquyre after the forsaid pamphlett and the wrytter importeris or dis- perseris of the same And to seize upon any copyes of the saidis bookis can be found and to imprison any person guilty of printing importing or dispersing thereofF, And after con- sidering and examining the said matter To report their opinion thereanent to the Councill. 155 No. LVIII. Act anent ane incorrect New Testament. Apud Edinburgh nono die February 1671. The Lords of his Majesties privy Councill haveing consi- dered the great danger may ensue to the christian religion from incorrect copyes of the bookes containing the holy scrip- tures and that of late the new testament hath bein printed at Edinburgh in a black letter by Andro Anderson printer for the use of child rein at schooles with many grosse errouris and faultes in the impression doe therefor prohibit and discharge all the Stationeris and otheris of this kingdome to vent and putt to sale any of the copyes of that edition of the new tes- tament untill the same be first amended and a title page pre- fixed thereto And doe ordaine and command the printer therof to reteir from the stationeris all the copyes of the same remain- ing with them unsold, and before they be offered againe to sale To correct and amend the errouris of the same and to prefix a new title page thereto bearing that this edition is cor- rected and amended in the year I67I and that under the payne of payment of one hundreth poundis sterling in case he faylie herein As also the saidis Lordis doe prohibit and discharge any of the printeris of this kingdome to publish the bookes of the old and new testament or any pairt thereof Except the same be first carefully revised, and the errouris and escapes in the impression if any be amended Certifieing any who shall doe in the contrar that they shall not only forfault the benefite of the copyes of that impression with their libertie and privilege of printing for the future, Bot shall be farder censured and pu- tt isched as the Lords of councill shall think fitting And or- daines a macer or messinger at arms to make intimation hereof to the printeris bookselleris and other persons concerned that none may pretend ignorance. 156 No. LIX. Anent the techeing qfanejbrm of grammar. Apud Haliruidhous xv Decembris, Anno 1575. My Lord regentis grace and Lordis of secret counsall Un- derstanding that it is convenient and proffitable for the upbring- ing of the yowth within this realme that thair be onlie ane form of grammar techeit in all the grammer scuillis thairof And to the effect that the same may be aggreit be commoun consent of certane of the maist leirnit scole raaisteris Ordanis letteris to be direct To charge Maister George Buchannane or Maister Peter Young preceptouris to the Kingis Majestic Maister Thomas Buchannane Maister Williame Robertoun Maister Andro Symsoun Maister James Carmichaell Maister Patrik Auchinlek scole maisteris of Striveling Edinburgh Dunbar Hadingtoun and Sanctandrois To compeir personallie befoir the Regentis grace and Lords of secret counsale At Haliruidhous or quhair it sal happen thame to be for the tyme the tent day of Januar nixt to cum To gif thair advise anent the forme of grammer that sal be techeit in all the scuillis within this realme in time cuming As thay will declair thair gude afFectionis to the furtherance of sa necessar a werk and ansuer upoun thair obedience in that behalf. No. LX. Apud Haliruidhous xj January anno 1576. Anent the complaint maid to my Lord Regentis grace and Lordis of secreit counsall be Alexander Arbuthnott burges of 157 Edinburgh Makand mentioun That quhaif thair is ane contract maid betwix him and Thomas Bassinden bake binder Conten* and in effect that he sould deliver to the said Alexander with all possible diligence the werk of the bybill ellis prentit with the prenting hous and necessaris appertening thereto meit for setting furthwart of the said werk As the said contract at mair lenth beris Notwithstanding he on nawayis will do the samyn without he be compellit quhairthrow the said werk lyis ydill in the meintyrae to the greit hurt of the commoun weill of this realme And anent the chai'ge gevin to the said Thomas to compeir befoir my Lord regentis grace and Lordis of secreit counsall at ane certaine day bipast To ansuer to the said com- plaint under the pane of rebellion and putting of him to the home as the samyn complaint at mair lenth beris The said Alexander Arbuthnet compearand personallie and the said Thomas Bassinden being alsua personalie present with Maister Richert Spens his prelocutour Thair ressonis and allegationis with the said contract being hard sene and consideret be my Lord Regentis grace and lordis of secreit counsale and thay rypelie avisit thairwith JMy Lord Regentis grace with avise of the saidis Lordis Ordanis the said Thomas to deliver to the said Alexander the said werk of the bybill ellis prentit with the prenting hous and necessaris appertaining thairto meit for setting furthwart of the said werk conforme to the said con- tract betuix the dait heirof and the last day of Januar instant. And ordanis letteris to be direct heirupon gif neid be. No. LXI. Anno 1665. — For y* bettering of y' Inglish translation of ^ Bible, fist printed A. D. 1612 J by Mr. Jn. Row, 'tis offered. That these five things are to be endeavoured ; L That evil and unmeet divisions of chapt", verses^ & sen- 158 tences, be rectify'd^, & made more proper, rationall, & dex- terous ; w^i^ will much cleare y® scope. If. That needles transpositions of words, or stories, p'^tend- ing to Hypall or Synchyses, be waryly amended ; or not- ed if they cannot III. That all vseles additions be lop't ofF, y* debase the wis- dome of y^ spirit; — to instance 1. All ye Apocryphall writings; being meerly humane. 2. All popish & superstitious prints, plates, & pictures. 3. Apotheosing, and canonizing of some, (not oth") as Sts. S* Luke: not S* Job .... 4. Spurious additions, or subscriptions, (to Epistles) words & Sentences. IV. That all sinfull & needles detractions be supply 'd; and y* lies in 6 things, viz. 1. Let all Sentences, or words detracted, be added in y® text. 2. Epitomize y® contents, & chapf^ better at y^ topps of y^ leafe. 3. The parenthesis ought not to be omitted, where 'tis. 4. Exhaust not the Emphasis of a word, (as Idols, 13 wayes exprest.) 5. Nor y^ Superlative, left only as a positive. 6. Notificatum, not noticed at all. V. As respecting mutation, or change, 4 things are need- full ; namely, 1. That nothing be changed, but convinc't apparently, to be betf : 2. Yet a change not hurting truth, piety, or ye text, may be just & needfull. 3. Many evil changes are to be amended, as these 9 in par- ticular : (1.) When words or sentences, are mistaken. (2.) When ye margin is righter then y« line, as in 800 places (& more) it is. (3.) When particles are confounded. (4.) When a word plurall, is translated as singular. (5.) When the active is rendered as if a passive. 159 (6.) When the genders are confounded : as mostly y* cantic : bee. (7.) When Hebrismes are omitted, in silence, or amisse. (8.) When participium paiil, isrendred as if it wereNy- phall. (9.) When conjugatio pyel is Inglish't as if Kal. 4. (On the other hand) 9 good changes are to be warily endea- vour'd, viz. (1.) Put ye titles of y^ true god (all ouer) litera Capi- tal!. (2.) Let Majistrates correct misprinting of Bibles. (3.) Put more in Inglish, (even propria nomina ;) less in Heb. Gr. & Latin termes. (4.) That Tngl. words (not understood in Scotland) be idiomatiz'd. (5.) That all be Analogicall to Scripture termes, not toucht w*'^ our opinion, or error. (6.) Something Equivocal to Keri, & Kethib, be noti- ced. (7.) That letters, poynts, and stopps, be distinctly noti- fied. (8.) The paralel places ought to be well noted, in the margin. (Q.) Things not amiss, may be endeavo'^ed to be bet- tered. The like is (as to y^ N. T.) to be endeavo'^ed, many words wantino- their owne native idiom and import, and sometime y« translation overflowes in y^ Inglish ; or els is defective : and some words confounded : (Ex : gr : S«v*jK««, power, and i^ou Testaments, and Catechisms j and that in order thereto, the ministers and elders having in- terest in the Highlands, present in this Assembly, shall meet and appoint some to receive these Bibles, Sec. 6. That it be recommended to the ministers concerned in the Highlands to dispatch the whole paraphrase of the Irish Psalms to the press : and ii the principal copy can be recovered, to ex- pede the same ; but that any other copy they have, be revised by the Synod of Argyle, and being approven by them, that the same be printed." 179 Tlie Assembly having considered these Overtures, they ap- prove thereof, and recommend and appoint accordingly. At Edinburgh, Aug. 11. 1725. This being one of the stated quarterly meetings of the Com- mission appointed by the Assembly, &c. There was presented and read a petition of Thomas Lumis- den Printer, the tenor whereof follows : " Unto the Right Re- verend and Honourable the Moderator and remanent members of the Commission of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, the Petition of Thomas Lumisden Printer in Edin- burgh, Humbly Sheweth, That it having been the care of the General Assemblies of this Church to have the knowledge of Christ propagated in the Highlands and Islands of Scotland, and a Reformation carried on there, Libraries were sent to divers places therein, and also Bibles in Irish : But there never having been any translation of the Confession of Faith and Catechisms of this Church in that language, the people are at a great loss thereby, and this having been und^r the Assembly's Consideration anno 1708, they referred to the Synod of Argyle to cause prepare a Translation of the said Confession and Ca- techisms in the Irish Language, which they having done did make their Report to the General Assembly 1709. But they not having a fund for printing the same; it lay over till the year 1713 ; that the Assembly did refer the matter to their Commis- sion : But their funds being exhausted and considerable de- mands thereon for some time then to come, the Right Honour- able John Campbell Esq. now Lord Provost of Edinburgh, was pleased to give some encouragement to this undertaking, and thereupon the printing was begun. But the Printer having died a little thereafter, the book stopped, and the Petitioner having bought part of the types belonging to the Printers for the Church, as also got their rights to some accounts due by the Church, with some Books on hand, and this among the rest, not then finished, and being employed for some time to print the Church's papers, the Petitioner did set about the finishing of this work, and now has got it complete : And seeing the Petitioner had a prospect of being printer to the 6 180 Church when he undertook this work, and tliat it was uport the faith thereof that he ventured so far, it would be very hard that he should be deprived of the Church's employment, and come also to so great a loss by this work. He therefore lays his case before this Reverend Commission, that they may be pleased to consider how to dispose of this impression for the use of the Church. He has printed only about 2000 copies thereof. The Prelatical party have been at much expence in distributing their common prayer book among the people, and it were a pity that so valuable a book as the Confession of Faith and Catechisms, the public standards of the doctrine of this Church, should not be put in the hands of so considerable a party of its members, when the same might be so very useful. It is well known money is very scarce in that country, and there are many more scholars in those places by the care of that excel- lent society for propagating Christian knowledge than used to be ; and these scholars may be very useful to their aged parents and other relations who cannot read, if this book were put in their hand ; but they cannot so soon be in case, though they can read, to turn what they read into Irish ; but this book being done to their hand will be a great help. May it there- fore please the Rev. Commission to consider the premisses, and to cause take the said Impression off the Petitioner's hand and dispose thereof .as yovi shall think fit : This matter concerning Libraries, Irish Bibles, Psalm books and Catechisms being in your instructions, and I am not in case to lie out of money. And your Petitioner shall ever pray (Sic subscribitur) Thomas LuMiSDEN." The Commission having heard the said Petition, they appointed Messrs John Cuming, Neil Campbell, &c. a Committee to consider what is therein set forth, and to report their opinion thereon to the Commission, and to meet for that end at the rising of the Commission this night in the Assembly house. At Edinburgh, August 12, 1726. The Committee appointed to consider Thomas Lumisden's Petition made their Report, and the same being read and con- 181 sidered by the Commission, they did approve of it, and in the terms thereof do offer it as their humble opinion and overture to the next Assembly that the impression of the Confession of Faith and Catechisms in the Irish Language should be taken off the said Thomas Lumisden's hand at the price of sixpence the piece unbound, and that it should be referred to the Com- mittee for reformation of the Highlands and Islands to distri- bute the same to proper persons as they shall see cause, and that the Assembly should give the said Thomas a precept for the price of the said impression, payable out of the Church's public money, so soon as all prior debts of the Church are paid, and that the said precept should bear annual rent from the date thereof. At Edinburgh, May 6, 1726. Upon Report of the Committee for the public money, the General Assembly declare, that they cannot grant any precepts or orders on the Procurator for any money till the debts already contracted and stated be first paid ; but that the Impression of the Confession of Faith and Catechisms in Irish be taken off Thomas Lumisden Printer in Edinburgh his hands, according to, and in terms of the opinion of the late Commission, and for the ends therein mentioned. No. LXXIX. Extracts from the Records of the Church of Scotland, con- cerning Watson''s edition of the Confession of Faith. At Edinburgh, May 17, 172a It is remitted to the Commission to have under consideration the reference of the last Ge;ieral Assembly to their Commission about the new impression of the Confession of Faith, &c and to do what they can to bring that matter to a good issue. 182 At Edinburgh, Nov. 10. 1726. The Brethren from the Presbyteries within the Synod of Perth and Stirling produced an Instruction from their Synod,* requiring them to move in the Commission, that they will take under consideration the reference of the late Assembly con- cerning the new edition of the Confession of Faith, Catechisms, and other books authorised by this Church, and take care that the things complained of about that work in the Instruction may be helped. The Commission appointed their Committee named \Q May last to consider the Overtures about preaching and planting of parishes, &c. to take likewise this Reference under their consideration and report some overtures thereabout to the meeting in March next. At Edinburgh, March 9, 1727. The larg-e Committee of the Commission did report that they had at several meetings taken under consideration the Reference of Assembly concerning the late edition of the Confession of Faith and other books authorised by this church, and had hopes given them, that a third volume would come abroad which would remove all the grounds of complaint that have been made in that matter, and some had been named to deal with the Editors to that effect ; and it is. the Committee's opi- nion that yet farther pains should be taken to persuade the editors to finish that work as soon as they can. The Com- mission having heard this Report, they recommended to such • The Instruction Avas in these words ; — " At Stirling, 12th April 1726. The Provincial Synod of Perth and Stirling hereby instruct the Commis- sioners from the several Presbyteries within their bounds to the ensuing General Assembly, that they insist that if the editors of the new edition of the Confession of Faith do not insert into the same the Solemn League and Covenant, the act of Assembly 1647, approving the Confession of Faith, and the Sum of Christian knowledge^- the venerable Assembly shall declare that they had no concern in that matter, especially seeing the chui-ch were pleased to take notice of that edit'on," 183 of the brethren and elders as have most interest with the said Editors to labour to persuade them to hasten the publishing of the 3d volume of the said Collection, and to make it so complete as that all grounds of complaint may be removed. At Edinburgh, May 18, 1727. The instruction given to the last Commission concerning the new edition of the Confession of Faith, and other books authoi-- ised by this church is renewed, and the Commission appointed to consider the same, and do therein as thej' find cause. At Edinburgh, August 9, 1727. The Commission of the General Assembly appointed a Com- mittee to search the Registers, and to report what has been done in this affair. At Edinbunjh, August 11, 1727. The Committee appointed to search the Registers of the As- semblies, and their Commissions, to see what has already been done in the question that has so long depended about the late edition of the Confession of Faith, and other books authorised by this Church, reported, that they had obeyed the appoint- ment, and found that in August 1717, the Commission, upon the desire of some who had a design of printing our Confession of Faith and Catechisms, appointed a committee of their number to oversee the printing thereof, and grant their assistance : That on the 29th May 1718, report is made by the foresaid committee, that they had performed what was recommended to them, and a new committee is appointed to revise and correct with all due care and diligence, the remaining books ; and May 26, 1719, the Commission renews their appointment upon the said Committee, and adds some to them; — November 11, 1725, the Commission, according to their powers, do appoint the said Committee to make a report in March thereafter, that it might appear whether they had answered their instructions or not, and whether thereby it would further appear that the editions, in the years 1721 and 1722, is to be looked upon only as the deed of private men, or as having been done by the authority of the Church, that the Commission might declare the fact according- ly ; — March 31, 1726, the Commission called for the Report of the Committee, and received the same, but found reason to delay the consideration thereof, and to agree to an overture that this affair continue to be committed by the next Assembly to the ensuing Commission, they being in hopes that before another. Assembly shall meet, matters may be so ordered as to give gene- ral satisfaction concerning the things complained of in that work, but they found not the report itself in the records, but in a paper apart, bearing date December 6, 1725; but they now produced it, that it might be considered by the Commission. The Commission having heard the said Report, delayed the far- ther consideration of it until another meeting, and appointed the 184 moderator, Messrs. Samuel Semple, &c. to speak with the edi- tors as to this affair. At Edinburgh, Nov. 9, 1727. [The Commission appointed a new Committee.] At Edinburgh, March 14, 17-28. The Committee appointed to consider the Edition of the Con- fession of Faith and Catechisms of this Church, Reported^ that having met and considered the said aflFair, find as follows, viz. That in the Records of the Commission, dated the 29 of May 1718, page 209, they find it insert. That the Commission of the Gen. Assembly finding that they are instructed by the said As- sembly to take care that the Impression of the Holy Scriptures, the Confession of Faith, Catechisms and other Books relating to the Doctrine, Worship, Discipline and Government of this Church be Correct, and it appearing that the last Commission bad appointed divers Rev. Ministers and Elders to Revise an Edition of the Confession of Faith and Catechisms of this Church, which was then preparing, and to take care that they should be freed from these Errors that have Crept into former Editions, and be rendered as Correct and Beautiful as might be, which hath been accordingly performed. But this Committee are of Opinion that the foresaid approbation does not reach any fur- ther than the approving of the Correctness and Beauty of the Impression so far as it was then carried on, and that it does not appear that the Commission had in their view the Omitting in that Edition of the Confession of Faith, Larger and Shorter Ca- techisms, Compiled at Westminster, the Acts of Assembly 1647 & 1648, approving of the said Confession of Faith and Cate- chisms Respectively. And the Committee finds not that the Preface prefixt to the 1st volume and written in general for an excellent design, was compiled or prefixt by the order of an Judicatory of this Church. As to the 2d volume this Commit- tee represent that it appears to them from the Records of the Commission, dated 31 of March 1726, P^g^ 550, about the mid- dle}, that a Committee appointed by the Commission of Assem- bly anno 1718, to Inspect the Impression of the Confession of Faith, Catechisms and other Books authorised by this Church being required to meet and prepare their Report of what was done by them to be laid before that meeting of the Commission, did accordingly meet and Report as follows, viz. That it was agreed in one of their meetings. That the Westminster Confes- sion of Faith, with the Larger and Shorter Catechisms, and Directory for family worship, should be published as the first vol- ume, as being most necessary, which was accordingly done, and the Committee was therein approven by the Commission May 29, 1718. Likeways it was agreed in another meeting of the Committee, That the other Confessions of Faith, Catechisms, and Books relating to the Doctrine, Worship, Discipline, and Go- vernment of this Church should be Correctly printed according 185 to the order of time in which they were authorised. And the Committee Reports that there is one volume published, in- tituled, " a Collection of Confessions of Faith, Catechisms, Directories, Books of Discipline, &c. of publick authority in the Church of Scotland. Together with all the acts of Assembly, which are standing rules concerning the doctrine, worship, go- vernment and discipline of the Church of Scotland." Volume second containing a Correct and Beautiful Edition of the Con- fession of Faith, CatechismSj Directory, Books of Discipline, Ac- authorised by this Church from the Reformation according to the said appointment. But this Committee find that this Re- port is not Insert in the Records of the Commission, but was Lodged in the Clerks hands in a paper apart, and the Committee does not find in the Records that the Commission gave any judgment upon that Report, Or that they had interposed in di- recting or advising what was to be published or left out in the 3d volume. But the consideration of the said Report was de- layed, and an Overture was agreed to be made to the Ensuing Assembly, that the affair should still be continued under the consideration of the Commission which they should appoint, being in hopes that before another General Assembly should meet matters would be so ordered as to give a general satisfac- tion concerning the things that had been formerly complained of about that work ; and it does not appear that any such thing has 3'et been done in that matter since that time, and therefore upon the whole, the Committee were humbly of Opinion that any omissions or imperfections which may be in that perfor- mance are not chargeable upon the Judicatories of the Church. The foresaid Report being read in the presence of the Commis- sion and compared with these parts of the Registers referred t© in the said Report, and being at length discoursed upon, It was put to the vote Delay this affair or not, and the Roll being called and votes marked, it carried in the negative. Thereafter it was put to another vote Approve of the Report and opinion of the Committee or not, and the Roll being again called and votes marked, it carried Approve, and therefore the Commis- sion Did and hereby Do Approve and Declare according to the abovewritten opinion of their Committee. At Edinburgh, May 13, 1728. The General Assembly having heard the Report of those appointed to revise the Register of the actings and proceedings of the Commission of the late General Assembly, and having heard their remarks, and the Commissioners their answers, &c. and nothing appearing censurable, they ordered their clerk to attest this in their books. Jo. DuNDAS, CI. Eccl. Scot.* " From the above Extracts it is evident that the General Assembly did not claim much credit for the part which had been taken by the Committee em- ployed in the revision of the Confession of Faith printed by Watson. VARIETY OF BIBLES PRINTED IN ENGLAND. None corresponding to those marked * are printed in Scotland. Where Printed oyal Folio, double pica type. Camb. and Oxf. emy do. do. do. Camb. al Quarto, pica type. I^ond. ■■ {Blaney^s Marginal References) Apocrypha, Index, &c. best ink. Oxf. edium Quarto, double pica, Ref. Camb. and Oxf. edium Quarto, Blanei/s Ref. pica type. Lond. emy Pica type, index, &c. Oxf, ly quarto, inferior. Camb. own Quarto, References. Oxf. ayal Octavo small pica type. Camb. Lond. and Oxf. Dyal Octavo, small pica type, Blaney^s References. Oxf. edium Octavo, small pica type. Lond. jyal Octavo, long primer type, best ink, and cold pressed, best paper. Lond, my (Jctavo, long primer type, best ink, and cold pressed. Lond. 'lyal Octavo, brevier type (5/a7?e^'« Marginal References and Apo- crypha) iine wove paper, best ink, cold pressed. Lond. edium Octavo, brevier type, Blaney's IVIarg. Ref. Lond. jjyal Octavo, brevier type, without Refs. Camb. and Oxf. edium Octavo, small pica letter, fine. Oxf. edium Octavo with References. . Camb. edium Octavo, Mar. References. Camb. edium Octavo, small pica. Camb. edium Octavo, brevier type, best ink, cold pressed. Lond. y Octavo, brevier type, best ink, cold pressed, Lond. Camb. and Oxford !my Octavo, minion type, large paper, best ink, cold pressed. Lond. own Octavo, minion type. Camb. Lond. and Oxf. own Octavo, fine, with References, Oxf, 3my Twelves, nonpareil type Lou. Camb. and Oxf. 1. do. fine paper. Camb. do. liond. do. inferior. Camb. Oxf. and Lond. ty-Fours, minion type, fine wove royal paper, best ink, cold tressed. Lond. -.liion type, royal paper. Lond. and Oxf. ). nonpareil type, fine. Camb. do. common, Camb. and Oxf. pearl type, fine. Camb. Lond. and Oxf. ). diamond t\'pe, the smallest ever printed, best ink. Lond. NEW TESTAMENTS, y Octavo, pica type. my Octavo, long primer type. own Octavo, long primer type. lyal 12mo. long primer type. )my 12mo. fine, brevier type. ) inferior. uty- Fours, minion type. ). do. nonpareil type. do. pearl type. enty-Fours, diamond type, columns, I N, B,— 'Bible Societies can purchase these Books much lower (ha;) the pxices quoted. 1} £4 8 2 16 2 5 2 1 1 10 12 10 6 5 14 6 16 12 8 6 14. 5 7 3 18 4 9 8 10 5 8 5 12 8 5 7 3 9 3 5 3 8 10 4 5 8 5 2 10 a 8 4 5 2 5 6 4 4 5 2 10 4 5 12 Q Lond. Camb. Oxf. 2 5 Lond. 1 5 Camb. ] 5 Oxf. I 5 Lond. Camb. Oxf. 1 jond. Camb. and Oxf. 10 liOnd. and Oxf. 1 Camb. and Oxf. 1 Lond. 1 i, cold pressed. Lond. 3 9 Oxf. 1 » 2 EDITIONS PRINTED FOR THE BRITISH AND FOREIGi BIBLE SOCIETY. BIBLES. Quarto, with Blaney's references, pica letter, royal paper Octavo, small pica letter, royal, superfine paper, and best ink Octavo, small pica letter, marginal references, superfine, royal Octavo, small pica letter, medium paper . Octavo, long primer letter, demy paper Octavo, brevier letter, marginal references, fine demy Octow, brevier letter, demy paper Octavo, minion letter, marginal references, crown paper Twelves, minion letter, fine royal paper, best ink Txcelvcs, nonpareil letter, demy paper Twcnty.fours, minion letter, royal paper Twenty-fours, pearl letter, royal paper Twenty.fours, pearl letter NEW TESTAMENTS. Octavo, pica letter, fine demy paper Octavo, long primer letter, demy paper Twelves, brevier letter, fine demy paper, and best ink Twenty-fours, minion letter, fine royal paper, best ink £s. d u i 14 ' 10 7 i 6 8 4 < 7 1 3 2 3 3 J 8 2 1 1 1 ►M. 17( ■17J 17' 17 17. 17. 17, EDITIONS OF THE SHORTER CATECHISM. Edinburgh printed and sold by John Moncur Edinburgh . . . . by J. Watson Glasgow . . . . by John Robertson, &c. . Edinburgh . . . . in Pearson's close Glasgow . . . . by John Robertson, senior Edinburgh . . . . by Thomas Lumisden and Co, Edinburgh . . . . by E. Robertson London (beautiful edition.) . printed in thp year 1 7! Glasgow printed and sold by John Robertson . . 17 Glasgow . • • • by John and James Robertson . . 17 Edinburgh . . . . by David Paterson, Castlehill . , 17 Edinburgh . . . . by David Paterson ... 17 Edinburgh . . . . by David Paterson . . . 17i Edinburgh . . . . by David Paterson . . . 17l Edinburgh . . . . by J. Robertson Edinburgh printed for the Society in Scotland for Propagating Christiap Know- ledge . . . 171 Edinburgh^ . . by Alexander Robertson . . .17 Edinburgh . . by J. Robertson . . . 17l London . by W. Kent, High Holborn . . . .18 M ost of those are superior to the King's Printers' edi- tions 1806 and 1810. The Book of Proverbs is the only part of scripture which continues to be prin by the unprivileged printers. Many of the editions are very coarse, but in gei tliey are correct. We have seen only two editions which distinguish the suppl words by a different character. This attention has been overlooked in the resp table editions of P. Hill, 1820, and James Lumsden, 1823, and in the much nea edition printed for Olipkant, Waugh and Innes, 1813. 3 EDITIONS OF THE CONFESSION OF FAITH Not pritited btf His Majesty's Printers, with the exception of No. 23. Edinburgh printed by G. Lithgow, prin'.er to the University, 1650, 18mo. London . . for the Company of Stationers . 1652, 18mo. , Edinburgh printed for the heirs of George Anderson . 1652, do. Edinburgh . , by Gideon Lithgow . . . 1656, 18mo. Edinburgh . by Andro Anderson . . 1657, 18mo. London printed by A. IMaxey for the Company of Stationers 1658, ^to. London . . by E. M. for the company of stationers, 2d edition 1658, 4to. London . . Do. do. larger paper and larger type 1658, 4-to. Edinburgh . by Gideon Lithgow . . . 1659, 18mo. Glasgow . by Robert Sanders, printer to the Town 1669, 18mo. Edinburgh printed by James Glen and David Trench . 1671, 18mo. Glasgow . . by Robert Sanders, printer to the city and uni- versity (the edition used by the Presbytery of Dundee) . 1675, 4to [The title bears that this is reprinted from the edition printed at London for the Company of Stationers, 1658.] A neat and correct edition (used by the Presb. of St. Andrews) 1688, 18mo. Edinburgh printed by John Reid . . 1689, l8mo. Edinburgh . . . . - . . 1694, do. Edinburgh . . by James Watson, Craig's Close 1701, 12mo. Edinburgh . . by James Watson in Craig's Close . 1 707, 8vo. Edinburgh . . by James Watson in Craig's Close 1708, 8vo. Edinburgh . . by James Watson, opposite the Luckenbooths 1710, 8 vo. Glasgow . . by Hugh Brown, printer to the University (the edition used by the Kirk Session oi Kirkaldy) . 1714, 18mo. Edinburgh . . by John Moncur, . • . 1715, l8mo. London printed for S. Cruttenden and T. Cox, Cheapside, 5th edit. (the edition used by the Presbytery of Fof/ar) . 1717, 8vo. Edinburgh printed by James Watson, H. M. printer, 2 vols. Svo, 1719, 1722. [This edition was to have been in 3 vols, but was never completed. It wants the directory for public worship, form of church go- vernment, &c. and contains various matters which are not of public authority in the church.] Glasgo Edinburgh Edinburgh Glasgow Edinburgh Edinburgh Glasgow Glasgow Edinburgh Glasgow Edinburgh Edinburgh Glasgow Glasgow Edinburgh Edinburgh Glasgow Glasgow Glasgow Glasgow Glasgow Glasgow Glasgow Edinburgh Edinburgh Glasgow Edinburgh Glasgow Glasgow Glasgow Glasgow Glasgow Glasgow Glasgow Glasgow Edinburgh by James Duncan, printer to the city by Wilham Brown and Company by Thomas Lumsden and John Robertson by James Duncan by T. Lumsden and J. Robertson by Thomas Lumsden and John Ilobertson by 'William Duncan, Saltmarket by James Duncan by T. Lumsden and J. Robertson by Messrs. Oarmichael and Miller by T. Lumsden and J. Robertson by T. Lumsden and J. Robertson Collection of Confessions by Urie and Company by T. Lumsden and J. Robertson by T. Lumsden and J. Robertson by J. Robertson and Mrs. M'Lean by J. Robertson by J. Robertson and Mrs. M'Lean by J. Robei-tson and Mrs. M'Lean by W. Duncan by John Ilobertson. senior by J. Bryce and D. Paterson by E. Robertson by E. Robertson by Arch. M'Lean by E. Robertson by John Bryce . . . . . . for R. Duncan, Saltmarket by William Duncan 1721, l8mo. 1723, 12mo. 1725, 12mo. 1727, ]8mo. 1727, Svo. 1728, 12mo. 1732, iSmo. 1732, 18mo. 1735, Svo. 1736, 12mo. 1736, Svo. 1739, Svo. 1741, 12mo, 1743. 12mo. 1744, Svo. 1744, 12mo. 1745, 18mo. 1746, do. 1746, Svo, ] 749, Svo. 1749, 8vo. 175.3, Svo, 1755, 12mo. 1756, 12mo. 1756, Svo. 1757, Svo. 1757, 12mo. 1761, 12mo. 1761, Svo. 1762, Svo. 1 763, Svo. 1764, Svo. . by John Bryce l by R. & A. Foulis (the edit, used by the presb. oi Nairn) 1765, Svo. . for Alexander Weir, Paisley 17GS, Svo. . . by Robert and Thomas Duncan . 1771, Svo. 1771, Svo. EDITIONS OF THE PSALMS IN METRE Not printed by His Majesty's Printers, with the exception of' Tyler's. Edinburgh printed by Evan Tyler, printer to the King Evat Edinburgh Edinburgh Edinburgh Edinburgh Edinburgh Glasgow Edinburgh Edinburgh Edinburgh Edinburgh Edinburgh Edinburgh Edinburgh Edinburgh Edinburgh Glasgow Edinburgh Edinburgh Glasgow Edinburgh Edinburgh Edinburgh Glasgow Glasgow Edinburgh Edinburgh Glasgow Glasgow Glasgow Edinburgh Glasgow Edinburgh Glasgow Dundee Edinburgh Edinburgh Edinburgh Edinburgh Glasgow Paisley Edinburgh Glasgow Glasgow Edinburgh Edinburgh Glasgow Dumfries Edinburgh Glasgow Edinburgh Glasgow Falkirk Glasgow Edinburgh Glasgow Glasgow Glasgow by Gideon Lithgow, printer to the University by Gideon I.ithgow by Gideon Lithgow . . by Gideon Lithgow . . . by A. Anderson, before he was King's Printer by Robert Sanders, printer to the Town by G. Swinton and T. Brown by G. Swinton . for a Society of Stationers by G. Mosman, printer to the Church of Scotland by Mosman .... by James Watson . by heirs of A. Anderson ... by T. Lumisden and J. Robertson , by M'Euen and Co. ... by R. Smith and A. Hutcheson . by R. Fleming and Co. . by Lumsden and Robertson . . by W. Mitchell and James Knox by W. Gray . . . by Hamilton, Balfour, and Neill by E. Robertson . . by John Bryce, 12mo. by William Duncan, senior . . by C. Wright and Co. ... by W. Ruddiman and J. Richardson for John Bryce for John Orr ^ ; . . by W. Duncan, sen. . for John Wood . • • by John Bryce ... by Robert Clark by James Robertson . by Ogilvie and Chalmers . by Colin IM'Farquhar . . . by Alexander M'Caslan . . by Peter Williamson, 8vo. . by Peter Williamson, 12mo. (six copies in one of Trades Seats of St. Andrews) for Alexander Weir by Archd. Neill • for J. and J. Robertson (Used in the Pulpit of the city of St. Andrews.) for J. Robertson and J. Duncan by John Gray and Gavin Alston by A. Tweedie .... by J. & J. Robertson . . • by Robert Jackson by P. Williamson by Robertson, (used in pulpit of St. George's, Paisley) by J. Dickson (used in the pulpit of Tolbooth Church) for J. Duncan by Daniel Reid by David Niven (in the Bible of the South Church Dundee) by J. Dickson, (printer to the Church of Scotland) by Daniel Niven by J. and M. Robertson, « for J. Dickson the inburgh inburgh inburgh isgow rtb isgow inburgh llinburgh linburgh isley asgow linburgh linburgh linburgh iinburgh lasgow lisley for J. Dickson and P., Hill (a copy of this edition is used by the Moderator of the General Assembly) J. Moir . . . for the booksellers (16 Copies used by the Town-Council of Edinburgh.) by J. and M. Robertson by R. Morison (used by precentor of Canongate) . (7 copies used by Magistrates of St. Andrews) by J. and M. Robertson by J. Dickson, (printer for the Church of Scotland) for, and sold by J. Gillies, Glasgow by J. & P. Wilson . - by Geo. Caw, for J. Gibson, J. Fairbaim, and J. Ogle, Edinburgh (Used by Magistrates of Cupar, by the Minister of Fala, and also by Precentor of Tron Church) by Neilson and Weir . • by R. Chapman by T. Maccleish and Co. • • by J. Ruthven and Sons . • by J. Dickson (pulpit of Tron Church) by T. Ross by David Niven (pulpit of old Aberdeen) by J. Wilson • • • 1792 1793 1793 1793 1794 1796 1797 1798 1798 1798 1798 1798 1798 1799 1799 1799 1799 1801 DITIONS OF THE CONFESSION OF FAITH IN LATIN. pntab. jlasg. ^dinb. jlasg. Idinb. dinb. dinb. excudebat J. Field excudebat A. Anderson, impensis Soc. Stat. ex officina Soc. Stationariorum excudebat R. Sanders ex officina Soc. Stationariorum • ex officina typographica G. Mosman excudebat Jac. Watson 1659 1660 1670 1670 1689 1694 1711 Edinhirffh, Jan. 18, 1649.~The commission of the General Assembly, con- sidering how profitable it wiU be to the kirks abroad, that the Confes- sion of Faith and Catechisme be translated in Latine, therefore they seriouslie recommend to Mr. John Adamson and Mr. Thomas Craw- furd to doe the same with diligence. Application has been made to a number of Towns and Parishes, re- questing to know what editions of the Bible are used, either by th* Ministers in the Pulpits, or by the public bodies in the seats which they occupy. The following are the only returns : Whitburn. Pulprt Bible, Folio, with Ostervald's notes, printed for S. Archer, Belfast, M. Keene, Dublin, and Mundell, Doig, [ and Stevenson, Edinburgh. Belfast 181 1] Perth. East Church, pulpit, quarto. Oxf. 178Q West do. do. quarto. Edin. 1 793 St. Paul's do. do. folio. Edin. 177^ Three churches of St. John's, folio. Lond. 1708 East Church, former Bible. Lond. 1777 Magistrates, 2, quarto. Oxf. 1817 7, quarto. Edin. 1793 Glassite Meeting-house, folio. Camb. 1763 Glasgow. High Church, quarto. Edin. 1828 Outer High Church, quarto. Lond. 18l3 Blackfriars, quarto. Oxf. 174)3 St. David's, Watson's, folio. Edin- 1722 St. Mary's, 4to. Edin. 1793 St. Andrew's, folio. Oxf. 1794 St. Enoch's, quarto. Edin, 1822 St. George's, quarto. Edin. 1822 St. John's, quarto. ' Lond. 1813 St. .Tames's, quarto. Lond. 1813 Of eight Dissenting Ciiaj)els, reported, three have Lond. 1813 St. Andrews Town Church, old pulpit Bible, folio. Lond. 1611 Another copy, with Geneva notes, folio. . Lond. w. t. (This is an edition printed in Holland, about 1682.) St. Leonard's Church, quarto, printed by M. Ritchie, Middle Street, Cloth Fair, for John Wright, Piccadilly. St. Andrews. Provost's Bible, quarto. 6 Magistrates and Counsellors, quarto. 7 Psalm Books, R. Morison. Perth. 1794 St. IMary's College, Principal's seat, quarto. 2 Professors, quarto. 1 Professor. Trades, all Edinburgh Bibles, except Sailors, 1 8vo. Bible. Oxf. 1750 6 Psalm Books, by Peter Williamson. F.din. 1 773 i Psalm Books, printed for the Booksellers. 1793 Pulpit Psalm Book, by J. and J. Robertson. Glasg. 1775 Cupar. Pulpit Bible, (Watson's,) folio. Edin. 1722 Dean of Guild. Oxf. 1755 Magistrates, (Kincaid.) Edin! Psalm Book, by George Caw, for J. Gibson, &c. Edin. 1798 Lond. Camb. Edin. Camb. Camb. Lond. 1796 1768 1762 1762 1762 1772 Ayr. Pulpit, quarto. Provost. Anstruther. Pulpit. Pittenweem. Pulpit. Haddington. Pulpit, quarto. Another, quarto. Magistrates, five copies, quarto. Do. quarto. Garvald. Morham. Yester. Edin. 1793 Edin. 1806 Camb. 1789 Edin. 1814 Oxf. 1769 Edui. 1793 Lond. 1687 Edin. 1726 Edin. 1793 Lond. 1638 Camb. 1789 Do. quarto Elders, folio. Pulpit, quarto, Psalm Book, J. Moir. Edin. 1793 Pulpit, quarto. Edin. Pulpit, Dutch plates — no place or printer's name Another, do. do. Athelstaneford. Pulpit, folio, Dutch edition. said to be Lond. Aberdeen. West Church, 1 copy folio. Lond*. 1617 Another, folio. Sheffield 1785 Another, quarto. Cambridge 1789 1791 1683 1707 Oxford 1779 Edinburgh 1791 Edinburgh 1793 Oxford 1762 Oxford 1759 Ira. (dross, imdee. )erdeen. Reverend Mr. Bryce, quarto Reverend Mr. Foote, quarto Reverend Mr. Murray, quarto Lord Provost, quarto 8 Magistrates and Counsellors, octavo 11 Ministers of Chapels and Dissenting Meetings, have Edinburgh Bibles for the pulpit. itmamock. Pulpit Bible, quarto 2 Do. do. Do. do. Magistrates Pulpit Bible Gifted by Sir Alexander Bruce— July 20th 1636. Old Pulpit Bible, folio. Another, folio. Magistrates, 6 copies octavo. 5 ditto quarto. Edin. 1726. Old Church, precentor's desk, folio. Old and South Churches, 2 pulpit Bibles. 1 do. Cross and Steeple Church 1 2 St. David's 1 folio 1 quarto St. Andrew's Church, 1 quarto Convener of Three Trades, 1 quarto Deacons of Three Trades, 3 octavo Convener and Deacons of Nine Trades, 10 copies Old Church Precentors desk, folio South Church, black letter Pulpit Bible, folio ittle Dunkeld. Do. Dunkeld Glassite Chapel, folio Old Pulpit Bible, folio Pulpit Bible, folio Communion Bible, quarto High Church pulpit, folio Another (a present from the late King's printer) foho Edinburgh 1793 Lord President's Bible Lond. 1796 Lord Provost's Bible, quarto Lond. 176T Dean of Guild, quarto Lond. 1767 16 Psalm Books, Edinburgh, printed for the booksellers. 1793 Old Church, quarto Oxford 1682 Gifted to the Ministers in leSi by four of the Elders. Another copy, folio Edmburgh 1793 Tolbooth, quarto Oxford 1777 New North Chuich, quarto Oxford 177T Another, quarto, (purchased since the interdict was granted) Edin. 1822 Lady Tester's, quarto Oxford 1786 Psalm Book (Pulpit) D. Niven, Glasgow, 1799 Psalm Book, (Precentor) printed for the Booksellers. Edin. 1796 College, quarto London 1813 Another Edinburgh 1793 Old Greyfriars, folio Edinburgh 1722 St. Andrews, quarto London 1813 St. George's, quarto Oxford 1808 St. Cuthbert's Chapel, quarto London 1813 Another 1793 New Greyfriars Church Oxford 1723 Another (a present from the late King's printer, an elder of Tinkeld. anark. ochmabcn. dinburgh. London 1813 Edinburgh 1793 Oxford 1817 Edinburgh 1762 London 1634» London 1611 Oxf. 1795 London 1772 6 ditto ditto. Edin. 1762 Lond. 1638 Edinburgh 1789 Oxford 1754- Oxford Edinburgh 1822 Amst. 1672 Edinburgh 1823 Oxford 1772 Oxford 1786 Oxford 1772 Edinburgh 1772 London 1638 London Lond. 1772 Edin. 1793 Oxf. 1680 Lond. 1616 Edin. 1793 Lond. 1806 Camb. 1763 Peebles. that Church) Tron Church, quarto Psahns for Pulpit, J. Dickson. Edinburgh 1798 Do. for Precentor G. Caw. Edinburgh 1798 Pulpit Bible, quarto Edinburgh 1793 Oxlbrd 1777 Lond. 1806 8 Lond. 161« Lond. 1672 One, ditto Edin. 1808 Lond. 1703 Edin. 1720 Edin. 1793 Baskerville, Camb. 1763 Oxf. 1786 Oxf. 1786 Edin. 1793 Lond. 1761 Lond. 1766 Oxf. 17( Edin. 1775 Edin. 1722 Lond. 1813 Edin. 1793 Camb. 1789 Edin. 1793 Edin. 1793) 1793 1806 Amst. 16791 1 Ecclesmachin. Pulpit Bible, folio North licith. Pulpit Bible, folio South Leith. Magistrates, three, quart©, Edin. 1765^ Kirk Session, octavo Another, quarto Incorporations, quarto Pulpit Bible, foUo Canongate. Pulpit Bible Another (purchased since the interdict was granted.) Communion Bible Forfar. Pulpit Bible, quarto Magistrates Bibles, three quarto Three ditto ditto Two ditto ditto Six ditto ditto Dunfermline. Pulpit Bible, folio, Watson Another Magistrates, quarto Convener, quarto Chapel of Ease Pulpit Bible Psalm Book for the Pulpit, G. Caw. Edin. 1798 Ditto, for Precentor, G. Caw. Edin. 1798 Queen Anne Street Chapel, Pulpit Bible, quarto Psalm Book for Pulpit, G. Caw. Edin. 1798 Ditto, for Precentor. Edin. 1798 Chambers' Street Chapel, Pulpit Bible, quarto Edin. Cannon Street Pulpit Bible, quarto Lond. Kilconquhar. Folio, printed for Stephen Swart, at the Crowned Bible, on the west side of the exchange This copy, as stated by the Minister, has been a Pulpit Bible for more than a century. It was first Prin- cipal Drew's (of St. Leonard's College and Pa- rish;) then his son-in-law's, Mr. M'Cormick, Minister of St. Andrews ; then Principal M'Cor- mick's (of St. Leonard's Parish ;) and now it is used by his son-in-law. Dr. Ferrie. Linlithgow. Pulpit Bible, folio Magistrates, five Bibles, quarto Guildry, five Bibles quarto Shoemakers, seven Bibles quarto Bakers, three Bibles quarto, Mr. Watson's Pulpit Bible, quarto Mr. Miller's ditto, folio Mr. Knowles' ditto, quarto Borrowstounness. Pulpit Bible, quarto Mr. Harper's Pulpit Bible, quarto Auchtermuchty. Pulpit Bible, quarto (A Present from the Patron of the Parish, John Bruce, Esq. one of his Majesty's Printers.) Pulpit Bible, folio Baskerville, Birming Another, quarto Edin, Psalm Book, by Morrison. Perth 1794 Pulpit Bible Basket, Edin. Pulpit Bible, folio Baskerville, Birming. 1769 Another, folio Lond. 1 762 Old Machar. Pulpit Bible Another, Precentor's desk Psalm Book, for Pulpit. Niven. Glasg. 1799 Pulpit Bible Another Abbey Church Pulpit Bible quarto St. George's Church, Pulpit Bibles :-=- One copy with Ostervald's Notes, given by the Town.Cquncil, quarto Glasg. 1775 Dollar. Colinton. Creieh. Monimail. Paisley. Edin. 1793 Camb. 1769 Camb. 1767 Camb. 1769 Edin. 1799 Oxf. 1817 Edin. 1793 Edin. 1814 Camb. 1789 Lond. 1813 Edin. 1822 17G9 1808 1726 Edin. 1793 Oxf. 1685 Oxf. 1729 1 Edin. 1763 Edin. 1775 9 Another, given by the Town-Council, ditto Another, quarto Psalm Book, printed by Robertson. Glasg. 1780 High Church Pulpit Bible, (two copies) quarto Middle Church, Pulpit Bible, quarto Magistrates, four Bibles, quarto Do. three Bibles (with Ostervald's Notes) Pulpit Bible, foho " Psalm Book, by Morison. Perth 1794. Another. Ediu. 1807 Pulpit Bible Psalm Book, J. Dickson Pulpit Bible, folio (no printer's name) Another, folio Seven Magistrates Two Pulpit Bibles Pulpit Bible ditto ditto St. Michael's Churcli, quarto New Church, folio Another, folio, with notes Four Magistrates, quarto Two ditto quarto Six Psalm Books, 11. Jackson. Dumfries, 1774 Pulpit Bible, quarto, wants title Another, folio Edin. Lond. 1808 1818 Edin. 1793 Edin. 1793 Edin. 1793 Glasg. 1775 Basker'ville, Birm. 1769 Lond. Oxf. Edin. Lond. Edin. Edin. 1799 and 17G8, and Lond. Oxford, Camb. Oxford, L.ond. Edin. Ormskirk Lond. Camb. Lond. Edin. Edin. Edin. 1798 1799 Six Magistrates, octavo One do. do. Associate Congregation Pulpit Bible, quarto Psaim Book, by G. Caw Minister's Bible Another Pulpit Bible, quarto Pulpit Bible, quarto Another, quarto Psalm Book. Glasg. 1799 Magistrates' Bibles, 4 copies, quarto Pulpit Bible, quarto Another, in precentor's desk Magistrates' Bibles, 8 copies Five Psalm Books. Three ditto. Glasg, 1794 Pulpit Bible, quarto Pulpit Bible, quarto Pulpit Bible, quarto Psalm Book, by J. Dickson. Pulpit Bible, folio • Pulpit Bible, folio Another, folio Pulpit Bible, folio Pulpit Bible, folio Pulpit Bible, quarto Pulpit Bible, quarto Psalm Book. Glasg. Pulpit Bible, quarto Another Psalms, Lumsden. Edin. 1746 Pulpit Bible Pulpit Bible Pulpit Bible, foho p «i o- i • Rebound, 13th Nov. 1704, by order of Mr. Sinclair, mi- nister, with consent of the heritors and elders. Pulpit Bible ( Presented by the heritors in 1773.) ^^i""™" Another, (Dr. Somerville's father's Pulpit Bible) "^^J' Pulpit Bible, quarto . .om v r* r"Y Another, quarto (Presented by the heritors m 1821.) Oxford, Edin. 1799 Edin. Lond. Oxf. Lond. Lond. Edin. Glasg. Edin. Lond. Edin. Lond. Edin. Oxford, Lond. Lond. Camb. Lond. Camb. Oxford, Oxford, Oxford, Lond. Camb. Lond Lond. 1783 1783 1708 1793 1814 1806 1786 1775 1701 1763 1793 1809 1772 1769 L619 1787 171(5 1786 1793 1700 1765 1813 1813 1775 1778 1793 1765 1744. 1806 1785 1790 1753 1759 1789 1772 1762 1786 1767 1789 1678 1638 1767 1727 1781 1817 10 4to. 4to, Bible, 1582, Geneva Translation, 1587, ditto, 1587, ditto, 1590, ditto, 1593, ditto, 1596, N. Testament, Geneva, 4to, 1599, ditto, 4to, 1599, ditto, 4to, 1599, ditto, 4to, 1601, ditto, 1607, ditto. Psalms, folio, Edinburgh, 1699 4to, A- Hart, Edinburgh, N. D. 8vo, Psalms for Scotland, London, 1587 Copies of the Bible printed in England, having Psalms Jar the Church of Scotland bound in the same Volu7ne, — all printed between the date nj Arbuthnot's Patent, C 1 579) J «wd the commencement of Freebairn'i in 1712. All these (except one) belong to a single individual. liond. Lond. Lond. Lond. Lond. Lond. Lond. Lond. Lond. Lond. Lond. Lond. Lond. Lond. liOnd. Lond. Lond. Lond. 1615, Geneva Translation, Lond. 1615, K. James Translation, Lond. 1623, ditto, 1629, 1629, 1638, ditto, 1638, 1608, ditto, 4.to, 1608, N. Testament, Geneva, 12mo, 1608, ditto, 4to, 1610, ditto, 4to, 1611, ditto, 4to, Edinburgh, 1650 ditto, N. D. Edinburgh, 1669 Heirs of A. Hart, Edinburgh, 1632 Edinburgh, 164.3 N. D. 12mo, Psal. for Scotland, Middleb. 1596 folio, Edinburgh, 1699 Edinburgh, 1650 Middleb. 1596 A. Hart, Edinburgh, N. D. Edinburgh, 1650 Lumsden, Edinburgh, 1746 1614, King James' Translation, 12mo, Psalms for Scotland, Middleb. 1596 Lend. Lend. Lond. Lond. Lond. Camb. 4to, 4 to, 12mo, 4to, 4to, 4to, 4to, 1647, do. by Comp of Stationers, 8vo, 1648, Camb. 1648, Lond. 1648, Lond. Lond. Lond. Lond. Lond. Camb. Camb. 1668, Camb. 1668, Camb. 1668, Lond. 1669, Comp. of Stationers, 1649, 1633,— Field, 1653,— -Calvert, 1660, 1661, 1668, Lond. Lond. Lond. Lond. Lond. 1669, 1669, 1672, 1675, 1675, Camb. 1675, Lond. 1680, Lond. Lond. Oxf. Loud. Lond. Lond. Lond. Lond. Lond. Lond. liond. Lond. liOnd. 1682, 1682, 1683, 1683, 1685, 1694, 1695, 1695. 1698, 1698, 1700, 1704, 1712, 2 copies, 18mo, 18mo, 4to, 4to, 24mo, 18mo, 4to, 4to, 4to, 4to, 4to, 4to, 12mo, 12mo, (another edit.) 8vo, (another edit. ) folio, 4to, 12mo, 4to, 12mo. 12mo, 8vo, 4to, 8vo, 4to, 8vo, 8vo. 8vo, 18mo. 12rao, 4to, 8vo, 8vo, A. Hart, Edinburgh, 1615 A. Hart, Edinburgh, 1615 Edinburgh, 1756 Edinburgh, 1613 Edinburgh, N. D. Bryson, Edinburgh, 1G40 Edinbiu*gh, 1714 G. Lithgo^v, Edinburgh, 1651 Edinburgh, 1650 D. Gray, Edinburgh, 1754 G. Lithgow, Edinburgh, 1635 G. Lithgow, Edinburgh, 1655 Edinburgh, N. D. Edinburgh, 1650 G. Lithgow, Edinburgh, 1636 G. Lithgow, Edinburgh, 1655 A. Anderson, not K. P. 1671 Edinburgh, 1669 G. Lithgov/, Edinburgh, 1656 Mosman, Edinbtirgh, 1693 A. Anderson, not K. P. 1671 Edinburgh, N. D. N. D. Edinburgh, 1679 j Edinbiu-gh, 1650 T. Brown, Edinburgh, 1675' Edinburgh, 1670 Edinburgh, 1676 , Edinburgh, 1688 Edinburgh, 1675 Edinburgh, 1G81 Edinburgh, 169S Edinburgh, 1G92 Edinbiu-gh, N. D. Edinburgh, 1698 Edinburgh, 1675 j Edinburgh, 1G98 Edinburgh, 1 6!'-^ Edinburgh, I (if- 1 Blosman, Edinburgh, Ki!);' Edinburgh, N, D. 11 ttons oj the Bible, printed beyond Seas, suhsequenthj to the Edition hy Arbulhnot and Bassandyiie in 1579. AU in possession of a Member of the Edinburgh Bible Society. y, with Psalms, as they are to be sung in the Kirk of Scotland. Imprint- )\by Isaac Canin, at the expenses of the aires of Henrie Charteris and I dr^r Hart in Edinburgh, 8vo. at Dort . . 1601 \|, imprinted at Amsterdam for Thomas Crafoorth, ito, . 1633 \ , at ^»»rferJa?«, by Thomas Stafford, folio . . 1640 uiording to the copy printed at Edinburgh by Andro Hart, in the year 1610") '.e, folio, at Amsterdam^ for Stephen Swart . . , 1672 le, folio, at Amsterdam, for Stephen Swart . . . 1679 le, octavo, Leij)s'ig, for John Grosse's Heir . . . 1746 Uions of the Earliest Fersion of the Psalms for the Church of Scot- land, and of the original Scottish Co?fession of Faith, ^-c. (Not printed by any of His Majesty s Printers for Scotland.) All belonging to a Member of the Edinburgh Bible Society. Psalms, Catechism, &c. for the Church of Scotland, T. Bassanden Edin. 1.578 ms for the Church of Scotland T. VautrolHer, Lond. 1587 Psalms, with the Book of Common Order, for the Church of Scotland Middleburg, 1594 0, printed by Henrie Charteris Edin. 1594 o, printed by Henrie Charteris • . Edin. 1596 Psahns of David in Metre, used in the Kirk of Scotland Middleburg, 1596 fession of Faith, Catechism, &c. . . . Dort, 1601 ms, with Confession and Catechism . A. Hart, Edin. 1611 ms, with Confession . • . A. Hart, Edin. 1615 ms in Prose and Metre . . . A. Hart, Edin. 1617 chism, appointed to be printed for the use of the Kirk of Edinburgh A, Hart, Edin. 1615 ms, for the Church of Scotland E. Raban, Aberdeen, 1629 ms (in Prose and Metre) with Confession Heirs of A. Hart, Edin. 1630 The Prose Psalms are of the Geneva Translation, ms, according as they are sung in the Church of Scotland Heirs of A. Hart, Edin. 1633 Psalms in Metre, according to the Church of Scotland E. Kaban, Aberdeen, 1633 Psalms of David in Prose and Metre, according to the Church of Scot- id ... • • • Aberdeen, 1633 (Tho Psalms in Prose on the Margin (said to be) according to the New- Translation 1610.) Psalms of David in Prose and Metre . Heirs of A. Hart, 1634 (The Psalms in Prose are of the Geneva Translation.) Psalms of David in Prose and Metre . Heirs of A. Hart, 1635 (The Prose Psalms of the Geneva Translation.) Psalms of David in Prose and Metre . James Bryson, Edin. 1 640 (The Prose Psalms of the Geneva Translation.) ions of the New Testament in the possession of a Member of the iblc Society, printed in Scotland, during the last century, by printers ho at the time had no jjatent. ro . . . by James Watson, Craig's Closs, Edin 1706 ves . . by Mr. Thomas Ruddiman, Edin- 1725 vcs . by Alexander Carmichael and Alexander Millar, Glasg. 1737 vei .. . by John Robertson and M. M'Lean, Glasg. 1748 H I 12 EDITIONS OF THE ENGLISH BIBLE In the Libraries of Uie Univerailies of Scotland. (No Bible in these Lists has been printed by any (jf'the Scottish Patentees.^) Bibles in the Library of the University of EdinburgJi. * , The Great Bible, folio, (" gifted by William Reid, son of Bailie Keid, \ 1670,") .... Lond. 1-541 Bible, (Genevan) quarto, inscribed " Bible belonging to the Royal Col- lege of Chiruigeons, Edin. 1761." . . Lond. 1599 With Psalms, Biyson, Edin. 1640 Bible, (Genevan) folio. . . • Amst. 16 Inscription, " Ego donatus sum Academiae Edinburgenae a 3Iagisterii Candidatis." A. D. IG41. I Bible, (King James's Translation) quarto. . . Camb. 1668 2 Copies ; one presented by the candidates for the degree of A. M. in 1668. Bible, (King James's translation, with Geneva notes) folio. Lond. 167S [N. B- In the accounts for the years 1668 and 1679, these entries appear, — Field's new impression of the Bible, with Jackson's^ Concordance, Camb. 1668, 10 lib. A new English Bible, of the edition London, 1679, with Annotations, Maps, Scots Psalms, 18 lib.] Bible, folio. .... Oxf, 1771' Bible, with notes by Bishop Wilson . . Bath, 1785 Bible, with notes by Adam Clarke, LL.D. . Liverpool, 1813 Bible, (Popish translation) quarto. . . Doway, 163a Bibles, Psalm Books, and Confessions of Faith in the Library of' the University of Glasgow. i Cover dale's ' . . . . supposed 15M Matthcrv's ... . Lond. 1537 Tindale''s . . . imprinted by Whitechurch, Lond. 1553 Doway . . , . . • 1609 Bible . . , . . Barker, Lond. 161 New Testament, the Ehemes translation . . Fulke, Lond. 1601 Confessio Fidei, &c. . . . Edin. 168( Psalms in Prose and Metre . , Aberdeen, 163£ Bibles, Sj-c. i?i the Library of King's College, Aberdeen. 1. Bible, printed 1541, printer's name effaced. 2. Do. 1562, Richard Harrison, London. 3. Do. in small quarto, v;ants title. 4. Do. small size . . Bill and Barker, Lond. 166' Confession of Faith, with Dunlop's Preface, 2 vols. . Edin. 1719-2S Do. do. . . . Lond. 1711 Do. Latin . . . Cantab. 165( Do. do. . . . Gid. Lithgo, Edin. 166( Marischal College. Bible .... Barker, Lond. 160" Bible . . . Macklin's, Lond. 180( Bibles, S^x. in the University of St. Andrews. Cranmer's Bible, folio. . . . Rouen, 156t The Bishop's ditto, folio. . . . Lond. 157: Bible folio, Field's . ■ . . Camb. 165! Do. 12rao. .... Lond. 172) I-ond. 177- Edin. 177. Bath, 178. Liverpool, 181: Lond. 181 Lond. 181 Oxf. 181 Lond. 182 Rhemes, 158 Lond. 160 , Lond. 163 Lond. 172 Do. Dodd's, 3 vols. Do. Brown's, 3 vols. Do. Wilson's, 3 vols. Do. Clarke's Do. Cadell and DSTvies Do. Clarke's Do. D'Oyly and Mant's Do, Scott's, 6 vols. New Testament, Do. Fulke's Do. do. Do. (Common Translation,) 8ro EDITIONS OP BOOKS OF PUBLIC AUTHORITY IN THE CHURCH OF SCOTLAND, NOT PRINTED BY SCOTTISH PATENTEES, See p. 28. [these lists, with some additions, are reprinted in 1839.] EDITIONS OF THE EARLIEST VERSION OF THE PSALMS FOR THE CHURCH OF SCOTLAND, AND OF THE ORIGINAL SCOTTISH CONFESSION OF 1^'AITH, &c. Not 'printed hy any of His Afaj'esty^s Printers Jor Scotland. (copies of these and various others are possessed by dr. lEE, A member OF THE EDINBURGH BIBLE SOCIETY.) The Psalms, Catechism, &c. for the Church of Scotland, T. Bassanden, Edin. 1578 Psalms for the Church of Scotland T. Vautrollier, Lond. 1587 The Psalms, with the Book of Common Order, for the Church of Scotland, Middleburg, 1594 Ditto, printed by Henrie Charteris . • . . Edin. 1594 Ditto, printed by Henrie Charteris .... Edin. 1596 The Psalms of David in Metre, used in the Kirk of Scotland Middleburg, 159G Confession of Faith, Catechism, &c. . . . Dort, 1601 The Psalms of David in Metre . . R. Charteris, Edin. 1603 Psalms, with Confession and Catechism . . A. Hart, Edin. 1611 Psalms, &c. Geneva Translation, . . R. Barker, Lond. 1614 Psalms, with Confession .... A. Hart, Edin. 1615 Psalms in Prose and Metre ... A. Hart, Edin. 1617 Catechism, appointed to be printed for the use of the Kirk of Edinburgh A. Hart, Edin, 1615 Psalms for the Church of Scotland . . E. Raban, Aberdeen, 1629 Psalms (in Prose and Metre) with Confession Heirs of A. Hart, Edin. 1630 (The Prose Psalms are the Geneva Translation.) Psalms, according as they are sung in the Church of Scotland Heirs of A. Hart, Edin. 1633 The Psalms in Metre, according to the Church of Scotland E. Raban, Aberdeen, 1633 The Psalms of David in Prose and Metre, according to the Church of Scotland ...... Aberdeen, 1633 (The Psalms in Prose on the Margin (said to be) according to the New Translation, 1610, that is, the Geneva.) The Psalms of David in Prose and Metre . Heirs of A. Hart, 1634 (The Psalms in Prose are of the Geneva Translation.) The Psalms of David in Prose and Metre . . Heirs of A. Hart, 1635 (The Prose Psalms are of the Geneva Translation.) The Psalms of David in Prose and Metre . James Bryson, Edin. 1640 (The Prose Psalms are of the Geneva Translation.) Psalms, Proverbs, 8ic., New Translation . Robert Bryson, Edin. 1612 DR. LEE POSSESSES MORE THAN 120 EDITIONS OF THE PSALMS IN METRE, AUTHORISED BY THE CHURCH OF SCOTLAND IN 1649, Not Printed hy His Majesty's Printers, with the exception of Evan Tylers. Edinburgh printed by Gideon Litbgow, small edition 1650 Edinburgh Edinburgh Edinburgh Edinburgh Edinburgh Edinburgh Edinburgh Edinburgh Glasgow Edinburgh Edinburgh Edinburgh Edinburgh Edinburgh Edinburgii (In 1693, — 8vo book Edinburgh Edinburgh Edinburgh Edinburgh Edinburgh Edinburgh Edinburgh Glasgow Edinburgh Aberdeen Edinburgh Edinburgh Glasgow Glasgow Edinburgh Edinburgh Glasgow Edinburgh Edmburgh Glasgow Edinburgh Glasgow Aberdeen Dundee . Edinburgh Glasgow Glasgow Edhiburgh Edinburgh Glasgow Edinburgh Dundee . Glasgow for a Society of Stationers . . . . by G. Mosman, printer to the Church of Scotland, 4 sizes 1693 Geo. Mossman printed editions of the Psalms in 4to. for Bibles, for Bibles, — 12mo. for Precentors, and 18mo. as pocket Psalm by Gideon Lithgow, printer to the University, another ed. 1650 by Evan Tyler, printer to the King by Gideon Litbgow by Gideon Litbgow by Gideon Litbgow by A. Anderson by Gideon Litbgow by A. Anderson, before he was King's printer by Robert Sanders, printer to the Town by G. Swinton and T. Brown by A. Anderson by G. Swinton .... 1650 1651 1653 1655 1655 1656 1669 1669 lfi71 l( -"l 1675 1679 1690 by G. Mosman by James Watson by James Watson by Heirs of A. Anderson by T. Lumisden and J. Robertson by R. Fleming and Co. by M'Euen and Co. by Carmichael, Brown, and Millar by T. Lumisden and J. Robertson by D. Angus by T. Lumisden by T. Lumisden and J. Robertson by A. Millar by R. Smith and A Hutcheson by R. Fleming and Co. by Lumisden and Robertson by J. M' Galium and Co. . by T, Lumisden and J. Robertson by W. Gray by W. Mitchell and James Knox by W. Gray by R. Urie by Chalmers by H. Galbraith by Hamilton, Balfour, and Neill . by John Hall by W. Duncan by R. Fleming, two editions ' by E. Robertson, two editions by John Bryce by C Wright and Co. by H. Galbraith and Co. by William Duncan, senior. 1694 1702 1711 1714 1729 1730 1730 1733 1738 1740 1740 1741 1741 1744 1745 1746 1747 1748 1748 1751 1751 1751 1754 1756 1756 1756 1757 1757 1757 1757 1757 1759 1760 printed by W. Ruddiman and J. Richardson . • 1761 for John Bi7ce . . . . • 1761 by Gray and Alston . . • • • 1763 by J. Robertson .... 1765 for John Orr . . • « . 1 76 1 by W. Duncan, senior . . • • 1761 for John Wood . . . . -1767 by Jos. Galbraith . . . • 1769 by John Bryce . . . . • 1770 by Robert Clark . . . . 1770 by John Robertson . . . • • 1770 by Ogilvie and Chalmers .... 1770 by Colin M'Farquhar . . • .1771 by Alexander M'Cashin . . . . 1772 by Peter Williamson, 8vo . . . . 1772 by Peter Williamson, 12mo. (six copies in one of the Trades Scats of St. Andrews) 1773 1773 1774 1774 1774 1774 1775 1775 by R. Jackson . . . . by John Bryce . . . • by A. Duncan ..... for Alexander Weir by Archd. Neill ..... for J. and J. Robertson ( Used in the pulpit of the city of St. Andrews.) for J. Robertson and J. Duncan . . , 1776 by John Gray and Gavin Alston . . 1776 by A- Tweedie . . . . .1777 by J. and J. Robertson .... 1777 (large type) 1778 by Robert Jackson .... 1779 by P. Williamson . . . . 1779 by J. Boyle . . . . . 1 779 by Robertson, (used in pulpit of St. George's, Paisley) 1780 by R. Morrison and Son . . . 1781 by J. Chalmers . . . • .1781 by J. Boyle ..... 1781 for C. Elliot . . . . .1781 by J. Dickson (used in the pulpit of the Tolbooth Church) 1783 for J. Duncan ..... 1783 by Daniel Reid . . . . . 1784 by David Niven (in the bible of the South Church, Dundee)! 786 by J. Dickson (printer to the Church of Scotland) 1786 by David Niven • . - .- . 1786 by J. and M. Robertson . . . .1786 for J. Dickson ..... 1788 by E. Miller . . . . .1789 for Nisbet and Ross . . . • 1789 . 1789 J790 by J. M. Robertson . . • . 17S0 for J. Dickson and P. Hill, (a copy of this edition is used by the Moderator of the General Assembly) 1792 by J. Moir ...... 1793 for the Booksellers. . . • • 1793 (16 copies used by the Town- Council of Edinburgh.) by J. and M. Robertson • . . . 1 793 by R. Morison, (used by the precentor of Canongate.) 1794 (7 copies used by Magistrates of St. Andrews.) by J. and M. Robertson .... 1796 J. Nelson for James Gillies . . . .1796 Glasgow printed Edinburgh Edinburgh Glasgow Edinburgh Ayr Edinburgh Paisley Paisley Glasgow Edinburgh Edinburgh Edinburgh Edinburgh Glasgow Paisley by J. and A. Duncan .... by J. Dickson, (printer for the church of Scotland.) for the Booksellers ..... James Imray ..... for, and sold by J. Gillies, Glasgow . by J. and P. Wilson .... by Geo. Caw, for J. Gibson, J. Fairbaim, and J. Ogle, Edinburgh ( Used by Magistrates of Cupar, by the Minister of Fala, and also by precentor of Tron Church.) by Neilson and Weir ..... by Hugh Crichton .... by R. Chapman .... by T. Maccliesh and Co. ... by T. Ruthven and Sons ..." by J. Dickson, (pulpit of Tron Church) by T. Ross ....... by David Niven, (pulpit of Old Aberdeen) by J. Neilson ..... 1790 1797 1779 1798 1798 1798 1798 1798 1798 1798 1798 1799 1799 1799 1799 1801 DR. LEE POSSESSES COPIES OF AT LEAST 7^ EDITIONS OF THE CONFESSION OF FAITH, Not Printed by His Majesty's Printers, with the exception of one by James Watson. Edinburgh printed by G. Lithgow, printer to the University • 1650, 18mo. London . for the Company of Stationers . . 1631, 18mo. London • for the Company of Stationers . . 1632, 18mo. Edinburgh printed for the heirs of George Anderson . 1632, do. Edinburgh . . by Gideon Lithgow . . . 1636, 18mo. London . . for Company of Stationers. . . 1656, 18mo. Edinburgh . . by Andro Anderson .... 1657, 18mo. London printed by A. Maxey for the Company of Stationers . 1658, 4to. London . . by E. M. for the Company of Stationers, 2d edition 1638, 4to. London . . Do. do. larger paper and larger type 1 658, 4to. Edinburgh . by Gideon Lithgow .... 1659, 18mo. London . by J. H. for the Company of Stationers . 1662, Glasgow • by Robert Sanders, printer to the Town . 1669, 18mo. Edinburgh printed by James Glen and David Trench . 1671, 18mo. Glasgow . . by Robert Sanders, printer to the city and univer- sity (the edition used by the Presbytery of Z^wncfee) . . 1675, 4rto. [The title bears that this is reprinted from the edition printed at London for the Company of Stationers, 1658.] Edinburgh . . . . . • . 1679, London . for the Company of Stationers . . . 1688, A neat and correct edition (used by the Presb. of St. Andrews) 1688, 18mo. Edinburgh printed by John Reid . . . . 1689, 18mo. Edinburgh . • • • . • 1694., do. Edinburgh . . by James Watson, Craig's Close . . 1701, 12mo. Edinburgh . . by James Watson in Craig's Close . 1767, 8vo. Edinburgh . . by James Watson in Craig's Close . . 1708, 8vo. Edinburgh . . by James Watson, opposite the Luckenbooths 1710, 8vo. Glasgow . . by Hugh Brown, printer to the University (the edition used by the Kirk Session of Kirkaldy) . . 1714, 18mo. Edinburgh . • by John Moncur .... 1715, 18mo. London printed for S. Cruttenden and T. Cox, Cheapside, 5th edit. (the edition used by the Presbytery of For/br) . • 1717, 8vo. 5 Edinburgh printed by James Watson, H. M. printer, 2 vols. 8vo. [This edition was to have been in 3 vols, but was never completed. It wants the directory for public worship, form of church govern- ment, &c. and contains various matters which are not of public authority in the church.] 1719, 1722. Glasgow Edinburgh Edinburgh Glasgow Edinburgh Edinburgh Glasgow Glasgow Edinburgh Glasgow Edinburgh Edinburgh Glasgow Glasgow Edinburgh Edinburgh Glasgow Glasgow Glasgow. Glasgow Glasgow Glasgow Glasgow Glasgow Glasgow- Glasgow Edinburgh Edinburgh Glasgow Glasgow Edinburgh Glasgow Glasgow Glasgow Glasgow Glasgow Glasgow Glasgow Glasgow Glasgow Edinburgh Glasgow by by James Duncan, printer to the city by William Brown and Company by Thomas Lumsden and John Robertson by James Duncan by T. Lumsden and J. Robertson by Thomas Lumsden and John Robertson by William Duncan, Saltmarket by James Duncan by T. Lumsden and J. Robertson by Messrs. Carmichael and Miller by T. Lumsden and J. Robertson by T. Lumsden and J. Robertson Collection of Confessions by Urie and Company by T. Lumsden and J. Robertson by T. Lumsden and J. Robertson by J Robertson and Mrs. M'Lean by J. Robertson by J. Robertson and Mrs. M'Lean by D. Duncan by J. Robertson and Mrs. M'Lean by Jo. Hall by W. Duncan by James Knox by John Robertson, senior by J. Bryce and D. Paterson by E. Robertson by E. Robertson by Jo. Robertson by Arch. M'Lean by E. Robertson by John Bryce for R. Duncan, Saltmarket by William Duncan by John Bryce . . . . R. & A. Foulis (the edit, used by the pre for Alexander Weir, Paisley by J. Robertson by Robert and Thomas Duncan by John Bryce 1721, 1723, 1725, 1727, 1727, 1728, 1732, 1732, 1735, 17.36, 1736, 1739, 1741, 1743, 1744, 1744, 1745, 1746, 1746, 1746, 1749, 1749. 1749, 1752. 1753, 1755, 1756, 1756, 1756. 1757, 1757, 1761, 1761, 1762, 1763, 1764, b. of iVaiTO) 1765, 1768. 1769. 1771, 1771, 1785, 18mo. 12rao. 12rao. 18mo. 6vo. 12mo. 18mo. 18mo. 8vo. 12mo. 8vo. 8vo. 12mo. l2mo. 8vo. 12mo. 18mo. do. 8vo. 12mo. 8vo. 8vo. 8vo. 12mo. 12rao. 8vo. 8vo. I2mo. 12mo. 8vo. 8vo. 8vo. 8vo. 8vo. 8vo. 8vo. 8vo. 8vo. DR. LEE CAN PRODUCE AT LEAST 35 EDITIONS OF THE SHORTER CATECHISM OF THE CHURCH OF SCOTLAND, Not Printed by his 3Iajesty's Printers. Edinburgh printed and sold by John Moncur Edinburgh . by J. Watson 1709 1714 Edinburgh printed and sold by John Reid Edinburgh Edinburgh Glasgow Edinburgh Edinburgh Glasgow Glasgow Edinburgh Edinburgh Aberdeen Glasgow Edinburgh Edinburgh Edinburgh London Glasgow Glasgow Glasgow Edinburgh Edinburgh Edinburgh Edinburgh Edinburgh Edinburgh Edinburgh Edinburgh for W. Brown by T. Lnmsden by J. Robertson and Mrs. M'Lean by J. Robertson by John Robertson, &c. by John Robertson in Pearson's close by J. Chalmers by John Robertson, senior by Thomas Lumisdan and Co. by E. Robertson by Alexander Robertson (beautiful edition.) . . printed in th by J. Robertson by John Robertson by Jolm and James Robertson i by Alexander Robertson by Alexander Robertson by David Paterson, Castlehill by Uavid Paterson by David Paterson by David Paterson by David Paterson by J. Robertson Edinburgh printed for tlie Society in Scotland for propagating Christian Knowledge Edinburgh . by Alexander Robertson Edinburgh . by J. Robertson Edinburgh . by J. Robertson Edinburgh . by J. Robertson Stirling . by C. Randal Edinburgh . by J. Robertson London • by W. Kent, High Holborn Most of these are superior to the King's Printers' editions 1806 and 1719 . 1731 1732 . 1740 1742 1743 1743 . 1744 . 1745 1749 • 1753 1754 . 1754 1758 . 1758 year 1764 1764 1769 1774 1777 • 1781 1782 . 1784 1786 • 1788 1788 1810. 1791 1793 1795 1797 1799 1799 1800 1811 Small books like the Catechism, for the use of children, are seldom preserved or collected, but the possessor of these has seen copies of several other editions published by unprivileged printers. Several editions both of the Psalms, and Confession of Faith, printed at Glas- gow by Urie, Foulis, Robertson, &c. ; at Aberdeen, by Angus, Chalmers, Boyle, &c. ; at Dundee, by Galbraith, Ogilvie, &c. ; and at Edinburgh, by Lithgow, Mosman, Lumisden, Fleming, Ruddiman, &c. had a very great circulation, and in appearance, at least, are superior to those of the contemporary patfentees. The Psalms printed by Blair and Bruce were at first deformed by various blun- ders affecting the sense. Thus the pulpit Psalm Book of 1801 reads in Psal. cv. 15, ye for he. Psal. cxliv. 13, then for ten, &c. As the free printing of the Psalms, Confession, and Catechism for more thar>*a century does not appear to have produced any injury, while it certainly promoted the circulation of these books and kept down the price, it may occur to many that no risk is to be apprehended, though all printers were to have the same liberty of printing the Bible in English as they have of printing the original Hebrew or Greek. At present it cannot be shewn that any security for accuracy exists. Thirty years ago the carelessness of some privileged printers had become a matter of reproach. Within the last twenty years many errors have been exposed, and greater care has consequently been exercised. The following page contains a few specimens of er- rors in late editions, which have been observed without being searched for. It would be well if some provision could be made for preventing the wilful or reckless intro- duction of such erroneous readings. In the Memorial and Additional Memorial several errors in the Bibles printed at Edinburgh have been occasionally men- tioned. The following have not been pointed out. 4to Bible, Edin. 1808. IMicahvi. 16. thereof for therefore. Luke iv. 28. hear tor heard. Gal. ii. 21- in for vain. James i. 27. her for their. 4to, — Edin. 1822. Isa. xl. 3. made for make. Jer. XV. 10. hath for have. 8vo N. T- Edin. 1812. Matt, xvii 27. comest for cometh. xviii. 17. the for thcc. ^lark X. 32. the for thee. Luke vii. 21. may for matnj- Acts viii. 22. mij for may. 8vo N. T. Edin. 1816. Matt. xvii. 27. comest for comeiA. Luke viii. Ik