The Fairmont West Virginian. (Fairmont, W. Va.) 1904-1914, 1909-02-03

iieput alton for v W Draper, q q MIS- HE
sorian d never neard z th a sdldl
| would SOL sadh here q the court ous
remark u; ina Is,ndall and regret that
Draper ever ndoned scleenc &c y Z.
write history t?) n
4 But enough OF these sl'le Issues. To,
make US forget our starting; point, Nj.
MssgraSeshas brought forward every:
thing that he considers offensive t.
Catholics from the Friday abstinence
down ito Halley's comets tale. II $,
tale. however, ne seems how willing
toilet go. No ;fallible, mortal" as he Is
ran muster my augmentation; my
argumentat on. am satisfied, has con-
WINGED not a few of your readers that
Draper cannot. be considered as a his;
torian, let alone the qualifications Of
authentic, celebrated and what not?'
az "a -HI Ill Va
! now once more ask ms. opponent
10 abandon h!sfsepla.llka' tactics an /
either to come back 10 Ills first pos
ton or to manly declare that II Is IN.
tenablc.! ~ u ~; Ss.:,
He asset ted that the institution With
which Cardinal Gibbons It's connected
had in the past administered tseferal
! good sized shocks tolthe, human race.
Against this I entered my emphatic do
nlal. Then said Alrl,MusSrave; "Prove
by.. history that my statement Is not
absolutely true" This ! declined to
ID; THE burden Ok the proof was on MS
shoulders. j. finally made him: realize
that my contention, was according to
The laws Of true logic, He therefore
::.inted at the ln1utsitlon as a proof q
that shock Iasked him TO be precise.
! Then .basing himself. on Draper as.
scrtions. he gave me some figures Of
The executions Of the Spanish Inqui'l-
!. ton. ,i,.,e fs5.a /,
| Now let us remain on this ,snb1.t'.
Il deny: LIST; that the Catholic church
was responsible for those executiJas'
: I'd, that the figures given by 2 Draaer
, are true. To maintain his positions,
.lr. Musgrave must now produce his
proofs against my denial After IS
ttablshing, historically the twoiahe'e
points, he will kindly let us k1'$w
upon which part Of the human 1-.'e
the shock was especially felt. This Is
a part Of the proposition with .wlii'l
ne started. Was that shock Tel. hv
/, the Germans, and English Of the XIV iii
and XvIlth centuries? Was it n't
E rather. by the French OF the XV1"'l
] and XIXth centuries? Or perhaps by
/ the Nyam.Nyams and Hottentoss Of
I Africa? 5.sti1t,:.a ! ls.ft .1ss''
i In producing his proofs. Mr.: Mas
grave must'inot stlfully overlook the
) first principles Of historical criticl5in
" I would have again .ofcnll his 1T
4 lie. Z 10 u =
51ention to tlem. know that he w III
/ rather be untrammelea and that II Is
! very reluctant TO revise his notions Of
7 history; this form of.'mental surg"'y
Is decidedly not Of bis liking. His
persistence to reject .',he elementary
rules Of historical science, would me-.
essarily force us God forblD to s''s'
pect thatihe not only endorses Vol.
tnire's' views on civil and religious lib
erty, but that he also accepts his alsI
torical n,olto:I To repent a slanderous'
statement without ascertaning ~
foundations Is to- be eNc:tatd onlySlY
/. trvincIble ignorance. | cannot adaaf
ignorance. even tinvinciblc,; in the ease
/: Of by moderately humble" opponent.
a Respectfully,
A. BOUTLOU. Rector.
Fairntont, W. Va. Feb. 3H19o9. N
4 " .. r D Id