Discussion by the above-named gentlemen was held in the Disciple church at McArthur, Ohio, commencing Monday evening, January 6, and continuing twelve sessions of two hours each. Elder McDowell affirmed the divine origin of the Book of Mormon and the respectability of its teachings, for eight sessions. Elder Bridwell denied. Elder Bridwell affirmed the scripturalness of the Disciple or Christian Church for four sessions, while Elder McDowell denied. The same propositions were canvassed the same number of sessions, and, in same order, at Creola, five miles distant, in the Saints' chapel, beginning January 20. At the McArthur debate, a Mr. Darby, lawyer, acted as moderator for Mr. Bridwell, Elder S. W. L. Scott for Bro. McDowell, while the prosecuting attorney, Mr. Edwards, presided as chairman. The debate began, continued, and ended, on a high plane. Character was not en evidence. The work of Joseph Smith was on trial. Mr. Bridwell is a recognized scholar of shrewdness and ability. And it seems that the lesson is being slowly learned, that principles should be investigated, from their advocates. The theory of the opposition on the first proposition is, Joseph Smith possessed Boudinot's work, also Ethan Smith's work, both of which treat the subject of Israel in America, and Caleb Atwater's condensed idea of archreology, and from these the theory of the Book of Mormon was spun. It was argued by Mr. Bridwell that Ethan Smith and Boudinot quoted the same prophecies which are used by Latter Day Saints and their works antedate Joseph Smith. He had the very air ladened with "buried cities, extinct civilizations, Indians descendants of the ten lost tribes," etc., at the time Joseph was concocting the Book of Mormon. He read recommendations of Ethan Smith's work from points all around Palmyra, New York, circling Joseph Smith, but Mr. Bridwell did not, nor could he, prove that Joseph Smith had the book in his possession. Solid matter presented by Elder McDowell pulverized this theory. He informed his opponent that the theory advanced was subversive of all previous theories, in that it makes Joseph Smith at the age of fourteen years, interested in and developing advanced literary and scientific facts, beyond the ability of the scholarly men of his day, instead of being the lazy, stupid, hat-peeping, money-digging, sheep-thief, ignoramus and fraud as he is so generally characterized. The theory of the opposition makes Joseph Smith a literary man with a library consisting of books of archaeological, theological, ethnological, geological, and scientific comprehensiveness, worth thousands of dollars, bought with the money (?) taken in by his mother, washing for other people! If, then, so highly educated and polished, what becomes of such charges as "ignorant," "stupidity," "superstitious," etc.?

But to show points of dissimilarity between Boudinot, Ethan Smith, Atwater, et al., the following was exhibited on a chart and hung on the wall.

[Chart comparing the Book of Mormon with Elias Boudinot and Ethan Smith]

This, to say the least, was a poser, and I doubt if the opposition will deny the confusion which its explanation entailed. Our opinion is that this theory of opposition to the Book of Mormon is the coming one, and we give the ministry the benefit of this chart, and per consequence, all will see just how Joseph Smith copied (?) the theory into (?) the Book of Mormon. Elder McDowell presented a par excellent argument on archreology, and while the opposite side admitted the finding of buried cities, of course the semi-barbarous nations, conquered by the Spaniards, were the architects. While admitting the finding of mastodon bones (species cureloms and cumoms) they were here in the glacial periods 8,000 B. C. Elder McDowell gave heavy blows along here, and the theory of evolution wilted. Mr. Bridwell made a very plausible theory. The most recent archaeologist's reports were introduced by him, but McDowell showed the inconsistencies and contradictions of the witnesses introduced. At first, Mr. Bridwell's authorities neutralized the Priest-Stephens-Catherwood and Baldwin evidence, but by the time Bro. McDowell concluded his analysis the star witnesses did not vary from the fundamental facts as set forth by the prior archaeologists.

. . .

The debate will do good. Fine expressions were heard for our side. There are a grand class of Saints in that country, and the "quarry from whence they were hewn" will doubtless furnish more splendid building material.

Ever willing to give reasons for hope entertained,

S. W. L. SCOTT.