In P. 130. e. & 131. a. Mr. W. says, When One sees with what Epithets of Honour Mr. Edwards in some ⟨p. 96⟩Parts of his Book has complimented Mr. Stoddard ▪ it must look like a strange Medley to tack to them; — That he was a weak Beggar of his Question; A Supposer of what was to be proved; Taking for granted the Point in Controversy; Inconsistent with himself; Ridiculously contradicting his own Arguments. These Expressions, which Mr. W. speaks of as tacked to those honourable Epithets, he represents as Expressions which I had used concerning Mr. Stoddard: And his Readers that have not consulted my Book, would doubtless take it so from his Manner of Representation. Whereas, the Truth is, no one of these Expressions are used concerning Mr. S. any where in my […]; nor is there one disrespectful Word spoken of him there. All the Ground Mr. W. had to make such a Representation, was, that in answering Arguments against my Opinion I endeavoured to show them to be weak (tho' I don't find that I used that Epithet) and certainly for one to pretend to answer Arguments, and yet allow 'em to be strong, would be to show himself to be very weak. In answering some of these Arguments, and endeavouring to show wherein the Inconclusiveness of 'em lay, I have sometimes taken Notice that the Defect lay in what is called begging the Question, or supposing the Thing to be proved. And if I had said so concerning Mr. S—d's Arguments, speaking of them as his, I don't know why it should be represented as any personal Reflection, or unhandsome dishonourable Treatment of Him. Every inconclusive Argument is weak; and the Business of a Disputant is to show wherein the Weakness lies: But to speak of Arguments as weak, is not to call Men weak.— All the Ground Mr. W. has to speak of me as saying, that Mr. S. ridiculously contradicted his own Arguments, is, that (in P. 11.) citing some Passages out of Mr. S—d's Appeal, I use these Words; But how he reconciled these Passages with the rest of his Treatise, I would modestly say, I must confess my self at a Loss. And particularly I observed, that I could not see how they consist with what he says, P. 16. and so proceed to mention one Thing which appears to me not well to consist with them.— But certainly this is not indecently to reflect on Mr. S. any more than Mr. W. indecently reflects on the FIRST REFORMERS, in his Answer to Mr. ⟨p. 97⟩Croswell, (P.
In P. 130. e. & 131. a. Mr. W. says, When One sees with what Epithets of Honour Mr. Edwards in some ⟨p. 96⟩Parts of his Book has complimented Mr. Stoddard ▪ it must look like a strange Medly to tack to them; — That he was a weak Beggar of his Question; A Supposer of what was to be proved; Taking for granted the Point in Controversy; Inconsistent with himself; Ridiculously contradicting his own Arguments. These Expressions, which Mr. W. speaks of as tacked to those honourable Epithets, he represents as Expressions which I had used concerning Mr. Stoddard: And his Readers that have not consulted my Book, would doubtless take it so from his Manner of Representation. Whereas, the Truth is, no one of these Expressions are used concerning Mr. S. any where in my 〈…〉; nor is there one disrespectful Word spoken of him there. All the Ground Mr. W. had to make such a Representation, was, that in answering Arguments against my Opinion I endeavoured to shew them to be weak (tho' I don't find that I used that Epithet) and certainly for one to pretend to answer Arguments, and yet allow 'em to be strong, would be to shew himself to be very weak. In answering some of these Arguments, and endeavouring to shew wherein the Inconclusiveness of 'em lay, I have sometimes taken Notice that the Defect lay in what is called begging the Question, or supposing the Thing to be proved. And if I had said so concerning Mr. S—d's Arguments, speaking of them as his, I don't know why it should be represented as any personal Reflection, or unhandsome dishonourable Treatment of Him. Every inconclusive Argument is weak; and the Business of a Disputant is to shew wherein the Weakness lies: But to speak of Arguments as weak, is not to call Men weak.— All the Ground Mr. W. has to speak of me as saying, that Mr. S. ridiculously contradicted his own Arguments, is, that (in P. 11.) citing some Passages out of Mr. S—d's Appeal, I use these Words; But how he reconciled these Passages with the rest of his Treatise, I would modestly say, I must confess my self at a Loss. And particularly I observed, that I could not see how they consist with what he says, P. 16. and so proceed to mention one Thing which appears to me not well to consist with them.— But certainly this is not indecently to reflect on Mr. S. any more than Mr. W. indecently reflects on the FIRST REFORMERS, in his Answer to Mr. ⟨p. 97⟩Croswell, (P.
