Who first distinguished between the inerrancy of the Bible and the inerrancy of the original autographs?

It's common these days among those who believe in the [inerrancy* of the Bible](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_inerrancy) to limit the statement to the original manuscripts. For example, the [Chicago Statement](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Statement_on_Biblical_Inerrancy) reads: > We affirm that inspiration, strictly speaking, applies only to the autographic text of Scripture [...]. We further affirm that copies and translations of Scripture are the Word of God to the extent that they faithfully represent the original. [Augustine](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augustine_of_Hippo) apparently saw matters similarly: > If we are perplexed by an apparent contradiction in Scripture, it is not allowable to say, The author of this book is mistaken; but either the manuscript is faulty, or the translation is wrong, or you have not understood. ([Contra Faustum, 11.5](http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/140611.htm)) Who is the first Christian to specifically distinguish between the inerrancy of the copied and/or translated biblical text, and the inerrancy of the original autographs? * Note that I'm defining "inerrancy" broadly, so that it includes both Evangelical and Catholic understandings of the doctrine.