66 truly Levitical spirit, would prove it was a very wicked, cruel action! Now, sir, this is not a mere assertion of mine; it is what he, who styles himself a servant of God, a minister of the meek, the benevolent Jesus, has himself informed you. He stated in his communication of the 7th instant, that a Universalist told him, and several others who were present, that the surplus proceeds of my report were to be given for some charitable purpose. "This he, the Universalist, said by way of recommending the book to our patronage. Knowing that the tender mercies of the wicked are cruel, the plan did not meet my approbation!" This is the language of a self-styled" minister of Christ: I have borrowed Mr. M'Calla's expression "self-styled," and now give you my authority for applying it to him. The scriptures declare that "If a man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his." Has the Spirit of Christ been manifested by this reverend gentleman, in his unprovoked and unfounded attempt to asperse iny charac ter as a reporter, without producing a solitary proof that he had any other ground for it than that I differed with him in point of faith; unless indeed it be, that as he is going to publish the discussion himself, he wishes my book out of the way, to make room for his own, reasoning as the Ambitious Alexander, that as the earth cannot bear two suns, neither can the christian world bear two books. This indeed may be the sole cause of all his spleen, but the man who could descend to such meanness to accomplish his purpose must have an understanding as beclouded as his conscience is depraved. But admitting all Mr. M'Calla has stated about "conspirations," "engaged reporters," and "deputy publishers," to be true, what will it amount to, if I can prove that my report is faithful, satisfactory and impartial? This I shall now do, and let the public decide between mere assertion and positive proof. In his communication of the 7th instant, he says, It is evident that the first plan adopted by these partners in iniquity was for Mr. Jennings to keep himself out of view, and to pass off their spurious minutes as an authentic report approved by the moderators." Now to shew how regardless this man is of truth, and of my reputation, I have by particular request obtained from these very moderators certificates of the correctness of my report, which I here insert: From the Rev. Dr. Ely. At the request of Mr. Jennings, I would state, that I have not been able, since the publication of his "Minutes of a Dis-` cussion," &c. to read more than fifty pages of the work, which is less than one sixth part of the whole. So soon as I can find time to read the whole, I shall freely communicate, at his request, my opinion of the same. He does not pretend, in every sentence, to give the words of the speakers, and therefore they cannot be considered as responsible for any thing contained in the Minutes, until they admit themselves to have spoken it, or else are proved to have uttered the same. For my part, I wish the Minutes may be attentively read, which will prepare inquirers for the subsequent perusal of Mr. M'Calla's expected publication on the controversy; and for the establishment of their own minds on this important question, whether there is any punishment for impenitent sinners after the present life, or not? During the debate of Tuesday afternoon, July 13th, I was absent; so that I can only express an opinion on the first forty pages, and the short speech attributed to myself, on pages 234 and 235, concerning which I am free to declare, that I discover in these forty-two pages, so for as my memory serves me, no important error or omission. I uttered more than Mr. Jennings has recorded, and the other speakers may have done the same. Had I attempted, after speaking, to give my own words, I do not know that I should have been literally and verbally accurate, any more than the stenographer. I did not intend to convey the idea, nor can I say that Mr. Jennings has attributed it to me, that Iwould have no objection to hear Mr. Kneeland preach, under any circumstances, which would imply, that I thought him a minister of the gospel, or of the true religion; for I would not, after knowing his sentiments, receive him into my house in the character of a servant of Christ. As a man, I will show him any kindness in my power; but I conceive myself positively forbidden to countenance any one, in any manner, as a minister of the gospel, who brings an essentially different gospel from that contained in the bible. After all, I think the fortytwo pages, of which I now give my opinion, as just a statement of what was uttered in my hearing, as could be expected of any stenographer, who should attempt to follow men of ready utterance, in a debate of TWENTY HOURS. Philadelphia, October 12, 1824. EZRA STILES ELY. It will be remembered that these forty pages, to the correctness of which the doctor has certified, contain the greater part of those very three speeches and a fragment of a speech attributed to W.L M'Calla, and which he in the Gazette in the most positive terms disowned! The speech of Dr. Ely, having nothing to do with the argument, I did not attempt to give in full as delivered, but have merely given an outline of it, and this I submitted to the doctor for his correction, before I sent it to the press; the only alteration he made was substituting week-day for any day in the week: yet this outline of his speech, corrected and approved by himself, Mr. M'Calla calls "an invented address," which I put into the mouth of one of the moderators! Let him settle this point with Dr. Ely and his own conscience. As to the correctness of the remainder of the report, I beg leave to present you with the following certifi cates, though I am fully aware they do not agree with the unfounded assertions of Mr. M'Calla, nor will they "go clearly to prove that this man is essentially deficient in skill, or in integrity as a reporter," as the truly christian spirited Mr. M'Calla basely insinuated in his last communication. The following have been selected from those received. From the reverend William Hogan, late pastor of St. Mary's Church, South Fourth-street, and the reverend William Morse, pastor of the Second Universalist Church, Callowhill street. To the public. We, the subscribers, hereby certify, that we have examined the "Minutes" of the "Theological Discussion" between the reverend Abner Kneeland and the reverend William L. M'Calla, which were taken in short hand by Mr. R. L. Jennings, and, in our opinion, they contain a true and faithful report of that discussion, without any omissions or additions affecting the arguments of either of the disputants. WILLIAM HOGAN, Philadelphia, October 13, 1824. Certificate from the reverend Abner Kneeland, pastor of the first Independent Church of Christ, called Universalist, Lombard-street. Having carefully examined the report of the late "Discussion" between the reverend William L. M'Calla and myself, as taken in short hand and published by Mr. Jennings, I hereby certify, that the arguments are essentially the same as delivered by us, in all their parts, together with the style and manner in which they were delivered: and although in many places I can perceive some verbal difference, yet, as far as my memory serves me, there is nothing added or omitted which in any manner affects the arguments on either side. ABNER KNEELAND. Philadelphia, October 16th, 1824. Certificate from D. Francis Condie, M. D. Mr. R. L. Jennings, Dear sir-I received your request this morning, and in reply, beg leave to state, that I attended during the whole of the discussion between the reverend A. Kneeland and reverend W. L. M'Calla, on the subject of the punishment for sin, part of which I myself took down: I have perused with attention "Minutes" of that discussion, as published; and have the pleasure of certifying to their correctness. You have not only presented every argument offered on both sides of the question, your but, what is always a difficult task, have retained in the report the peculiar style of each party, and most generally their very words. I may further add, that those with whom I have conversed, in relation to the work, as well those who oppose as those who believe in the doctrine held by the Universalist Churches, have all borne testimony to its correctness. Yours, D FRANCIS CONDIE. South Fifth-street, October 13th, 1824. The reverend Dr. Wylie, of the Presbyterian Church, Eleventh-street, has given me permission to certify to the following effect That from motives of curiosity rather than approbation, he attended at the church in Lombard-street, during the debate between the reverend Abner Kneeland and the reverend W. L. M'Calla, three times, in the whole about two hours and a half, and although he has seen in the public papers, that the report is not acknowledged by the Rev. Mr. M'Calla to be correct, yet truth obliges him to declare, that he can not discover the least difference, even in expression, between what is contained in the report and what he heard delivered by the speakers when at church. More certificates of the correctness of the report have been received, but the above, it is presumed, will be considered fully satisfactory. R. L. JENNINGS. I have trespassed, sir, largely upon your columns, and upon the patience of your readers, but it is with the hope that this is the last time that I shall trouble you on this subject, for Mr. M.Calla must convince me that the ears of those gentlemen, who have certified to the correctness of my report, though perhaps not so long as his own, are not capable of receiving sounds, and their memories not capable of retaining them, before I shall consider myself under any necessity of answering any more of his publications, having here given sufficient proof to satisfy any unprejudiced mind of the correctness of my report, and it is presumed that even Mr. M'Calla, wide as he ranges in the field of bare assertion, will not feel himself at liberty to state that the respectable members of his own church, or the others, whose integrity is equally unquestionable, are my partners in iniquity, nor that they have given their names to aid in " passing off spurious minutes as an authentic report." But if he should be disposed to say so, let his future communications be addressed to them, and not indirectly to Yours respectfully, R. L. JENNINGS. No. 26. FROM THE FRANKLIN GAZETTE, OF OCT. 23. DEBATE ON UNIVERSALISM. Although there was no reason, from the beginning, to hope that such a character as Mr. Jennings would make a fair report of my argument as far as it went, my apprehensions on this subject were not, to the best of my recollection, publicly expressed until after his first number made its appearance: yet he has repeatedly published that Mr. M'Calla "denounced the report altogether," "before he saw it," before he saw a line of it." This is the burthen of his song in yesterday's Gazette. Mr. Kneeland also has published that I denounced the report as altogether spurious. Some of their followers have taken this for granted, and used it with that industry which might be expected. Mr. Kneeland and Mr. Jennings refer, I suppose, to a communication for the Franklin Gazette of August 5, a few days before the appearance of the first number. In this I said that I was, 66 contrary to a written agreement, compelled to a premature close, and afterwards denied an opportunity of finishing." For this reason, his intended, and as yet unseen work, is called a spurious production, This is done in a note with express reference to what had gone before. Although Mr. Jennings has said that I denounced it altogether, and Mr. Kneeland as altogether spurious, this is wholly without foundation. The word altogether was added by themselves, contrary to my plain meaning. It has been already shown that Mr. Kneeland wrote something much more serious than this over my name, without my knowledge or permission. I hope soon to show that Mr. Jennings is his promising disciple. If either of these persons were to issue proposals for publishing a complete New Testament, while yet they intended to omit what they call the disputed books, and many chapters and verses of other books, I should, after such information, pronounce it a spurious production, without waiting to see it. I would not call it alto get her spurious, because I could not tell whether it might not be genuine as far as it went. But these Universalist preachers would think it quite justifiable to alter my expressions until they would answer their purpose. They intended to publish for my whole argument what I knew, and what they knew, to be only a part. This would injure its integrity as much as if they were to corrupt it by interpolations. I therefore pronounced it spurious, and gave this as a reason. This was correct in language, and true in fact. The community understood my meaning, and so did those who perverted my words. Mr. Kneeland pretends that Mr. Jennings is the sole publisher of these Minutes, without being in the least under his control. Suppose that I had denounced it as altogether spurious, without |