§ MR. CHARLES M'ARTHUR (Liverpool, Exchange)To ask the Secretary
†"Address for Return of the Lunatic Asylums in the United Kingdom and Ireland (sic) on the 1st day of January 1902 (in continuation of and in the same form as Parliamentary Paper, No. 434, of Session 1895).‡ See (4)Debates lxxix., 1440.943 of State for the Home Department whether he is aware that, in a recent edition of the Book of Common Prayer, the King's printers have made certain alterations from the authorised text, and will he state by whose authority they were made.(Answered by Mr. Secretary Akers Douglas.) I understand that the points referred to in the Question of the hon. Member are the omission of the word "well," in the offertory sentence "for with such sacrifices God is well pleased," and the omission of a comma after "grace," in the sentence" outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual grace given unto us," in the Catechism. The following are the facts of the case. By the Act of Uniformity of 1662 it is provided that all ministers shall be bound to say and use the public and common prayer "in such order and form as is mentioned in the said book annexed and joined to the present Act." It appears that in the "annexed book," the sentence taken from the 13th Chapter of the Epistle to the Hebrews runs "for with such sacrifices God is pleased." The "annexed book," having been carefully collated in 1894 by the King's printers, in consultation with the printers of the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, the error in earlier editions of the Prayer Book was corrected. With regard to the omission of the comma after the word "grace," in the passage in the Catechism, it is to be observed that, though the comma appears in the "annexed book," the punctuation of that book is throughout of such a peculiar description that it would, if exactly reproduced in modern type, be inconvenient and confusing. As a matter of fact, the punctuation of different editions of printed Prayer Books has varied considerably, and in this particular case the printers at their consultation found that the practice was by no means uniform. In many editions, going back to early dates, the comma was omitted, in others it was printed. Having in view the great importance of uniformity in such a matter, the printers agreed that the comma should be omitted, so that the interpretation of the sentence should not be prejudiced in any direction, it being clear that the 944 system of punctuation in the "annexed book" is not such as to justify the basing of an argument on the presence or absence of this comma.