apparent inconsistency is perhaps explained by his choice to sometimes adhere to the more venerable judicial canons of interpretation, such as the constitutional avoidance canon. The word "textualism" was first used by Mark Pattison in 1863 to criticize Puritan theology, according to the Oxford English Dictionary. Justice Robert Jackson first used the word "textualism" in a Supreme Court opinion a century later in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer. Australia Textualism was influential in Australia, and was particularly prominent in the interpretative approach of Sir Garfield Barwick. Amendments to the Acts Interpretation Act 1901 have rejected key elements of textualism, stating that statements made in the Second Reading speech by Ministers introducing an Act may be used in the interpretation of that act. Textualism v. purposivism Purposivism is the perspective of statutory interpretation in which the judges should construe statutes to execute their legislative purpose. Textualism is the perspective of statutory interpretation in which the courts should read the words of that statutory text as any ordinary member of congress would have read them. See also Judicial activism Legal positivism Letter and spirit of the law Originalism Traditionalist theology (Islam) References Further reading Solum, Lawrence, Legal Theory Lexicon: Textualism, Legal Theory Blog. T Theories of constitutional interpretation