Vermont telegraph. [volume] (Brandon [Vt.]) 1828-1843, 1838-04-04

2 " tel our opinion. We live IN an age OF
I. telling" and this would be no disparage-
ment to US, provided we were cautious not
10 tell for certainty, what, at the best, we
can only guess at II must be an hon
est opponent" (and have always designed
to be, Notwithstanding all that has been
said to the contrary must say, lido not
know trhdt the tioo aOitnesses are. Well,
then, says one, "you cannot tell what they
are not" Suppose brother Murray should
tell US in his next paper, that Paul was
MeLchizedec, and in proof, should tell US
that Paul was very good man, so was
Melchizedec-lived to be somewhat in
years, so did Melchizedec, &c. &c. Would
you believe it? Believe it, why no. Mel
chizedec was dead, (if he was a man, a
thousand years before Paul was born. Not
so fast kind friend. You must not object
10 brother Murray's assertion, unless you
can tell who Melchizedec was. Come out,
then, like an "honest opponent" and tell
who Melchizedec was, and eve will then
see how you can combat error" Should
give my opinion respecting the two witness
es, there would be, at least, thousand and
one" for, presume there have already been
a thousand contradictory ones given. 1t is
by no means certain, that the two witnesses
have erer yet lived. do not say, however,
that they have not, for do not know. l
am free to acknowledge, with Peter, that
there are some things in the Bible, "hard
10 be understood" and when find per-
son, who, to the neglect of plain commands
spends Is or 90 years, trying to make all
these hard things soft, l am reminded o.
the farmers "wall layer" who was sen
into field full Of loose stones, to build :
certain piece of wall. He began "pryiDg
up" some suitable ones for his use, ant
found jest beneath the surface, one Of $ ole
hature's ribs" which time, with all hi
o earthquakes and thunderbolts, had not beer
able to fracture; and here he spent long
summers day, drilling, prying and beating
with such success as might be expected. A
night the farmer walked into the field tc
see how the "wall prospered." and thu:
accosted his laborer: "Well, friend, how
goes the wall to-day 2" "Why, really
: hav'nt built much wall to-day: could'n
= get up this stone" "Get up this stone,-
l there are stones enough already up, tt
y build every rod of wall need,-why, then
t have you not used them .frst?" "Why,
$ thought this ledge, if could get it to pieces
: would make such excellent foundatio
d stone-besides should show my skill Il
e stone digging" "Your Skill Sir, woul
be shown. much more to your credit an
- my profit, should you do as you are directed
and work where you can effect something :
here Sir is your money for the day war
no more such "wall layers"
could not help being little amused
on reading my oppon ent's reply to my r.
-! marks on the falling of France. He tel
us, that, unless "all men have been decor
" ed, it did fall from kingly government
q republication Popery to Atheism" g.
10 Now as have always been pretty stron
~ republican, have long had notion tn
h. falling from "kingly government to r
ri public" is falling up hill, and after all II
he light my opponent has thrown upon it,
I'd really looks so now. Perhaps, howeve
I'd some "royalisl" can set me right. Respec
ne ing Popery and Atheism, have only
ed say that, so far as l can see, their height
ch about equal
IT, Perhaps it will be expected, that shoul
at at Least, reply to my opponents broad, u
~ qualified declaration, that "Mr. Brow,
was my writer" or, in other words, thai
did not indite the articles, published oV
- my name. But these declarations "pa
~ by me like the idle wind which | heed moi
vi For, first, it matters not, with regard
ne finding the truth, whether wrote them
ID some other person. Secondly, admitti
ng that wrote them, and they should, gene
We ally, be thought refutation Of my OPP
10 nent's theory, should not consider t
D." public under any special obligation to st
nv their business, 10 weave me laurels for n
IN: victory. And lastly, if l did not wr
of them, may possibly redeem my charac'
v" from some of his kind charges. There
nd one light, however, in which consider
-ho statements valuable. They prore j
e, what, on reviewing his book, l felt in du
Id, bound TO say, viz: that he is prone to st'
the things for facts, of which he has not So
the cient proof. But for this trait in his CHI
sss acter, l fully believe, the public never wor
=, have seen his "lectures." No careful a
avs judicious writer would bring such unqu'
not fed charges against his opponent with'
and positire proof have, therefore, only