As has been explained before, the eye readily moves from one ending to a similar ending with a surprising tendency to pursue the course which would lighten labour instead of increasing it.

The cumulative result of such abridgement by omission on the part of successive scribes may be easily imagined, and in fact is just what is presented in Codex B[263].
Besides these considerations, the passages which are omitted, and which we claim to be genuine, bear in themselves the character belonging to the rest of the Gospels, indeed--in Dr.Hort's expressive phrase--'have the true ring of genuineness.' They are not like some which some critics of the same school would fain force upon us[264].

But beyond all,--and this is the real source and ground of attestation,--they enjoy superior evidence from copies, generally beyond comparison with the opposing testimony, from Versions, and from Fathers.] Sec.

2.
The fact seems to be all but overlooked that a very much larger amount of proof than usual is required at the hands of those who would persuade us to cancel words which have been hitherto by all persons,--in all ages,--in all countries,--regarded as inspired Scripture.

They have (1) to account for the fact of those words' existence: and next (2), to demonstrate that they have no right to their place in the sacred page.
The discovery that from a few copies they are away, clearly has very little to do with the question.