Let us take first this group of Conneaut witnesses, eight of them, used by Hurlburt, Howe, Bentley _et al.,_ and chiefly relied upon by Mr. Schroeder as supplying the "clinching" [56] evidence for the plagiarism of Spaulding's "Manuscript Found" by the author or authors of the Book of Mormon. They are the most important witnesses on the side of the Spaulding theory of the origin of the Book of Mormon; yet, by the application of the principle that recognizes the untrustworthiness of witnesses interested in opposing religious innovation; that recognizes the zeal of witnesses interested in supporting orthodoxy; that recognizes the bitterness which characterizes sectarian strife; as also the necessary vagueness of the state of mind of these witnesses in respect of those things of which they testify; as also by the consideration of many other things that will bear upon their statements--for the evidence and argument is to be cumulative--I hope to prove quite conclusively that these witnesses are incompetent, and their statements untrue. [Footnote 56: See sub-heading in _American Historical Magazine,_ Vol. II, No. 1, p. 70 _et seq._] II. THE "SECOND" SPAULDING MANUSCRIPT. Let it constantly be borne in mind that the existence of a second Spaulding manuscript, on the subject of ancient America and its inhabitants, and entirely different from the one at Oberlin, is not heard of until after the unearthing of the manuscript, (now at Oberlin) by Hurlburt, and the consequent disappointment of the conspirators on finding it so utterly lacking in the features necessary to make it appear probable that it was the basis of the Book of Mormon. Howe's book was not published until after the return of Hurlburt from Massachusetts with this disappointing manuscript.