We have seen that James Murray formed a transnational network of OED collaborators, and, by actively seeking words from written sources around the world, he widened the lexicographic net to include words of the world which his contemporaries – OUP superiors, consultants, sub-editors, and reviewers – often judged too ‘barbarous’ or ‘outlandish’ for an English dictionary. This history shows that Murray believed that these words were part of the English language, and therefore deserved a place in an English dictionary. But how high a priority for Murray was their inclusion? When pushed to excise certain entries in order to save space or time, would Murray delete these entries before other subsets of the vocabulary? One way of gauging editorial priorities is to look at annotations on dictionary proofs. An editor’s final changes and edits can be used as a barometer of his/her priorities, prejudices, and attitudes. With respect to foreign words, we know from Murray that he often found it difficult to decide on inclusion. Add to this the pressure that he was under to work faster, to save space, and to exclude words considered too ‘outlandish’ for an English dictionary, and one might expect foreign words to be among the first deletions on dictionary proofs. However, an inspection of the extant dictionary proofs for letters E, F, G, and L has shown no such tendency.

The proofs show that loanwords and World Englishes were no more likely to be excised than any other subset of vocabulary. This only demonstrates, however, that words from outside Britain were no less valued than other words; it does not necessarily imply that they were more valued than any other subset of vocabulary. While it may never be possible to gauge whether these words had priority or extra value in OED1 editing policies and practices, it is possible to gauge how passionate Murray was about their inclusion by seeing his reaction to the suggestion that his coverage of these words be taken by another dictionary.