The Evening critic., 1882-05-09
COL. R. G. INGERsoLL DECLINES
To Accept the challenge Given ny
Professor Thomas Mitchell. Of
BroekiyD, n. ". For n Public

BroekiyD, n. ". For Public
Debate.
10 the Ediior Of The EyeR,ag critic!
1t Will be remembered that on April 30 Mr..
Mitchell handed to the editor OF the Nd,ioaal
ReIubAcaH, and he published, the following;
A CHALLENGE
TO COLONEL ROBERT q. ISGERsoLL FROM A
CHRISTIAN MINISTER.
TO he kdttor Of tie Republican,.
In your issue OF the 18th instant are found
the following words OF Robert @. Ingcrsoli
"Nor does any priest dare TO douy or rofute
tho arguments have put forth" In response
will you please publish the following. We
hereby challenge Robert q. Ingersol TO a
public debate, TO be held In the city OF WASH
ington, ID. c., speaking alternately from the
same platform each evening until one of the
parties backs down. The principal subjects for
the discussion TO be-'Is there personal
GodP 'Did He create the world and Its In
habltantsg' WAS the work done In six literal
days?' 'Aro the Scriptures His inspired
words?' Docs science cOrroborate the Scrip
turo statements of the origin of the world and
the food2' DO the Scriptures impose incon-
sistent duties OF inculcate evil practlces?'
We take the Blblc side, and King James
version, without note, comment or marginal
reading" An early reply is necessary. For
an Interview, address THOMAS MITCHELL,
Brooklyn, n. Y. April "a, 1892.
The challenge not being accepted through
the Republican, as was requested on
the following ISSUE. our reporter OBJ.
tained from Professor Mitchell the
following Information upon the subject.
Has Colonel Ingersoll accepted your cha lenge
and have you seen him in regard to It? In an.
swer to the first question he has not, and to the
second We have seen him and he has positively
declined. VIII you please state the substance
Of tho interview? on Friday morning, May g,
we called on Colonel Ingersoll at his residence,
We asked him If he had seen the challenge, at
the same time handing him copy, which he
read aloud and asked: swell, what do you
want me TO do?' We replied, "ro consent to
hold the debate;" to which he replied, 81 will
n pekp1. tSXNbV will T.. fa I ~
the want of timcg" He answered, "No, have
plenty of time, but do not know you" We
answered, "Nor did we know you until very
lately" We agreed, however, that this was
small matter, and the ability to dis
cuss the subject did not depend upon
it. We remarked that we were known,
being the author of q number Of works,
the last Of which is entitled ''Cosmogony,"
and handed him the printed opinions of the
press upon its merits, which, as Its title
indicates, discusses the science and philoso-
ply of the origin Of the world and Its inhabit.
ants. These opinions embrace a very respect.
able portion OF the press of the country, and
are very decided upon the ability with which
these subjects are handled. We also handed
him printed circular bearing the testimony
of our ability to meet Mr.. Ingersoll in debate
of two of the officers of the Manhattan Liberal
Club of New York city, the most intelligent
body of skepticS in the world, before whom
we lectured on biblical criticism, they selecting
the subject. He glanced over these and said
| nothing more about our not being known. He
| then began to be personal, saying 1t was not
| gentlemanly to publish this challenge in the
| papers, and that we should have come to him
and talked the matter over privately, and that
we did this for the purpose of gaining noto-
riety and making money. This motive we
denied, he replying, 81 am wise and can see
this TO which we reJoined, "Yes, so am wise
and can see that you are mistaken" We might
| have added and would have done so had 1t not
| been in his house, that perhaps nlnety-flye
| per cent. of those who have heard or read Mr..
Ingersolrs lectures say that he does not be
lieye what he says, and that he only does 1t to
make money.
ya ia in, Ia. hot ,,a
used gentlemanly II we called on you. We
| then explained to him the reason which in
| duced us to give the challenge first
through the press, which was that by bringing
| public pressure to bear upon you 1t would be
stronger motive and more likely to induce
| you 10 accept 1t and not refuse both courses as
| you have now done. He then asked what
| church we represented. We replied none, but
| held ourselves responsible to prove the posi-
| tions in our challenge to be true. We then
asked him If he would the debate pro-
| vided four or five Of the clergymen of the
| most prominent denominations would indorse
| our effort 10 meet him in the proposed manner,
| TO which he made no reply. He then opaned
his g1eQtest fort, Tidicuie, by saying &" You are
child Of God, and want to save my soul" We
answered, Yes, we are child of God, and
| would like to have your soul saved, but your
soul, whether saved or lost, Is OF but very little
| your work and save the multitude"
| There were others present, and we
| do not think the case Will furnish n
| story for the Colonel to tell In public of an
| other minister over whom he obtained an
| early triumph. If Colonel Ingersoll really de-
| sres to know the truth, why will he not dis
| cuss these questions before the same audi
| ences? He knows that the great mass of those
| who come to hear him will not come TO hear
| his opponents, whereas in debate from the
| same platform they would be compelled to
| hear both sides, and this would expose his
| shallow thought and superficial reasoning
| upon God, Christ Scripture and science, and
| put an end TO the dreadful work Of using these
| grand themes for money-making specula-
ton. Everybody can see that the trinlng
things he assigned as reasons why he would
not accept this challenge have no weight,
while the real one was the fear of his money
making craft being injured, and the refusal is
simply the act OF a moral coward; hrt 1t will
prove the next best thing TO having the debate
itself TO cripple his Influence for future evil