in his line of debating, I soon discovered that his
scholarship and reading were both very limited, exceedingly so; and I
intentionally widened the range of controversy more than was my wont,
to see what he would do--and he was completely lost. His forte in
debating is wit and ridicule, by which he gets his opponents angry and
confused. He tried this hard for three days, till he rendered himself
offensive to all. It was rumored that his brethren then held a council
and told him that this must be stopped; that he must debate the
questions on their merits or quit; that he was bringing the cause into
disrepute. The county paper, edited by a scholarly Episcopalian, was
very severe in its criticism of his conduct. This caused much
excitement among the Methodists. When he had to quit his efforts to get
me excited, he was no longer himself. This debate was held at the
request of the Baptists. Mr. Frogge and a Baptist preacher had debated
near there the fall before, and, the Baptist having failed, had to give
up the discussion. Mr. Frogge then left a broad and boastful challenge
for any immersionist. The Baptists were very sore over it, and when I
went there in the winter to hold a meeting they requested me to accept
his challenge. I referred them to the brethren, and with their
concurrence I entered upon the discussion.

In November I held another debate with Mr. Hiner, this time at Bedford,
Ky. It continued eight days. This created the most intense excitement I
ever saw in a meeting-house. At the two previous debates in the county
I repudiated C. W. Miller's book (_Points of Controversy_) as
authority. It is the book that Dr. Ditzler exposed. Our opponents said
I would not dare to do that where Miller was. They had him at this
debate. Mr. Hiner read from it a passage purporting to be from Moses
Stuart. I asked him what he was reading from. He said, "'Points of
Controversy,' and you challenge it if you dare." I then asked for the
page in Stuart's book where the language occurred. He refused to give
it. I had Stuart, and the inference was that he didn't want the
comparison made. When I got up I referred to what had passed about the
quotation, saying I was willing to take Stuart for it if he had given
me the page, but as for "Points of Controversy," I could take nothing
on its authority, for I repudiated the book and its author as authority
in anything. This provoked a personal wrangle with Miller, who was
close to me, after th