The Sun.
London, England, 1859-07-07 00:00:00

TILE BIBLE

'LING

On Monday next, Mr. Baines, M.P., is to ask
the Home Secretary, " Whether it is the intention
of her Majesty's Government, on the expiration of
the patent of the Queen's printer for England and
Wales, on the 21st of January, 1860, to propose the
renewal of that patent, so far as it relates to the
printing of Bibles and ',Testaments, or any restric-
tion on the free printing of the Holy Scriptures."
In these days of free trade, most people will be
surprised to learn that the printing firm of Eyre
and Spottiswoode, and 'che Universities of Oxford
and Cambridge, are the only persons and bodies
who may print Bibles in England. The patent
was granted in the reign of George the Fourth,
and is very stringent;, for, that nothing what-
soever may be done " whereby the profits which
may accrue " to the patentees may be diminished,
it forbids " all and sing ular the subjects of us, our
heirs and successors, whatsoever and wheresoever
abiding, and all others whatsoever," to print " any
Bibles or New Testaments in the English tongue,
or any translation, with notes or without notes," or
" to import or cause to be imported, sell, or cause to
be sold, any books , volumes, or works what-
soever in the Englisli tongue, or in the English
tongue mixed with any other tongue whatsoever—
the right of printing which is vested in the patentees
—" under the penalties and forfeitures by the laws
and statutes of this realm in that behalf made and
provided." So that not only any one who may
reprint the existing edition, but anyone publishing
a new translation, or a commentary, or a polyglot,
is at the mercy of the patentees, who may at once
drag him into the Court of Chancery for the offence.
It is an important fact, that the same restriction
formerly existed both in Ireland and Scotland, but
that it has now been abolished in those countries.
In Ireland, in 1794, the patentee applied to the Irish
Court of Chancery to restrain a printer from pub-
lishing an edition of the Scriptures ; but Lord
Chancellor Clare declared that " he could not con-
ceive that the king had any prerogative to grant a
monopoly as to Bibles for the instruction of man-
kind in revealed relig,ima ;" and from that day the
Irish patent became a nullity.
In Scotland a lady and gentleman held the patent,
but in. 1837 a committee of the House of Commons
recommended that the patent should not be renewed,
and that " the people of Scotland should have the
advantage of the competition which the free intro-
duction of Bibles and Testaments" from England
will afford. The result of the non-renewal of the
patent was most decisive—not only in the lowering
of the price of Bibles in Scotland, but in England
also, so that the prices of Spottiswoode's lists,
which in November, 1840, amounted to £2O ls. 6d.,
had fallen in February, 1841, to £9 14s. 5d., or
about one-half !
The impression that the existence of the mono-
poly secures correctness is erroneous, inasmuch as
the patentees are under no obligation to print cor-
rectly, while they are secured against competition.
In fact, some of the " authorised" editions have
contained many, and some curious, blunders. One
old edition omitted the word " not" in the seventh
commandment; another called the parable of the
vineyard "the parable of the vinegar," and so was
known as the " vinegar edition." It was also
stated before the House of Commons committee
that 12,000 errors had been found in one edition
alone !

It will rest on the patentees to show why they
should continue to enjoy so extraordinary and in-
defensible a monopoly, and all who would advocate
any restrictions on Bible printing to prove why
the sacred Scriptures should be " protected" as no
other volume is, or needs to be.