Transcript of debate in the Northern Ensign for
March 3, 1896
THE “MILLENNIAL
DAWN” CONTROVERSY – DEBATE BETWEEN MR HOUSTON AND THE REV. MR DAVIDSON
THE debate between the Rev. Mr Davidson and Mr C.N.
Houston on some of the doctrines taught in the book “Millennial Dawn” took
place in Canisbay Free Church on Wednesday evening. The circumstances which led
up to the debate are well known to our readers and need not be recapitulated
here. A good deal of interest was manifested in the event, and it came off in
the presence of an audience which quite filled the church. The weather which
had been very stormy for a whole week previously had become settled. The
bitterly cold wind had ceased to blow, there was a fine serene sunset, and a
clear sky and nearly full moon made night almost as bright as day, while a
sharp frost converted muddy roads into as pleasant paths as were ever trod upon
by shoe leather. The people gathered to the place of meeting from far and near.
A party drove from Wick and another from Halkirk, and other districts beyond
the Persian frontier sent contingents – one of those from a distance being the
Rev. Mr Brims, Keiss – while the parish itself was, as a matter of course,
largely represented. When the audience was assembling the strangers who had
taken their seats had leisure to take a look round and mentally express
satisfaction with the internal alterations and improvements, in virtue of which
it may be said that the church has quite renewed its youth and been removed far
and forever from the class of sacred edifices which are characterised as
belonging to the barn type. Reflections on this subject were distracted for a
time by the appearance of a plump and every way well appointed cat – not black
– which inspected the elders’ platform, reserved for the chairman and the
debaters; and from thence it sprang up in the direction of the pulpit, where
for the rest of the evening it is supposed to have watched the interesting
proceedings which were going on below. When the hour came – seven o’clock –
almost every seat in the large building was occupied. Dr Macgregor acted as
chairman, and discharged the duties of his office with ability and fairness. It
was bruited abroad that lively episodes might be looked for before the debate
was over, and there was even a rumour that extra police were to be in
attendance to make sure that all things should be done decently and in order.
One preserver of the public peace was in evidence, but one only, and as might
have been anticipated, no occasion arose for invoking his intervention. The
chairman kept the audience well in hand. At one juncture when there appeared to
be some disposition to interrupt Mr Houston, the doctor said that if anything
of the kind happened again he would name the interrupter. This, however, was
more easily said than done. In a crowded meeting it will often baffle the
keenest-sighted president to “spot” every individual who hisses or interjects
an unfriendly remark, and this was found to be the case in the present
instance. Therefore at the next threatened outbreak, Dr Macgregor said that if
order was not maintained he would leave the chair, and this intimation had the
effect for a time of allaying the discordant elements. Personally Mr Houston is
held in high esteem in his native parish, but there was evidently something
more than curiosity to know about “this new doctrine” of which he appeared as
the setter forth. Coupled with the feeling of curiosity there was apparently
among some an uneasy suspicion that the doctrine in question marks a perilous
deviation from the old paths which they and their fathers before them have
hitherto been content to keep in their Zionward pilgrimage, and orthodox
religious folk are sensitive to nothing so much as meddling with matters which
vitally concern their hereditary beliefs. Mr Houston, however, got throughout a
patient hearing, and his arguments were closely followed by the meeting. Both
gentlemen paid the audience the compliment of coming to the debate well
prepared; and although an hour was allowed each for his opening speech, neither
had half exhausted his arguments when time was called. After that, each had
half an hour in which to reply, but the time limit was not rigidly insisted on;
and it was half-past ten o’clock before the debate came to an end. A full
report of the proceedings would fill about fourteen columns, and as that is a
much larger order on our space than we can meet, a severely condensed summary
must suffice. Mr Houston and Mr Davidson, accompanied by Dr Macgregor, emerged
in due time from the vestry, and were quietly received. Mr Davidson read four
verses of the 19th Psalm, commencing, “God’s law is perfect, and
converts The soul in sin that lies,” and these having been sung, led by Dr
Macgregor, Mr Davidson engaged in prayer. Thereafter Mr Houston said he had
pleasure in proposing that Dr Macgregor to take the chair. The doctor was known
to them all, and he presumed he would have no interest in favouring one side
more than the other. (Applause.)
Mr Davidson seconded the motion. In doing so he
wished to explain that Mr Houston had the choice of the chairman, and three
gentlemen had been named, without, however, consulting them, viz, the Rev. Mr
Macpherson, Dr Macgregor, and Councillor A. Sinclair, merchant. Mr Macpherson
declined because he had to go from home; and Dr Macgregor also declined on
account of his professional duties. He (Mr Davidson) then went to Mr Sinclair,
who was willing to take the chair; but Mr Houston preferred the doctor, and
that gentleman ultimately consented to undertake the duties of the office.
(Applause.)
The Chairman asked the audience to give each
gentleman a patient hearing. Truth, he said, could not suffer permanently from
anything that was said or done, and they had evidence of this in the history of
the past and in the record of quarrels on questions of opinion which had taken
place. The chairman then read the terms of debate as follows; -
“I, C.N. Houston, affirm that according to the
Scriptures, the ‘ransom for all’ given by the ‘Man Christ Jesus’ does not give
or guarantee everlasting life or blessing to any more. It only guarantees for
every man an opportunity of life everlasting.”
“I, Donald Davidson, affirm that according to the
Scriptures, the ‘ransom for all’ given by the ‘Man Christ Jesus’ does give and
guarantee everlasting life and blessing to some men. It does not guarantee
‘another opportunity or trial for life everlasting’ as taught in ‘Millennial
Dawn,’ vol 1.”
MR HOUSTON
OPENS.
Mr Houston introduced his opening speech by saying
that he appeared before them that evening with great pleasure. He was one of
themselves; they knew him altogether; and he need not therefore make any
apology about himself. If they believed half that had been said in connection
with this controversy, he could not wonder if they had some curious feelings in
their hearts; but he hoped to be able to disperse some of the more erroneous
ideas which had been formed and which had possibly been crammed into them. He
spoke of the changes which had taken place in various departments of life –
changes wrought by science and changes in theological opinion, and remarked on
the opposition which everything that was new encountered for a time, although
by-and-by it came to be accepted as a matter of course and regarded as
indispensible, notwithstanding the deceivableness of Satan’s power in getting
people to keep back truth by prejudice and religious hypocritical cant. If
people charged him with disseminating error, he was sorry for it; but they had
known him all his life, and they knew that he had ever sought to do that which
was considered good. He described how he had been led to study the question
which was to be discussed that night, and how he found that there was not a
single iota of the doctrines which he now believed could be gainsaid by the
word of God. After his brother-in-law’s death, he had after prayerful
consideration and most earnest thought resolved to give up business and devote
his life to the study and proclamation of God’s truth alone, independent of any
creed, sect or system, but just as he saw it pointed out to him in that
glorious book, “Millennial Dawn,” which is the word of God expounded. He got a
person to distribute the sample tract, “Do You Know?” and he had every right to
be challenged for doing that; but he had an equal right to hold and expound his
own opinions. Truth was every man’s possession’ and that was the stage they
were at now. He read the proposition which he was to affirm, and said that the
latter part was not exactly according to what was in “Millennial Dawn,” but Mr
Davidson would not agree to it in any other way, therefore let it go. When Mr
Davidson did at last agree on the terms of debate, he was greatly rejoiced, and
he was there that night, as the result, to make known the truth of God. What
they had to consider was “the ransom.” And what was the ransom? Dr Young of
Edinburgh defined it as a corresponding price – an equivalent of some kind –
something that you would not take gold for – you must get back for it the same
thing – you life or that thing. He drew a picture of the garden in which Adam
was placed. It was arranged by God that Adam should be the father of the race;
and a law was given him to keep, but he disobeyed and died, and all his
posterity with him. But the Second Adam gave his life a ransom for the first
Adam and all in him – and that ransom will be testified by God to every living
soul in due time. Therefore no man could perish except by refusing with full
knowledge and opportunity the Second Adam’s doings. The heathen had not heard
the glorious news of a ransom, but still they are responsible; and God condemns
them in one – the first Adam – that he may redeem them all in One, and tell
them some time or other what has been done for them. He gave his reasons for
believing that this would happen at the end of the present dispensation when
according to the beliefs of the Jews and the prophets Jeremiah and Daniel the
patriarchs would be brought back to the earth; and Paul said, “Why think ye it
a thing incredible that God should raise the dead?” The Jews had carnal ideas,
and thought they were to be the power in the earth; but Christ had first to die
for their sins, and in virtue of his death they shall yet be taken back to the
land and shall inherit the earth and be the power in the world. It is God’s
fiat that they shall possess the land because they are ransomed. The ransom was
paid two “days” in advance, otherwise two thousand years in advance, and when
the time is fulfilled, those counted worthy in the Jewish age will be brought
forth and constituted the rulers among men in the day of the world’s trial.
This period of about two thousand years is marked off for calling out the
church, the Bride of Christ, which is to accompany Him in the work of blessing
and restoring the world. The time for their favour began in 1878, at the end of
their double – the period of disfavour; and as they took 37 years in falling,
they take the same number of years in rising again, which brings us to 1915, at
which time they are due to possess the land and be the controlling power. Mr
Houston next spoke of the second chance, and said it was a great mistake if any
one thought that “Millennial Dawn” teaches that God excuses sin. Men could do
nothing without knowledge – knowledge to take of one’s free will the blessing
which God has provided and offers. Man is meant by God not to be a slave but a
noble being, a king; and in the restoring of the race the awfulness of sin was
shown in the destruction of those who fall away and remain impenitent, who have
possessed knowledge and opportunity, and have tasted the good word of God and
the powers of the world to come. For them is reserved the devouring fire which
shall devour the adversary.
MR DAVIDSON’S
OPENING – A CATECHETICAL INTERLUDE.
The Chairman said they would all agree that they had
listened to a very eloquent discourse from Mr Houston, He would say no more
than that. It was now Mr Davidson’s turn to speak for an hour. (Applause.)
Mr Davidson, who was received with renewed cheering,
said he wished to centre his thoughts on the latter part of the proposition
which he was to affirm, viz., “another opportunity or trial for everlasting
life,” as taught in the first volume of “Millennial Dawn.” But he would first
make one remark by way of answer to Mr Houston’s speech. From his letters and
his present remarks his position seemed to be, there is a ransom for all, then
why not should all receive blessing through that ransom? No doubt it was a
little difficult to reconcile these two positions; but he (Mr Davidson) would
endeavour to make it clear by a simple illustration. Mr Houston was a draper in
Wick, and being in that line of business, he was quite willing and fully
competent to supply all the servant girls who came into Wick at each terms with
bonnets and dresses. (Laughter and some hisses.) But he supposed he was not
exaggerating or stating what was untrue when he said that many of these persons
when they went into Wick did not go into Mr Houston’s shop and buy bonnets and
dresses notwithstanding his willingness to supply these articles. Many of them
went to other shops – in which they were perhaps mistaken, but it was a fact.
He could sympathise with Mr Houston in that position, for he was in the same
position himself as regards spiritual matters. There was a ransom for every one
in Canisbay, but alas, many would not come and avail themselves of it. The god
of this world had blinded their minds, and that explained why though there was
a ransom for all, all did not avail themselves of the glad tidings. Mr Davidson
went on to say that before proceeding to discuss his proposition he had one or
two questions to put to Mr Houston, and he might answer them now or he might
decline to answer them. He would put the questions through the chairman. The
first was, “Does Mr Houston sincerely believe that according to the Scriptures
all who are unsaved in this present life will get a second chance or another
opportunity for life everlasting after death?” To that he (Mr Davidson) said
No.
Mr Houston – I will answer that question afterwards.
Mr Davidson – You will think about it. I have
another question and Mr Houston may answer it or not; but I venture to say that
the meeting will demand answers from Mr Houston to these two questions –
answers that will be plain and straight. (Applause.) If not intelligible and
straightforward answers are given, I have no power to extort them; but if such
answers are not given we will have something to say. My second question is,
“Does Mr Houston acknowledge that the book ‘Millennial Dawn’ teaches the
doctrine of a second chance or another opportunity of life everlasting to the
unsaved after death?” I say Yes. (A voice, addressed to Mr Houston, “Answer!”)
The Chairman – Mr Houston does not need to answer
the question now unless he chooses.
Councillor Sinclair – I think it would save time if
the questions were answered now. (Applause.)
Mr Houston – I have no objection to answer them now,
but it would lead the meeting to straighter issue if Mr Davidson would go on
with his address. (Cries of “No!” and cheers.)
The Chairman thought it would be better if Mr
Houston reserved his answers until a later stage.
Mr Davidson was quite willing that this course
should be adopted. He said he thought he would make it clear to their minds
that the doctrine of a second chance was plainly taught in “Millennial Dawn.”
Mr Houston would have them believe that he was as orthodox as himself (Mr
Davidson), perhaps more so; but it was not so much with Mr Houston as with the
book that he had to deal; and he asked them to bear with him when he read
extracts from its pages. The extracts were to the effect that the Scriptures do
not teach that death ends all probation; that the heathen and infants will
assuredly have an opportunity of being saved in the age or dispensation to
come, when all that are in their graves shall come forth, and when they shall
have a hundred years of trial during the millennial time; and Mr Davidson
further maintained that the book teaches that under certain conditions a second
chance will be given to those who have lived in a civilised state and possessed
the bible.
A TESTIMONY
CONCERNING A SECOND CHANCE.
Mr Davidson said he would now read a document signed
by twenty-one persons, including himself – gentlemen who occupied honourable
positions and were supposed to be honourable and intelligent men. The document
is as follows: -
“We, the undersigned, having read the book
‘Millennial Dawn,’ vol. 1., are decidedly of opinion that it plainly teaches
the doctrine of a ‘second chance’ or ‘another opportunity’ of life everlasting
to every man after death. (See pages
105, 108, 111, 129, 130, 140, 144, 150, 151, 158, 159, 160, 161.)
James Macpherson, E.C. minister of Canisbay.
Alex. Sinclair, C.C., Canisbay.
Andrew Munro, teacher, Canisbay.
Alexander G. Macgregor, medical doctor.
James Sutherland, elder, inspector of poor.
George Manson, elder, Duncansbay.
David Kennedy, elder, Freswick.
Alexander Dunnett, elder, Brabster.
David Nicholson, deacon, Seater.
John Simpson, deacon, Moy.
Francis Sutherland, deacon, John
O’Groats.
William Dunnet, elder, Huns.
William Steven, elder, Gills.
George Malcom, deacon, Gills.
Matthew Dundass, deacon, Duncansbay.
Geo. T. Mackenzie, schoolmaster and
deacon, Freswick.
Arthur M’Connachie, divinity student,
Zion Chapel, Wick.
Daniel Sutherland, accountant, Wick.
Alex. S. Fullarton, teacher, Wick.
A. Phimester, clothier, Wick.
Donald
Davidson, Free Church Minister, Canisbay.
Mr Davidson proceeded to say that he did not see the
need of going on with a discussion of this doctrine of a second chance if Mr
Houston did not believe in it. Why discuss points on which they were agreed? It
would be better to hear Mr Houston himself give plain, definite, intelligible
answers to the questions which had been put through the chairman, and leave it
to him to say whether thee need be further discussion. (Applause.)
The Chairman informed Mr Davidson that he had still
twenty-five minutes to speak.
DEBATE DEVELOPS
INTO LIVELY DISCUSSION.
Mr Houston rose and commenced his reply when Mr
Davidson asked for a plain yes or no to the question whether there is a second
chance for all who are unsaved in the present life.
Mr Houston claimed the right of reply in his own
way.
The Chairman – Mr Houston is entitled to do that.
Mr Davidson – Certainly. Go on.
Mr Houston read from the Epistle to the Hebrews
concerning those who sinned after having received the knowledge of truth. The
point, he said, was based on knowledge, and knowledge was the ground of
condemnation. There was no more sacrifice for sin, but God does purpose to give
knowledge. (“Question!”)
The Chairman – The question is, Is there a second
chance for those who are unsaved in this world? (Hear, hear and cheers.) Is
there a second chance for those who go into the other world, both for those who
have heard and those who have not heard the gospel. That is the point. (Cheers
and cries of “Yes” or “No.”)
Mr Houston – I won’t answer that. (Hisses and
general disturbance, which brought from the chairman an imperative demand for
order.)
Councillor Sinclair – I don’t see the use of coming
here to discuss the subject if these questions are not answered. (Applause.)
Mr Davidson – I said before that I could not extort
answers from Mr Houston unless he chose to give them.
Councillor Sinclair – It is a fraud altogether.
(Laughter, hisses and cheers.)
The Chairman – There is another half-hour for each
side.
Councillor Sinclair – Is it truth we want and not
words. (Applause.)
The Chairman – Mr Houston may give us a lot of texts
but leave us in the mist. (Applause.)
Mr Houston – If Mr Davidson wishes me to say yes or
not to an absurdity I will not answer that.
The Chairman – Mr Davidson says that “Millennial
Dawn” teaches that after death there is a second chance for every man who is
unsaved. I think Mr Houston should say yes or no whether he believes that that
doctrine is taught in the book.
Mr Houston – That is true, but I dare not acquiesce
in a proposition that is not stated as it is stated in “Millennial Dawn.” You
have heard the extracts read from the book, and I might as well ask you what
you think.
Mr Charles Dunnet, Gills – Do you not believe in
“Millennial Dawn?” (Laughter and cheers.)
Mr Houston – Every word of it. Mr Houston said he
would give an illustration. When a man was flogged on board ship, a doctor
stood by and stopped the punishment if he saw that the culprit had not
sufficient life and sense to make his conscious of what he was getting. If God
had provided a ransom which was as far reaching as the evil that is in the
world, would it be just or fair that poor creatures should be cast into
destruction because they had heard something about the ransom but did not fully
understand and acquiesce in it? That would be doing what the law of this
country would not do; and that was his answer. (A voice, “Not straight!”)
Councillor Sinclair – Put the question again.
The Chairman – I understand Mr Houston declines to
answer it.
Mr Houston – I believe no living soul will be
condemned except those who have had full knowledge, according to the question.
Mr Davidson – that is not according to the question.
Mr Houston – No one will be condemned, is my answer.
The Chairman put to Mr Houston the second question
as to whether the book teaches and he believes that there will be a second
chance or another opportunity to the unsaved after death.
Mr Houston – Most distinctly – to all and sundry.
The Chairman – That there will be an opportunity for
life everlasting for the unsaved after death?
Mr Houston – Yes; but the manner of putting the
question has a contingency in it. (Laughter.) The gospel has been preached for
nearly two thousand years, and there is no second chance for those who have
heard and rejected it; but the ransom secures eternal life to all who will have
it, either here or hereafter. (“Oh, oh!” laughter and booing.)
Mr Davidson – May I take it that Mr Houston
sincerely believes that there will be a second chance or another opportunity
given to the unsaved after death?
Mr Houston – Most distinctly, but I object to the
word unsaved, as that implies that they had had an opportunity.
Mr Davidson (offering Mr Houston a document) – Will
you put your initials to it?
Mr Houston – I would not word it in that way.
MR DAVIDSON’S
REASONS OF DISSENT.
Mr Davidson said he was opposed to the doctrine of a
second chance for four reasons - (1), Because it is unphilosophical and
unreasonable; (2), Because it is a doctrine which is repugnant to Christian
thought and feeling; (3), Because it is highly dangerous to morality; and (4),
Because it is wholly unwarranted by Scripture. Mr Davidson dwelt at
considerable length on each of these objections to the doctrine. It is, he
said, an ingenious theory, but it is a theory spun out of a man’s own brain. It
is a human speculation and therefore has the value only of a human speculation.
He demanded plain Scriptural warrant for the doctrine; and it lay with Mr
Houston to find the proof. Such proof, he maintained, could not be found. The
Scripture doctrine is, “Now is the day of salvation;” and no one of the human
race could answer the question, “How shall we escape if we neglect so great a
salvation?” Let Mr Houston now stand up and give the Scripture proofs which he
demanded. (Applause.)
Mr Houston objected that Mr Davidson had not read
the whole of the passage in “Millennial Dawn” which implied that there will be
a second chance to some of those who live in a state of civilisation. He
repeated that it was only those who have had a clear realisation of the terms
of the ransom who will be condemned for refusing it. He read from the
Confession of Faith with regard to election and predestination; and considering
that that was the creed of Mr Davidson’s church, he did not wonder at his
vehemence in repudiating the doctrine that the ransom for all must testified to
all in due time, he asked where was the justice and consistency, and where was
the Scripture, for condemning men for not accepting a ransom which was never
offered to them or which they were foreordained to reject. The words “As the
tree falls so shall it lie,” bore out his doctrine that as it falls so shall it
rise again. No man would be condemned until he had had a full and fair
opportunity of accepting the eternal life which God had provided for him. Mr
Davidson preaches a universal gospel.
Mr Davidson – I do.
Mr Houston replied that the Confession of Faith did
not, notwithstanding the many passages of Scripture which were in the same
terms as the one which says that Christ Jesus is the propitiation not for our
sins only, but for the sins of the whole world. He proceeded to say that the
doctrine of a second chance was the good news which would be unto all people.
God had appointed a day in which He would judge the world, and he would bring
back man to it, as the Jews would be taken back to the land and remain on it to
all eternity. He (Mr Houston) had come to them that night, and it was at their
peril whether they received or rejected the glorious truth which he had to tell
them about. It would take a little while to make everything clear to them –
(laughter, and a voice, “Yer gettin’ more into the mist”) – but what he had
stated was God’s word and could not be gainsaid.
A MIXTURE OF
ORTHODOXY AND HERESY.
Mr Davidson said, with respect to Mr Houston’s
remarks, that he had never listened to such a mixture of orthodoxy and heresy –
(laughter) – of sense and nonsense, from the lips of any man. (Renewed
laughter.) That was his opinion and judgment. Mr Houston appeared to have no
shadow of doubt in his mind regarding those great and solemn questions
regarding the state of the heathen, the offer of the gospel and the doctrine of
election. He (Mr Davidson) had arrived at no such condition of certainty; and
he would like to be a little more humble. He could not reconcile God’s
sovereignty with man’s free will while he was placed in the condition in which
he was. God was not in duty bound, as a mere matter of justice, to send him the
Gospel; and he might have been made an ape, a horse or a worm instead of a
human being. If he were cast into hell, he could not say nay. If God had sent
him the Gospel, he could only consider it a marvellous act of mercy,
condescension and love on His part, for which he trusted to praise Him through
all eternity. He had no ambition to continue this controversy any longer. He
freely handed it over to any other party who might take his place in answering
Mr Houston. He would tread his path humbly and confidently, assured that God in
his own time would bring all things to light. His answer as to the present and
future condition of the heathen was that a great sin and guilt lay upon the
Christian Church for not obeying the command, “Go ye into all the world and
preach the gospel to every creature;” but he had this satisfaction to his own
mind, that unto whom much is given of them much is required. He believed that
there would be various degrees of punishment when the day of judgment comes;
and that it will be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrah than for the cities
where the feet of the Saviour trod, that saw and heard and rejected Him. He
dare not go beyond God’s word. He left those matters which were not intended to
be solved in the hands of Him who, being a God of justice and love, will not
punish any individual beyond what he deserves; and if he, a simple member of
the human race, got strict justice meted out to him, he, at least, would have
no reason to complain. (Applause.)
MR HOUSTON’S
LAST WORD
Mr Houston said that it was because the Judge of all
the earth would do right that he sought be there that night; and he was there
because he wished to show forth what was a Scriptural, Godlike, philosophical
and true doctrine. (A voice, “You’ve no Scripture for the second chance.”) Mr Davidson said he had spoken some nonsense.
Well, he was not alone in that; for it was written that the very wisdom of God
had appeared foolishness to men. Mr Davidson said that he (Mr Houston) had not
a shadow of doubt; but why should he doubt? for if God’s word said that a
ransom is given to all, for all it is. Mr Davidson might seem to be charitable;
but when his Church declared against God’s word that only a certain elect
number are saved and that the rest are passed by, he thought it behoved men who
sought to maintain the honour of God to see, if God had given a ransom, that
that ransom ensures what it says, and that it will be declared to all. The
problem of God’s sovereignty and man’s responsibility was solved by that doctrine
– that God has appointed a day whereby he will judge the world, so that every
man who ever lived shall hear the voice of the Son of God. God’s sovereignty in
the ages and dispensations was fixed and true and man’s free will was true
also.
Mr Davidson proposed a vote of thanks to the
chairman for the admirable way in which he had performed his duties. He was
pleased to see such a good congregation, and he would be glad if they all came
out again next Sabbath. (Laughter and applause.)
Mr Houston seconded the motion, and said the
chairman had acted very fairly. He also thanked the audience for the very
patient hearing which they had given himself. He may have talked a lot, but he
had only said half what he might have done. (Applause and laughter.)
The meeting then dispersed. Hospitality to strangers
was generously dispensed by the Rev. Mr Davidson, Dr Macgregor, Councillor
Sinclair and others.
The Wick party reached home shortly after 1 a.m.,
after a comfortable drive in Mr Sinclair’s covered ‘bus, which was carefully
piloted by Mr Hugh Falconer.
Immediately following the above report,
the column continued with A CRITICISM ON THE CANISBAY DISCUSSION (by one who
was present) which was reproduced in full in ZWT reprints page 1965.
No comments:
Post a Comment