The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1899-01-29
INGERS0LL HITS BACK
EXPLAINS WHY HE NEVER TOOK UP
MINISTERIAL CHALLENGES.
Like Bob Fitzsimmons, He Thinks
Men who Want to Debate with Him
should Go and Make a Reputation.


in favor of what is called expansion that
is to say, / am in favor of the growth of the
Republic. The more people our flag can
wave over the better, in my judgment, 1t
will be for the people am for keeping
Porto Rico That island belonged te Spain.
The inhabitants were not in rebellion. 1t
was captured by us, and the people there
wish to come under the government and pro-
lection Of this country. So / am in favor of
keeping Porto Rico. I want Cuba, if the
Cubans want US but 1 would not conquer
the island. L would not by force annex or
establish any protectorate over that island.
I think we should at present see to it that
life, liberty and property are safe in Cuba,
and when the people of that island snail eX-
press their preference, and in so doing shall
establish a government, then, in my judg-
ment, it is our duty to recognize that gov
eminent But if the people of Cuba desire
to be under the protection of the United
States, then l am in favor of taking that
island. My position in regard to the Philip
pines is exactly the same. l do not wish to
persuade them with bullet or bayonet, with
shot or she'll If the people Of those islands
want to be protected by this country, then
1 am in favor of establishing such a gov
eminent, but not otherwise. l do not wish
to enslave any people, anywhere. for any
purpose At the same time L am for eXpan-
sion. 1 want this country to civilze the
Filpinos, to unteach them what Spain has
taught-make them, if possible, capable OF
self-government; in other words, do them
all the good we can. Now, that is my eX-
act position. l see no constitutional dith-
culties in the way. We want a position in
the Pacific. We want our share of trade
with the East. In other words, we want to
take care of ourselves. like to feel that
the Republic is strong and her blood cir
culates full ard free in her veins, reaching
to her finger tips OF course, along with
power comes responsibility but 1 think we
have the sense to use the power and the
courage TO take the responsibility.
CALLS HALL NO GENTLEMAN.
The colonel was shown a copy of the
Journal containing the challenge alleged to
have been issued by Rev. George f. Hall,
of Decatur, III. lie replied:
when L was in Decatur the other day
challenge was published in a paper there
signed by minister by the name of Hall.
He did not challenge me himself, but, ac-
cording to the chanenge. was to find some
man to meet me. 1t was easy TO see, from
reading the challenge, that Mr.. Hall was
not a gentleman. The challenge itself was
full of low and vulgar things. If what he
sef-respect could have challenged me, and,
after reading it, l could not answer it in
the same spirit in which it was written
without losing my own Self-reSpect. All l
know about this Mr.. Hall is what he dis
closes of his character in the challenge.
SUCH man, in my judgment, IS not worth
debating WITH not worth noticing in any
way, and so L left the challenge I'M
answered.
'.As to the charge of plagiarism which
was made by this man. He asks this ques-
ton: Did you not allow a temperance
speech, taken from DR.. Gums Family
Physician to be attributed to you for
years without any effort at correction? The
facts are these: In the defense of Mr..
Mum at Chicago many years ago / made
q few remarks about the prejudice against
alcohol, Mum being on trial charged with
detrauding the government OF taxes on
whisky. This paragraph was published and
Somebody don't know who-stole the
paragraph about alcohol, and also stole
paragraph from DR.. Gums Family Ply
sician, put them both together and treated
them as his own Some friends of mine
who had read the paragraph on alcohol took
1t for granted that the entire speech had
been stolen from me, and published in some
paper that it was mine. l Immediately
wrote to the editor, telling him that the
first part of the speech was mine, but that
the second part was not, that l could not
have written the second part, it must have
been written by somebody with an entirely
different religious belief from mine. Still
the charge was made by enemies that had
uttered that paragraph and claimed it as
giving the paragraph that.I did say, also
the paragraph that | did not say, and at
the same time offering 81 600 reward for
any one who would show that had ever
written or uttered the second paragraph or
had ever claimed it as my own. SO much
for the temperance speech.
Mr.. Hail also makes another charge
that Philadelphia paper published in par
allel columns beautiful selection in blank
verse from the pen of foreign poet, quoted
by me as original over the dead body of
child The truth is this: [ did make a few
remarks AT the grave of a child in Wash
ington, and they were published and after
ward some one published in a Philadelphia
paper the remarks l had delivered, dividing
the lines into blank verse, and saying that
it was a poem that had been written long
ago Immediately wrote to the editor of
the paper and offered reward of 81 900 10
any one who would show that the poem
mentioned was written before the delivery
Of my remarks by anybody in the whole
world. 1t may be useless to say that the
reward was never claimed
so Mr.. Hall says my Mistakes of Moses
was garbled from rare book entitled Evil
dences against Christianity published in
England in 1919. All need say about this is
that l never saw the book that he mentions
and if he will show the book, and if it then
appears that my Mistakes of Moses was
taken from it, will make DR.. Hall pres
ent of $1,000.
ON PLAGIARISM
HE also charges that portions of my lee
ture called The Gods was plagiarized from
Inc LSNldlHdHs Dy t1ODDeS, from Inc RulnS
of Empires by Volney. from Voltaire's
Encyclopedia and from the System of Ma
ture, by D'Alenbert. My answer to this IS
first, that 1 never had the pleasure of read
ing The Leviathan, by Hobbies; second, that
there is nothing in the Ruins of Empires,
by Volney, like my lecture on The Gods;
third, that 1 never saw Voltaire's 'Encyclo-
pedia;' fourth, that there is nothing, so
far as l know, written by Votaire in any
respect like The Gods fifth, that The
Systems of Nature was not written by
D'Alembert, but by DHolbach, and sixth
that there is nothing IN any of the books
mentioned that could have assisted me in
any way in writing the lecture on The
Gods
These charges of plagiarism. after all.
are the compliments of enemies. They paw
to my writings an unconscious compliment
when, IN their meanness and malice they
say that l could not have written them.
Why could i not have written them? There
Is only one answer. They are too good, too
philosophc, too we'll written.
1T is true that / have been CHALLENGED
by many people, and il is also true that l
have never had a debate with any one of
these challengers. / was challenged by Rabbi
Brown, of Peoria, a man Of no standing. OF
no character and of no sense. l was chal-
lenged by Clark Braden, who is also a man
without character and without honesty and
besides a man without ability. Whether I
was challenged by Rev. Aaron Walker of
kokOmo. Ind, or not 1 do not remember
but l am perfectly willing to admit that I