Therefore, actual citation of separate clauses, being undesigned and fortuitous, is much more valuable than omission arising from what cause soever.] [2.

The reviewer says that 'all four clauses are read by both texts,' i.e.in St.Matthew and St.Luke, and appears to have been unaware as regards the present purpose of the existence of the fifth clause, or half-clause, in St.Matthew.Yet the words--[Greek: huper ...

ton diokonton humas] are a very label, telling incontestibly the origin of many of the quotations.

Sentences so distinguished with St.Matthew's label cannot have come from St.Luke's Gospel.

The reviewer has often gone wrong here.