Before And After The 1934 Debate
About the first of September, 1934, a phone call came to me in Oklahoma City, from Brother C. M. Stubblefield in Fort Worth. He asked, "would you like to debate J. Frank Norris in Fort Worth?" I replied to the effect of, "Absolutely!" Brother Stubblefield said, "Fine; I am calling to tell you that you have been selected for the job." He then explained that they had offered this debate to N. B. Hardeman first, and because he was not available they had called me, but wanted me to feel assured that I was unanimously chosen for the work. I assured Brother Stubblefield that no explanations about my being the second choice were necessary - that did not matter at all, it was the Cause of Christ at stake, and if my services were desired to defend the truth in debate with such an antagonist, I would really lay aside everything else and cross the continent to do it. Brother Stubblefield replied that such was his own feeling in the matter, and remarked that he would stand by me through it all, saying; "we will stand or fall together." To that I replied: "We shall stand, not fall, together." We did stand, - and the truth stood.
The following letter from John A. Dickey, who was on the committee with Brother Stubblefield, will indicate the unanimity of the committee which represented the brethren in making these arrangements.
Dear Bro. Foy: I have your letter written from Dallas. I presume the purpose of the letter relative to the selection of the speaker is to deny something that Norris has said. I don't remember the personnel of the committee, save that it was a lame one with possibly all churches represented. Bro. Stubblefield was selected to serve as chairman and appointed to contact you relative to meeting Norris. It was the unanimous agreement that you should be selected if you could be available. I do not recall that there was ever any discordant note in regard to the matter. If there was, it was never made known to me.
I trust this will serve the purpose you wish. Fraternally, J. A. Dickey,
In his efforts to break the after-effect of the debate Mr. Norris resorted to every kind of chicanery and calumny. Propaganda, as usual, was his chief weapon, and like Germany's Dr. Paul Josef Goebbels, he played it for all that it was worth to deceive if possible "the very elect." So first of all he circulated the propaganda that Wallace was not their choice anyway, and that some of his (my) own brethren on the committee had told him so. Brother E. W. McMillan, who lived in Fort Worth at that time, was on the committee with brethren Dickey and Stubblefield, and stood with them. Brother McMillan has been criticized rather severely for what is regarded as various weaknesses, but he stood up for this debate, and for the truth presented in it, far better than some of his later critics have done. But Mr. Norris' propaganda failed, and his falsehoods were not believed. The truth stood the test of this debate and has stood through all of the bombast of the decade that has followed the debate, in the vain efforts of Mr. Norris to cover his defeat by a barrage of personalities. The public has seen through the Norris smoke screen all the time, but there has been a continuous demand for the facts as to what occurred after the debate in reference to the published book. They all know what occurred during the debate - thousands heard and saw what occurred. We now have the opportunity to raise the curtains that have been down since the last session of the debate, and let the public in on the backstage treachery of the Norrisites.
After the telephone talk with Brother Stubblefield the propositions, worded by Brother Stubblefield and agreed upon between himself and Norris, were sent to me. I accepted them, and signed them. The date was set, and the weeks that followed were days of expectancy. Letters poured in from all over the nation from those who were planning to attend the event. One man, a Baptist, whose letters appear in this issue, came from North Dakota, a distance of 1400 miles to attend it. Brethren came from California and Tennessee, and from places beyond and between. Batsell Baxter wrote me that he was dismissing his classes at Abilene Christian College and was bringing all of the A. C. C. preacher's class to the debate - and he did.
Previous to the debate Mr. Norris also had worked up a great interest among his people. He admitted afterward that he did not know what was in store. He expected an exchange of some masterpieces of oratory, a sort of a battle of roses, but obviously did not expect his doctrine to be plowed up root and branch. So before the debate began he was in a great mood, and wanted to arrange a series of debates before the first one was held.
I was in a meeting with the Old Hickory church, Nashville, Tennessee, when I received letters and telegrams from Mr. Norris insisting on arrangements for a repetition of the debate in Dallas, San Antonio, and Houston. Perhaps the readers would like to see that original telegram.
As can be seen from that telegram, Mr. Norris was really "raring to go" and was willing to spend his "own money" in sleuces of $100.00 just to debate with me! Mark you, that was before he had debated with me. He would spend a lot more than that now to keep from debating with me.
The Norris telegram was answered, and its picture has also been taken so that you say see it:
This exchange of telegrams was called to the attention of the Dallas churches. In a short time I was advised by Roy E. Cogdill that Mr. Norris' proposal to have the debate in Dallas had been accepted by the Dallas brethren, the coliseum had been arranged for, and every thing set for the debate to come to Dallas the week after the Fort Worth discussion. I was immensely pleased. But the Dallas debate was never held. On the last day of the Fort Worth debate the vaunted Norris announced publicly and in person that he would not keep the Dallas engagement - he peremptorily cancelled it. Read the photostat of his telegram inserted here, (ed. Telegram not in publication) consider his arbitrary cancellation of the Dallas debate which had been arranged, everything set, and the coliseum waiting for us - and ask yourself why? Those who heard the Fort Worth debate know the answer.
Among those who were in attendance at the Fort Worth debate were G. H. P. Showalter, editor of the Firm Foundation, and W. E. Brightwell, office editor of the Gospel Advocate. Their reports of the debate in these two well known and recognized periodicals will be of interest to all, and belong in this permanent record. We give them exactly as they appeared.
Nashville. Tenn Oct 27 1934
J Frank Norris
First Baptist Church Ft Worth Tex
WILL ACCEPT EXTENDED DISCUSSIONS SAME SUBJECTS AT SAN ANTONIO AND DALLAS IF ARRANGEMENTS ARE MADE THROUGH MY BRETHERN STOP I MUST HAVE ENDORSEMENT OF DEBATES AND INVITATION FROM CHURCH AT EACH PLACE STOP WOULD NOT ACCEPT TERMS FOR REMUNERATION FOR MY SERVICES EXCEPT THRU MY OWN BRETHERN STOP SUGGEST THAT YOU CONFER WITH STUBBLEFIELD AND HAVE HIM PERFECT ARRANGEMENTS WITH OUR CHURCHES AND I WILL ACCEPT ANY ARRANGEMENT HE MAY MAKE