In your letter to the Unitarians, published in the _Courier_ of Wednesday, you state that you never invited discussion with us (the ministers) personally. We never imagined or affirmed that you did. But surely you invited discussion with the class of persons called Unitarians; and as a class has no voice except through its representatives, and no discussion can take place without two parties, you cannot think that we are departing from our proper sphere in answering to your call. Did you not invite us (the Unitarians) to you, “to tell and hear together the great things which God has done for our souls?” And did this mean that all the “_telling_” was to be on one side, and all the “_hearing_” on the other? Did you not press upon our admiration the primitive practice of “controversial discussion of disputed points?” And did this mean that there was to be neither “_controversy_,” “_discussion_,” nor “_dispute_,” but _authoritative teaching_ on one side, and _obedient listening_ on the other? In one of two relations you must conceive yourself to stand to us;—that of a superior, who _instructs_ with superhuman authority, or that of an equal, who “_discusses_” with human and fallible reasonings. Between these two conditions, there is _no third_; nor can you, with justice, take sometimes the one and sometimes the other, according as the occasion may require the language of dignity or that of meekness. We certainly addressed you as an equal, and did not pay you the disrespect of imagining that your invitation to “discussion” meant nothing at all. We are sorry that you ascribe to us any intention to divert you from your contemplated course of lectures. Be assured nothing could be further from our design. We simply desired that, having _invited us_, you should have _recognized us when we presented ourselves_, as parties in the “discussion.” We remain, reverend Sir, Yours, with Christian regard, HENRY GILES. JOHN HAMILTON THOM. Liverpool, February 7th. JAMES MARTINEAU. --------------------- _To the Revs. J. Martineau, J. H. Thom, and H. Giles._ Gentlemen,—I think it due to the cause of truth, as well as to the interest awakened in the public mind by this controversy, to address to you a few observations on your last letter, as published in the _Mercury_ of Friday. Though still strongly of opinion that the columns of a newspaper present a most undesirable medium of communication upon subjects such as those we are now engaged in discussing, I am unwilling in the absence of any other accessible instrumentality, to lose the opportunity it affords of impressing upon the attention of all reflecting men the actual position which we relatively occupy.