Many manuscripts have been discovered and examined by Editors since the Authorized Version of 1611; and when the Committee of Revisers undertook a new translation they also had to determine what Greek text they should follow: in other words they had to determine what they should translate, before they could settle how to translate it.
For the first question they had a rule laid down for them, namely, "To introduce as few alterations as possible into the Text of the Authorized Version consistently with faithfulness." But they have been openly charged with entirely disregarding this rule. They were also bound by one of their rules to note in the margin all the alterations of the text which they adopted; but this they in no way carried out. Of course in many cases the alterations of the text are what all modern editors are agreed upon, and how much safer it would have been to have followed such a rule.
Another thing to be lamented is the many places in the margin where they throw needless uncertainty upon the text by such remarks as "many ancient authorities read" something different.
As to the translation itself, there can be no doubt that in many places the revised version is for the better; but many persons competent to judge have not been slow to denounce it as on the whole unworthy to represent what God caused to be written as His word, and one of sound judgment has said he believes that no person could habitually use the Revised Version without damaging his soul.