The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1880-10-20

own distorted summary of it. No, what
he declared to be novel was not his sum-
mary, but my lesson, and that showed
conclusively not to be novel but oppor-
tune and timely Somebody disguised
the drift of whole paragraph" but it
was not l.
The second illustration Of these "ethics
of controversy" is found in his denuncia-
ton of me for telling one-sided, I'M
trustworthy story" and "suppressing
facts" in reference to the circumstances
which brought Rufus" and me into cor
respondence. stated what was the sim
pie fact that "Rufus" was the aggressor
in the controversy, and that | entered
the list in self-defence-that the first
ever heard of him was when he accused
me publicly of the odious offence Of garb-
ling. DR.. O'Connell wakes warm over
this, and says: "But did you add, Doc
tor, that he CRufus) had been provoked,
and that you with those others" were
the authors of that provocation? You.
did not, you told one-sided untrustwor-
thy story" etc. Now what does DR..
OConnell refer to as that provocation. -
If he refers to my appending my sigma
ture to tract simply as witness to the
accuracy and fairness of the quotations
contained in it, that was fact that l
would have not suppressed if l could,
and could not if l would. The very rea-
sons that | gave for replying to " Rufus"
was to vindicate myself from the charge
of having certified that garbled extracts
were accurate and fair If that was the
proYocation, never suppressed, conceal
al
why should. Rufus might be pro-
voked at the extracts. He certainly
could not be provoked at me for simply
certifying that they were accurate. He
might be provoked at the manner of their
distribution at Jarratt's Depot. I did
not distribute them there. A man who
simply certifes to the accuracy of a writ
ten or printed document cannot be re-
sponsible for the use that is afterwards
made of it. What "Rufus" charged me
with was "garbling," and for that mali
clous charge there was not shade of a
shadow of provocation in anything that
] had ever done or said and Rufus"
knows, and DR.. O'Connell knows, that
when | said "the assault was made by
Rufus and [ entered the list in self
defence" l stated the simple truth.
had suppressed no " facts necessary to
the fair understanding of the case and
his personal abuse of me, through nearly
half column, founded upon this charge,
Is wanton outrage upon the character
Bishop Keane.
But the most remarkable of all these
illustrations of the Roman Catholic "eth-
les of controversy" is to come vet. He
says towards the conclusion of his article,
And this is not the first time you strove
to stir up trouble and to engender reli-
gious hatred. You remember Bishop
Keane's first lecture and your war-cry
when fair-minded men of even the Pro
testant denomination avowed they could
not see the reason for. the battle-cry. "
The incident to which DIR. O'Connell here
refers was one which awakened so much
feeling at the time that for the honor OF
his own Church, and in the interests OF
peace and good goodwill between Cath
olics and Protestants, it would have been
we'll to let it sleep in oblivion. But as
ne has brought it up and charged me
with all the trouble and hatred then en-
gendered, will give plain, unvarnished
statement of the whole matter, and let
the Christian public Judge for themselves
only prefacing that this statement was
made and published by me at the time
over my own signature in the E1,dev ana
appeal (January 25th, 1879, and was
never, in so far as l know, disputed OF
discredited either publicly or in private
by any one. A lecture had been an.
nounced to be delivered by Bishop Keane
in the Academy of Music in this city, fo1
the benefit of charitable Society. Pro.
testant ministers, and prominent laymen
OF the Protestant Church were invited by
the Committee of Arrangements to seats
on the stage with the lecturer. Assur.
ances were given to some, and perhaps
to all thus invited that there would be
nothing sectarian or controversial in the
lecture. Tickets of admission were car.
ried into the counting rooms and bushes,
Offices of Protestants and offered for sale
and bought under the impression that
there would be nothing sectarian. Com.
plimentary tickets were rendered and &C.
cepted under the same impression, and
when the hall was filled, mainly with Pro.
testants and representatives of the Reform.
ed Churches, who were, by special invita-
ton, on the rostrum under such constraints
OF courtesy as sealed their lips lecture