Discussion at Napa by James White

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Apr 21, 1874

Discussion at Napa.

By James White

ALREADY considerable has been said relative to the discussion between Elds. Canright and Grant. But we wish to add briefly:—

1. Eld. Canright is clear headed, and expresses his thoughts in good language and forcibly. He has evidently given more attention to his subjects than he has to the manner of delivering them. He is full of ripe thought; and a desire to pour out as much as possible in a short period of time has led him to a hurried style of speaking, sometimes faster than the hearer can well follow. For the safety and improvement of his speaking organs, and the pleasure and profit of his hearers, he should rigidly discipline himself to more moderate and distinct speaking. He is a frank and free speaker, and the solemnity and fairness with which he treats the subject under debate impress the entire audience that he is sincere and honorable. We listened to his twenty-one speeches during the seven evenings of the debate, and could not detect in a single instance the least disposition to misstate his opponent, or take any advantage of him, and thus mislead the people.

2. Eld. Grant has evidently given more attention to manner of speaking, and the art of misleading his opponent, and misleading the audience, than he has to the subject debated. He will mention the strong point of an opponent with an air of the greatest indifference, and pass it by with an assertion, with the gravity of a judge, that it contains not a particle of proof. He will dispose of a dozen such points by simply mentioning them, and adding, “We will notice that by-and-by,” “We will let this rest for the present,” “That is very well,” and, “We will notice this in due time.” But he is sure never to touch the point again unless he is pressed to do so by his opponent.

Eld. Grant is by no means a strong man; but his unbounded self-confidence gives him a very fair exterior in the eyes of those who cannot read him, especially when he puts on that gracious cloak of sanctification. Eld. Canright successfully exposed his deceitful manner of meeting strong points so that the intelligent and unbiased were on their watch. Some lawyers in Napa were in conversation on his manner of debating, with whom the remark met general assent, that “Grant meets difficult points in the same manner that we do when we have a bad case.” Two lawyers at a railroad junction not far from Napa, were in conversation about the discussion, when one of them was heard to say, “That congregation in Napa is being bored by Grant worse than any congregation I ever knew.”

At an early period in the debate Eld. Grant introduced his favorite theme, the two covenants. And when he had got his views pretty well out, Eld. Canright replied to them in a clear and forcible manner. But when Eld. Grant got out of talk he would fall back upon the covenants again, and thus he would go over and over again the same ground, to fill up his time, until the people became tired and disgusted. But as most of the leading features of the debate have been previously noticed, we will pass to mention:—

3. The friends of the Sabbath are all stronger in the faith than before the discussion. Not one is shaken or in the least discouraged by hearing the opposition. Some of our friends from San Francisco, who had been the supporters of Eld. Grant, saw him in his true light clearer than ever before. The contrast between the disputants was very favorable to this. Thank God that those who have the truth can afford to be fair.

J. W.