208 
am quite ready to admit my own shortcomings ; I do not believe m either 
the infallibility of the Pope, or of myself. But as to a person who 
the existence of a Deity at all, I can have no grounds of argument with him 
If he point blank deny the possibility of such a Being, there is an end of 
the matter ; but if he say, “ I do not think there is a Deity,” or, I cannot 
assent to the existence of a Deity,” my reply is “ Come and let us reason 
too-ether.” I would argue with a man who withholds his assent. 
Mr. Row.— You just now referred to your axioms again. Do you mean 
to apply that word in your paper in the strictly mathematical sense of 
propositions ? . 
Dr. M‘Cann. — Y es. But all propositions are not axioms, these are 
self-evident propositions. 
Mr. Row.— And therefore axioms. I differ from you, then. 
Dr. M‘Cann. — T hat all these are self-evident propositions ? 
The Chairman.- The difficulty that I, and I imagine others, would have, 
would be in knowing the exact meaning of them. The paper contains an 
immense number of these propositions, and sometimes the language you use 
I should not have understood in the same sense that you appear to do. We 
should therefore have had a mere verbal discussion without getting at the 
essence of the thing. That was one great difficulty which I have felt. 
Dr. M‘Cann. — Thinking of the Society before whom I was to appear, 1 
supposed that all these preliminary definitions would be understood, and 
arranged my argument in a definite form to provoke discussion on the 
axiomatic character of my propositions. That was the point that I wis e 
debated, but time is passing away without this being done. Mr. Hoiyoaxe 
has told us what is his belief, and what are his views ; but I do not think 
he has attempted to reply to my paper. As to the accusation of heresy, my 
language might be heretical, but the word “if” saves me from my spiritual 
pastors°and masters. I can see how Mr, Holyoake fell into the mistake, for 
the “if” is in the previous sentence. , . ' 1A , 
The Chairman. — I do not agree with Dr. M‘Cann in his difficulty about 
replying to an out-and-out atheist, who plainly denies the being of a God. I 
myself would rather prefer that my opponent should put his views distinct. y 
in the form of a proposition denying that God can exist, so that I might as 
distinctly meet him. 
Mr. Row.— I wish to express my concurrence in that view. 
The meeting was then adjourned, 
