Jonas Hartzel.

A defense of the Bible against the charges of modern infidelity; consisting of the speeches of Elder Jonas Hartzel, made during a debate conducted by him and Mr. Joseph Barker, in July 1853 online

. (page 2 of 26)
Online LibraryJonas HartzelA defense of the Bible against the charges of modern infidelity; consisting of the speeches of Elder Jonas Hartzel, made during a debate conducted by him and Mr. Joseph Barker, in July 1853 → online text (page 2 of 26)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook


JOSEPH BAKKER.



LETTER VII.

JONAS HABTZEL's FOURTH LETTEB.

Respected EnnoE: Mr. Barker says my last
letter is " long, " " rambling, " " unfavorable ; "
and asks, " Why not come to the point at once, and
keep to it. "

Digitized by VjOOQIC



20 DEFENSE OP THE BIBLE AGAINST THE

It would be a reflection upon the intelligence of
yonr readers, to say one word by way of defense, but
as this will probably close the correspondence on
preliminaries, it is important that Mr. Barker should
be corrected in the following statement: "In his
first letter Mr. Hartzel ofiered to meet me on the fol-
lowing proposition — ' That the Jewish and Christian
Scriptures, ' " &c. K Mr. Barker has forgotten, you
have not — your readers have not — that I proposed
to meet Mr. Barker on condition he would defend the
6th and 7th resolutions offered in the Convention,
namely : " that man has an infallible rule of life, ''
&c. This he refused, and gave his reasons, but he
would discuss with me the first five ; to this I con-
sented, if he would put them in a debateable form.
This part of my letter he calls '' mystification, " " a
multitude of words about other subjects. " Let me
give an extract from my letter : "If there is a guide
to truth and duty, let him (Barker) aflSrm it, define
it, defend it, and let the merits of the rival systems
be brought into a fair comparison. " In view of the
position Mr. Barker took in the Convention, against
the Bible as a guide to truth and duty, standing at
the head of this aggressive movement, challenging in-
vestigation to this only practicable point, (guide to
truth and duty,) permit me to say, that Mr. Barker
has evaded, what all had reason to expect from him,
which is, to affirm something as a rule of life, as the
measure of human responsiblity. We cannot relin-
quish our claim upon him in this respect yb7» Tie says :

Digitized by VjOOQIC



0HABGE8 OF MODERN INFIDBLTTY. 21

" God has made a revelation of his will to man-
kind ; " we ask again, where is it ? Bring out your
light from under the bushel. Let it shine.

**He that has a truth and keeps if,

Keeps what not to him belongs,
But performs a selfish action

And his feUow-Biortal wrongs. "

Finally, as Christians are not afraid to come to
the light, I shall, the Lord willing, be ready to
maintain the proposition, on the first Monday of
July, "That the Jewish and Christian Scriptures
contain a series of communications, supematurally
revealed and miraculously attested — from the latter
man may acquire a perfect rule of life. "

Mr. George Pow will act as my committee.

Let the committee ad; promptly, that early notice
may be given through the columns of the Bugle.
Yours, respectfully,

JONAS HARTZEL.



y Google



23 DEFENSE OF THE BIBLE AGAINST THE



PROPOSITION:



The undersigned having been chosen to make the
preliminary arrangement respecting the manage-
ment of a debate between Jonas Hartzel, of Hope-
dale, Harrison County, and Joseph Barker, of
Salem, Colunibiana County, on the following proposi-
tion:

'* The Jeivish and Christian Scriptures contain a s^es of
communications, Bnpernatiirally revealed and miracnlously at-
tested ; from the latter, man m»j acquire a perfect role of life. "
Affirmative, Negative,

MR. HARTZEL. MR. BARKER.

Notice is hereby given, that the discussion will
commence in the Town Hall of Salem, on the Fourth
OP July, at 2 o'clock, P. M., and continue four days,
unless the parties shall otherwise determine.
GEORGE POW,
JAMES BAENABY,
JACOB HEATON.



d by Google



CHABOBS OF l^ODEBN INFIDBUTT. 33



A OoKSBcunTR History op this Bsfobt op Mr. Hastzbl's
Spbbchbs, and Mr. Barker's Bbpusal to have his fart
OP thb Discussion Published.



Tbis being the time and place agreed npon for tiie commenee-
ment of a diBciusion betweea Jonas Hartzsl, of Hopedale,
HarrkK>ii Conntj, and Joseph Barkbr, of Salem, Columbiana
Coanty ; Cyrus McNeely, selected by Mr. Hartzel, as Moderator.
Charles Griffin, selected by Mr. Barker. These two selected Wilson
Thorn, ol Toungstown, Mahoning County, Presiding Moderator.
The congregation was called to order, and the rules for governing
the discussion read.



RULES:

I. Mr. Hartzel shall open and close the discussion.

IL The di^utants shall each speak one-half hour alternately,
save the opening speeches, and Mr. Barker's final negative, which
shall be one boor.

ni. The debate shall continue four days on/y, unless by mutual
consent of the disputants.

ly. The discussion shall be condncted with that candor and
fairness, necessary to the eliciting of truth.



The reader will enquire, how came this debate to be published,
there being nothing said about a report in the correspondence ?
The following conversation, which occurred at the close of the first
session, will answer the question :

Mr. Hartzel. — I perceive that Mr. Barker has employed two



y Google



34 DEFENSE OF THE BIBLE AGAINST THE

gtenographers to report this dircassion. He has done this without
my consent or knowledge. Had Mr. Barker informed me in person,
or by onr committee of arrangements, I would have acquiesced. I
know nothing of the competency of his repoiters, or their proba-
ble impartiality. This makes my position extremely embarrassing.
My preparation has been with a view to oral discussion only ; but,
now that it is to appear in book form, makes it quite anoth^ mat-
ter. Had I been apprised of that fact in dde time, my mind would
have profited by such a stimulant. And now I must say, Mr. Bar-
ker has departed from all the rules of courtesy and ftUr dealing
between honorable disputants.

Mr. Barker. — I never engaged in a public discussion that was
not reported. Mr. Hartzel may have an appendix if he wish, and
I will have one of equal length. As to the reporters, James Bar-
naby and Caroline Stanton, I believe them well qualified; they
have reported some speeches for me, to my entire satisfaction.

Mr. Hartzel. — I shall consent to a report, (as a matter of safety)
and such are my conditions :

Ist I shall require from the reporters some evidence of compe-
tency — say that they write out a part of my first speech, and give
me a specimen of what they can do.

2d. That I correct and revise my speeches, and read the proof.

3d. That we sell the copy-right to some publishing-house.

4th. That all that shall accrue from the sale, ov«r and above
paying us for our time and expense, shall be devoted to two be-
nevolent institutions, as we may severally prefer.

Mr. Barker. — I agree to Mr. HartzeVs conditions. I shall give
mine to the anti-slavery cause ; or, he may pay the stenographers,
publish the work himeelf, aod have the profits, or I will do so.

But the reader will again enquire, why this one-sided report?
To answer this quesjbion, we call attention to the following :

On the 27tb day of August propositions were submitted to me to
purchase the copy- right. I immediately informed Mr. Barker that
the manuscripts must be delivered to the publishers by the 18th
day of October, corrected and ready for publishing — gave him an



y Google



GHABQB8 OF MODERN INFIDELITY. 25

inyiifttion to oome toHopedale— and for him to get proposals,
that we might have a choice, and to fix upon a price, <&o.
To this I received in answer :

Salem, Ohio, Sept. 21, 1853.

DflAB Sib : — I cannot come to Hopedale, but I shall be glad if
yon can oome to Salem. I shall be at home on the 4th of October.
As I hSTe not yet received the mannscript of my speeches, of
course I have not c(»Tected any ot them: I am going to Salem to-
day, and, if my speeches are written out, I will C(Mrrect them as
soon as possible. But I shall be bosj for two or three weeks. I
have no proposals from any publishing house ; but I will agree to
any reasonable propositioDs which may have been made to you. I
should \ike to have Irom fifty to one hundred copies of the work
for my trouble and time, allowing you the same number. If any-
thing more can be got for the copy- right, let my share go to the
Westi^rn Anti-slavery Society, and your share to any cause you are
most desirous to promote.

I should have written sooner, but I have but just returned from
Koox OouDty.

We shall be glad to see yon at onr house, when you oome to
Salem. We will not compel you to talk about theology, yen diall
enjoy yourself in your o vn way. Though we differ so widely with
you in opinion, we think you a ge«d and worthy man ; and
we are not so anxious to bring others to our views as we are
to see all seeking diligently for truth, and worMng zealoosly for
the general good. Devotion to the interests of humanity (which in
tliis country seems to mean devotion to the cause of anti-slavery)
pleases me more than agreement with me ia opinion. Indeed* I
cannot doubt, but that all honest and benevol^ott men are ever
moving near to truth, on all subjects 9f importance.

With kind regards to your wife and family, and to your excellent
friends and neighbors, Mr. and Mrs. McNeely,

I am, yours, respectfully,

JOSEPH BARKER.

I now informed D. S. Burnett, of Cincinnati, thai cm acoeuat of
Mr. Barker's delinquency, the mamMOdpt could not bt handed



y Google



26 DEFENSE OF THE BIBLE AGAIKBT THE

over for ** ezominatioa " at the time speoified— * ifttl you itlB en-
tertain yonr propoeltionB to me ? *' — and received In reply :

Cincinnati, Oct 26, 1853.
Send your manascripts — say definitely what will be the ooet of
the mannecript in onr hands? Can we pay that cost in books at
wholesale price ? Youra, in haste,

D. S. BURNETr.

I agcdn wrote Mr. Barker, in substance :

** Dear Sir :—It is important that the book should appear as soon
as possible ; public expectation will soon die away, and the value
of the manuscript is daily depreciating. "

I received in reply some apologies, and the following promise :
" Put off as long as yon can and let me know, and I will be ready
for you. " I said to Mr. Barker, by return mail — "I will give
until the 18th of November to prepare your speeches, when I shall
call for them on my way to Cincinnati, " etc.

The lollowiog letter came to band after I bad left for Salem :

Salem, Ohio, Nov. 14, 1853.
Dear Sm : — I am sorry to inform you, that in consequence of
having been called twice away from home, I have not yet been able
to do anything at the report of my speeches. I could begin now,
but on Thursday I have to leave Ibr Philadelphia and other places
east : and, after I return, I have to visit Indiana. If I had had Ae
leport earlier I could have made the corrections, but 1 did not re-
ceive it till about three weeks ago, and I have been from home
almost ever since. Could you not take my speeches as they are,
and let me correct them as they are wanted fbr the press? If not,
I will have to keep them some time longer.

Yours, very respectfully,

JOSEPH BARKER.

Had I received the foregoing letter before leaving home for
Salem I should not have gone ; for it was an indefinite postpone-
ment of the publication. *^ / toottld begin now, but on Thursday
I must leave for Philadelphiay and other places East, and, after



y Google



CHiaOBS OF MODEBN. mwtDmjTY. 27

my rHum, J have to visit Indiana, " Was Mr. Barker under
obligation, by previous engagement, to visit the east and the west
at this time ? Was the period between the 4:th of August and the
14th of November too short to make the corrections ? If so, why
did he pledge himself to his opponent, and the public, to be forth-
coming in the joint publication of his speeches with those of his
opponent, and thus foolishly lay the foundation for his futufe re-
gret, ** I am sorry to inform you, " etc.

The apology offered for having violated his promises I could
have but understood as an act of treachery, and that further eflPbrt
to publish the discupsion, as originally contemplated, would he in
vain. Mr. Barker says^ " If I had had the report earlier I could
have made the corrections. " Why did he not have it " earlier 7 "
His residence is only about one mile from Salem, which is the resi-
dence of the reporters. Is it not presumable that Mr. Barker was
f^requently in town during this period of some three months? But
let us have the testimony of Mr. James Bamaby, olie of the re-
porters* He says in a letter to me, dated August 4th, 1853 — ** We
write out Mr. Barker's spe, ches as we do your own, and hand them
over to him as he wants them. " Mine were all recaived, corrected
and ready for the publishers before !he 12th day of September.
Now, the facts are, Mr. Barker did receive his speeches as I did
or he did not want them. So matters stood on the 14th day of
November, viz : That I must take his speeches to the publishers,
uncorrected, " or they must remain in my hands sometime longer. "
How much longer? till he would ''go to Philadelphia, other places
east, and to Indiana. '' Now, I ask, do not these facts clearly show
that Mr. Barker intended to withold his speeches from the
publishers?

Bat to proee«d : I went to Salem, at the tfme specified, and, in
the presence of James Barnaby and Jacob Heaton, we entered into
the following article of agreement, written by Mr» Barker himself :

Agreement, respecting the Report of tub Debate between
Joseph Baukerand Jonas Hartzel :
Mr. Jonas Hartzel ofTera to transfer hia right in the report to me, and to
Iiand mc his corrected speecbos, on condition that I publish it as suon as I



y Google



28 defense; of the bible AOAmSX THE

well can, and paj the expense of roportuig, leaving it to my sense of right
to give him thirty or forty copies of the work or not.

I accept this offer, and engage to begin the printing of the work within
eight weeks from Kov. 18th, 1853. I do, at the same time, leave Mr. Jonas
Hartzel at liberty to sell the report to any publisher, if he can sell it to
better advantage, on condition that he give me seventy-five copies of the
report, bound in mnslin and boards, for my labor in correcting the report
of my speeches, and he pay the expense of reporthig. In case / pnblish
the report, Mr. Jonas Hartzel engages to certify to the correctness of the
report, supposing J publish his speeches as he hands them to me ; while, in
case he takes the work, to sell or publish it, / agree to give the same certifi-
cate, on condition my speeches are- published as handed by me to him.
Whichever publishes the report, the certificate of the reporters to the cor-
rectness of the report to be appended.

The speeches of each disputant to be published in the same type.

Each disputant to have the liberty to add an appendix ; the appendixes
to be (^ equal length.

Mr. Hartzel to let me have the work by the 12th of December, 1853, if
he does not seS it.befoiie that tune.

In case Mr. Hartzel takes the work, I engage to give him my speeches,
corrected, within two months from the date of this. A portion of them
shall be handed to him corrected in four weeks and the rest as soon as pos-
sible. Each to correct his own proof sheets.

JOSEPH BARKER,
JONAS HARTZEL,

I l^n went to Giaciiinati, presentod the repc^ to the publishers,
and, ai^r dae examinaiioD, the following agreement was entered
into :

Agreement between" the American Christian Publicat:on
Society and Jonas Hartzel, Nov. 28th, 1853.

The Ainerican Christian Publication Society agrees to take the financial
responsibility of the publication, by Jonas Hartzel, of his debate with Mr.
Barker, and to supeiintend ^e execution of tiie same, and wUl give to
Jonas Hartzel (who hereby relinquishes the entire interest in the c<^y*right
and sale of the work for himself and Mr. Barker) seventy-five copies of the
work, when published, for Mr. Barker, and the amount of one hundred and
twenty five dollars, also in copies of the work at the cost price. The Pub-
lication Society not to be liable for the expense of reporting.
THOMAS J. MELISH, )
GEORGE LENT, V Publication Committee.



A. M. LESLIE.



JONAS HARTZEL.



y Google



OHAKGES OF MODEBH INFIDELITY. 29

On the 8d day of December I requested Ur, Jacob Hf atoD, of
Sfilem, to act as 1117 agent, in banding over Mr Barker's speeches^
and to see that they were duly mailed, &e. On the 13tb of Decem-
ber Mr. Heaton wrote me :

Dear Sir i — Mr. Barker Came home ofl Saturday, and, at the
earliest opportunity, I called on him to hand him his speeches, and
ask him to correct forthwith. He said : *' I won't hand him over
any of my speeches, until he pays the reporters, and give me secu-
rity that he will publish my speeches according to contract. From
what I have learned since, Mr. HartzJelMesigns to publish an ap-
pendix, which he does not design me to see. This I will never
consent to. I must see his appendix, and shall write a reply of the
same length, and he must give me security that he will do it. ''
I became satisfied that he cither did not comprehend a business
obligation, or that he was unwilling to do what was right.

So, you see. another diflBculty bas sprung up. But, so far as se-
curity is concerned, your friends here will vouch for that. "Write
immediately. Truly, &c.,

JACOB HEATON.

To which I replied :

As to Mr. Barker's troubles, thej are all provided for in the arti-
cle of agreement: I am under no obligations to pay the reporters
in advance, but, if they are not willing to trust me, yon may give
them security, on condition, that as soon as tbe last of Mr. Barker'^
cpeeches are mailed by you, and received in Cincinnati, " we, or
either of us, will pay," &c. The publishing of h's speeches
according to contract is in his own hands, as he will corrf»ct them
himself, and read his own proof sheet. The article says : " Each
disputant idiall have the liberty to itdd an appendix, the appendixes
to be of equal length. " " What is written, is written. "

I requested Mr. Heaton to take the copy of the agreement, and
ask the reporters to accompany him, and have an interview with
Mr. Barker, etc. To this I received as follows :

Salem, December 21st, 1863.
Your letter came to hand, in reply to mine, and I went, with Mr.
Barnaby and Miss Stanton, (sent Mr. Pow word, but be did not



y Google



30 DEFENSE OF THE BIBLE AGAINST THE

como) to Bee Mr. Barker, but he Is Inexorable, and I fear you will
have some difficnlty, if the book ie e^er published. He takes the
stand that he madt see your appendix, and write a reply , and that
you must pay him, for the appendix, one hundred copies of the
work. In the last request, we nnanimoufily concurred that it w»b
not right, and I told bim so. Mr. Barnaby desired tbat I should
not write to you for a few days, hoping that Mr. Barker would re-
consider it, but he has not done so, therefore, we write you the re-
sult of our interview. Mr. Barker has corrected most of his
speeches for the press, bu^iays he would, rather than submit to the
wrong and insult you offer, by attempting to write an appendix,
which he shall not see, pay the reporters himself, and burn the
speeches. He alleges that you might fill your appendix with per-
sonal or new matter, which it would be unfair for him not to see.

I am satisfied that the work will not be published, unless you
agree to publish without appendix, or else you agree that he shall
see yours and write a reply. Probably, under the circumstances,
the least trouble would be to publish without appendix, then h!a
epeeches woi|14,b^ forthcoming immediately.

/ As ever, your friend,

JACOB HEATON.

P. S The copy of the artWe of agreement is in my possession,
and it does look as though he had^ot intended to sell his appendix,
btill it would be fairly inferable thai fie^^uld not be paid for what
was merely granted as a privilege. ^ ^^ J. H.

Reply to the foregoing ; (I hav^ quoted all my letters from
memory, as I kept bo copies.) " Mr. Barker then has givea up two
of bis difficulties, and, as to the remaining one, why did he not say,
(when charged by mjself with unfairness, in having made arrange-
ments to have the discussion re|>orted, without infi»miog me,) Mr.
Harteel may have an appendix, and I will have one of equal length,
and reply to his. '* Then I might have thanked his clemenry for
his generous offer. Or, why did be not so specify in the article of
agrtemont ~ '• Mr. Batker intends to have a written (ii?cu?sion ap-
pended t3 an oral one, and then call the written controversy ap-
pendix, " and thus send forth the book with a lie in its moutti. "

Some days atter the date of this, I went to Sakm in person, but



y Google



OHABOBB OF MODEBK INFn^n^TFT. 31

Mr. Barker bad left for Philadelphia, and, after ccnumltatioii with
MesfTB. Barnabj, Heaton and Pow, (onr committee of arrange-
meiitB) I said to Mr. Heaton, ** I will publish witiiont an appendix,
on condition that Mr. Barker's corrected speeches are delivered
into my hands immediately. To which Mr. Heaton replied : "Mr.
Barker left his corrected speeches, witii the nnderstanding that, if
yon came, and would comply with that condition, or an appendix
ol three or fbur pages only, his q>eecbes should be given np ; do
you go and ask Mr. Bamaby to go to Mr. Barker's house and get
the speeches. " To this Mr. Bamaby cheerfully consented, but re-
turned without them. The three gentlemen before named, were
now in attendance, and, after some deliberation, we agreed to write
to Mr. Barker.

As I received no word for some time, I wrote Mr. Heaton ; " If
Mr. Barker does not give up the speeches before his return, or soon
after, please write me, and I will come to Salem immediately and
make another effort, " and received in answer :

Salem, January 19th, 1854
Your letter of enquiry, in regard to the speeches of Mr. Barker,
came duly to hand, and, in reply, will say, that as soon as I heard
that his family had received a letter from him, I immediately went
down to their house to see whether he had not ordered his correct-
ed speeches to be given up, because I felt it was due trom^ me to
see that he eo»plied with his promise to me, but the letter was
merely giving anaeeount of the debate with Dr. Berge. The next
day, however, he wrote agidn, la reply to Mr. BarBabj,andhisown
sons, And regrets ^at it is now, for the present, ent of his power to
ewnply. Me alleges that the **tw0 apeeohee" wbieh he did correct he
wants to review, aa^^ that with hia present excitooant, he cannot
spare mind «Magk to think aboaty mask len to oeireet his Ohio
epeeeb^s. Asd Miys, •* Mr. Htotiei haa himself to Uame for this, I
was at iHHAe lor weeks, and could aad woald have correeied i^l my
spee^bes, if he had not been so ae^st in his desanda, and now he
BMist widt uiBlil I get' ba^ - then I will atlend to them.
Thus, you see, the cause of the delay, wMch I know must anney-



y Google



32 DEFENSE OF THE BSSLM AGAINST THE

lag. Still, I hope that il will not militate agaiost your asle in
CiDcinnati. He will sorely attend to it when he comes back.

All well; with best wishes for your wife and family, believe me,
as ever, yours, for the ultimate triumph of truth,

JACOB HELTON.

A fsw days after this I received the following :

CiMaiNNATi, Jannary 26th, 1854.
Bbo. Haekbl : —Your letter of 24th of last month, was placed
in my hands. Debates are somewhat like hot cakes, (to use a
common expression) commanding a rapid sale only while the pub-
lic mind is eager and excited on the subject of the discussion. So
much time has elapsed since the debate came ofif — so much delay
in famishing the manuscripts — so much doubt about ever getting
Mr. Barker's speeches at all, and so late a period would arrive be-
fore the book could be presented to the public, that we have
thought best for the Society not to attempt the issuing of the w<H*k.
Wishing you much success in the cause of the Lord, and much
individual happiness, we remain yours, in the good hope.

J. A. DEARBORN,
On behalf of PuK Com. of the A C. P. Society.



Such is the history of my ill-fiiied effort to bring out the report
of the discussion, according to stipulation. I am sure no one can
censure me for not having made suiBcient effort, unless so be that I
erred in not consenting to recall my i^pendiz irom Cincinnati—
for it was not until after it was deposited with the Publishers that
. Mr. Barker raised the question of right to reply. But on what did
Mr. Barker base his right of reply T Not upon any stipulation,
verbal or written ; but upon this, viz : ** That I might fill my ap-
pendix with personal or new matter. " In this I sul^eoted myielf to
the same liability, for I never a^ed to reply to his ; ndtfaer had I
any fears on that score. Had he filled his with irrelevent matter,



Online LibraryJonas HartzelA defense of the Bible against the charges of modern infidelity; consisting of the speeches of Elder Jonas Hartzel, made during a debate conducted by him and Mr. Joseph Barker, in July 1853 → online text (page 2 of 26)