A REVISED VERSION.

Thames Star, Volume XIII, Issue 4225, 17 July 1882, Page 2

A REVISED VERSION.

(To the Editor of the. Evening Stab.) Sib, —As one of those who heard Mr Cass's lecture, will you kindly allow me to make a few comments on the rersion of it which appeared in last Saturday's Star. The writer says Mr Caas " called me s coward because I would not let him erade my question." The fact is MrsVTilkes was called a coward because he refused tp answer one question put by the lecturer.

who said as he put the question, " I hare answered you many questions, will you not answer me one ?" " Then he said I was being prompted," is the rest complaint. : That charge was made by one of the ; audience, who also suggested that the ministers who were doing it should ask .their own questions. Mr Wilkes promptly denied it, and then Mr Cass spoke urging that he was glad to hear of . . ministers being present, and hoped they would join in the discussion, that he had personally urged the Rev. Mr Davies to be present, but he had refused. Mr Wilkes then says, " Lastly, he refused to hare anything to do ■ with me, offering to debate the subject with me the; following night, and stake '. £5. Now, the lecturer offered to discuss the question till breakfast time the .following morning, or to meet anyone the following night at the Oddfellows' Hall, and he would himself pay all costs The words: "I have done with you" were used to another person, Mr Cass giving as his reason that he never knowingly discussed this subject with infidels or | unconverted people, After Mr Wilkes had been silent some time, he again stood up, and asked if Mr Cass had not a few years ago lectured to prove that the rarth was flat. Mr Wilkes says he refused to answer the question. The reply was : "What has that question to do with this subject-rwhether I believe the earth is, flat or you are flat, but, if you like, I will i discuss the matter with you to-morrow. I and if I don't corner you, I will pay £o to your charities." This, sir, was the only time money was mentioned, and it had nothing to do with the subject under - discussion, as asserted by Mr Wilkes. It ' is true that earlier in the evening, Mr Cass promised Mr Wilkes a new suit of clothes if he could verify a certain statement with but one text of Scripture, but neither of the challenges were accepted. Much xnore might be said on other points of this letter, but to do so would be trespassing too murh on your valuable space. I will, therefore, conclude by sayingthafcl am no disciple of Mr Cass but cive these few facts in the interests ©f fair play, which I think ought to be accorded to anyone irrespective of his, ideas on theology or peography.—lam, &c, ]<eadeb.