119 
better than I do, that objectors see two interwoven incoherent narratives in 
the story of J oseph, which is a matter that I have said I would not enter 
into, but will leave the answer on the basis of the results of archaeological 
investigation ? Well, these writers I have referred to tell our little children 
how to distinguish the one story from the other, that the one was written in 
the interests of the men of Judah, but that all that which we are accustomed 
to admire in the character of Joseph, both in behalf of our children and our- 
selves, has been cooked up as an arri'ere jpensee , to magnify the tribe of 
Ephraim ; that the Joseph of that lovely story was an invention, and 
that the only meaning of the word J oseph was the tribe ; only they 
have projected backwards, if I may say so, and endeavoured to account 
for the greatness of the tribe of Ephraim by an ancestral glory which 
never existed. I have stated in the plainest way I can this theory of theirs, 
and I ask Mr. Eow, or I would ask him if he were still here, whether he 
does not agree with me that there is sufficient warranty for my saying with 
David — “What have I now done?” “ Is there not a cause?” (Applause.) 
I am very thankful to have heard what our friend from India has said. 
I have been greatly concerned about the condition of India, and it is not 
without reference to providing a handbook of historical materials and refe- 
rences for such controversies as these in the distant parts of the earth, that I 
have put together the paper I have read. I may add that I shall be only 
too thankful if it can be of any service, and I should be happy to help to 
put it into any form that may have the effect of rendering it more generally 
available for circulation abroad. (Hear, hear.) 
The meeting was then adjourned. 
VOL. XV. 
K 
