One other preliminary word should be said before coming directly to Mr. Schroeder's theory and argument, and that in relation to the authorities on which the gentleman relies for the support of his views. Of course I am not unacquainted with the old controversy concerning the degree of credibility to be allowed to interested witnesses, and also the suspicion that attaches to witnesses for the miraculous. I have too long sustained in public debate an unpopular cause not to have heard the cry that the witnesses for the truth for which I contended were "interested witnesses;" notwithstanding those who were my opponents, at the same time accepted Christianity on the testimony of "interested witnesses," and discarded entirely the testimony of unfriendly witnesses, or "interested witnesses" on the opposite side of the case. I trust that the suggestion in this paragraph will indicate the unfairness of discrediting and discarding entirely the testimony of the witnesses for Joseph Smith's account of the origin of the Book of Mormon, on the ground that they are "interested witnesses," and taking for truth the statements of the "interested witnesses" on the other side of the controversy. I have some acquaintance also with that school of thought which discredits witnesses of the miraculous. I am familiar with the laborious exposition of that theory by the late Professor Huxley in his article on "The Value of Witnesses to the Miraculous;" [6] and also with his controversy on the same subject with Dr. Henry Wace, prebendary of St. Paul's Cathedral, and other Church of England ministers. [7] One could scarcely live in this critical age of ours and be unaware of the existence of the school of thought which undertakes to bar from the court of public debate the testimony of those who are witnesses of things held to "transcend human experience." Such testimony, it is said, suggests "credulity on the one hand and fraud on the other." [8] [Footnote 6: _The Nineteenth Century Review_, March, 1889.] [Footnote 7: _The Nineteenth Century Review_, February, 1889; also March, April, May and June of the same magazine.] [Footnote 8: "A supernatural relation cannot be accepted as such, * * it always implies credulity or imposture," Renan's "Life of Jesus," introduction, p. 45.] And still, both in the history of the past and now, witnesses of the so-called miraculous are factors to be reckoned with in our world's controversies.