“The Hartford _Universalist_ said of Professor Stuart: ‘He puts an uncompromising veto upon the popular interpretations of Daniel and Revelation, and _unites with Universalists_ in contending that most of their contents had special reference to, and their fulfillment in, scenes and events which transpired but a few years after those books were written.’—_Oct. 15, 1842._ “Mr. Hinton said of the same: ‘We regret that, in the midst of the great moral conflict with Antichrist, which is now carrying on, those into whose hands the saints were so long given should find so able a coadjutor. We have, however, no fears that Christians of sound common sense, and capable of independent thought, will, after a candid consideration of the scheme which excludes papacy from the page of prophecy, and that which traces in the prophetic symbols a faithful portraiture of its abominations, make a wrong decision. Since we have read the work of the learned Stuart, we have rejoiced the more that our humble abilities have been directed to the defense of the old paths.’—_Proph. Illus._, p. 231. “Of Mr. Dowling, Dr. Breckenbridge said: ‘As for this disquisition of Mr. Dowling, we may confidently say that it is hardly to be conceived that anything could be printed by Mr. Miller, or Mr. Any-body-else, more shallow, absurd and worthless. There is hardly a point he touches on which he has not managed to adopt the very _idlest conjectures_ of past writers on the prophecies; and this so entirely without regard to any coherent system, that the only clear conviction a man of sense or reflection could draw from his pamphlet, if such a man could be supposed capable of believing it, would be that _the prophecies themselves are a jumble of nonsense_. Such answers as his can have no effect, we would suppose, except to bring the whole subject into ridicule, or to _promote the cause he attacks_.’—_Spirit of the 19th Century, March No., 1843._ “Again he says, in speaking of ‘the general ignorance which prevails on this subject,’ that of it ‘no greater evidence need be produced than the fact that this pamphlet of Mr. Dowling has been extensively relied on, yea, _preached_, as a sufficient answer’ to Mr. Miller.