tant side. But when
the Catholic and Protestant accounts are compared, one sees that
the advantages won against Campion were slight. They evidently
hoped that by vigorous and repeated attacks they would at last
puzzle or bear him down. But they were never near this. He was
always fresh and gay, never in difficulties, or at the end of his
tether. He stands out quite the noblest, the most sympathetic and
important figure in those motley assemblies. The Catholics were
delighted. They succeeded in getting their own report of the
disputations, which is still extant, and they would have printed
it, if they had been able. Philip, Earl of Arundel, by far the
most important convert of that generation, was won over by what
he heard in those debates.

On the whole then we must say that, if Campion did not come off
gloriously, he at least acquitted himself well and honourably,
and distinctly gained by the conflict. Offers of disputation were
not the ideal way of forwarding a mission such as his.
Nevertheless, in his case, despite circumstances the most
adverse, the result had proved advantageous. It had greatly
strengthened and encouraged his own followers, and that was in
reality the best that could then be expected. Incidentally too
the adverse rumours, which had gained ground during his
seclusion, were dissipated. It was clear that, though he might
have been deceived, his constancy was unconquerable.

Thus Campion's _Challenge_ and his _Ten Reasons_ not only contain
the message of his mission enunciated with characteristic
eloquence, but the delivery of each message is an history-making
event, big with dramatic consequences. The controversy about his
book did not die with him, but continued for some years, until it
was merged into the standing controversy between the two
religions. We cannot describe it here.

Suffice it to say that Mr. Simpson, in the _Appendix_ to his
_Edmund Campion_ enumerates not less than twenty works, which
appeared in those controversies between 1581 and 1585. The chief
defender of Father Campion's writings was Father Robert Drury,
S.J., but all his biographers also have something to say on the
subject. The chief opponents are William Charke, Meredith Hanmer,
William Fulke, Laurence Humphrey, William Whitaker, R. Stoke,
John Field, Alexander Nowell, and William Day. Some further
information on the whole subject may be found in articles by the
late Father Morris and myself in _The Month_ for July 18