The San Francisco Call. Newspaper, February 20, 1896, Page 8

THE SAN FRANCISCO CALL, THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 1896. MRS, COOPER READS -~ HER STATEMENT, Repeats the Charges Al- ready Existing Against Dr. Brown. THE SITUATION STATED. | Fears Expressed That Mrs. Stock- | ton Has Been Induced Not | to Appear. NEW EVIDENCE IS SUBMITTED. } Pastor on Cross- Examination Scores One or Two Very Strong Points. The Mrs. Cooper, as had been predicted, pre- | ferred serious charges against Dr. Brown esterday. She declared, with much | earnestness, that the Overman-Tunnell let- ters are genuine, supporting this state- ment with evidence, which the pastor will | probably find some ulty in overcom- ' { She claimed among other things that Dr. Brown, in his acquaintance with Mrs, Al-| Stockton, was not ministerial, his t at various times proving him to be unfizted to continue in pastoral work, and Mrs. Cooper also sets forth as a fact that Mrs. Blanchard had been intimidated into | statement which Dr. Browa knew Hattie Cooper in a supplem ing that Miss Overman supported her | charge, all ed with cons Mrs. Tunnell, and that the two occupied »om for one week prior to the arrest of a Mrs. Davidson. The nature of the con- racy was not named in the charge handed the committee. Miss Cooper also | that M nell was spirited alleged away from the home Dr. Brown, inti- | mating that if she was present the pastor 1ld find himself amid a sea of breake 1 he could not be extricated. | ittee on charges spent a busy vesterd First Mr. Mason of | Society. He m hours pared al ffect that Dr. Brown had ied to intimidate a young lady member his church o sed an on as to the pastor’s gu The force used was embodied in an ex- ed determination to assail the young | S C. acter unless she should un- of heart. Mr. Mason's rge was backed up with an affidavit | nad expre T w d | pelled 1o leave the college. Brown, and he would read the shorter re- port, which is as follows: | Your committee of three has received the following charges in writing, and: properly signed, copies of which have been put in the hands of Dr. Brown: First—That the Overman letters are gen- uine. Second—That Dr. Brown in his acquaintance with Mrs. Albertine Stockton was not ministe- rial in his conduct. 5 Third—That Dr. Brown has been guilty of intimidation to Mrs. Lena Blanchard. Fourth—That Dr. Brown was concerned in a conspiracy with Miss Overman to spirit Mrs. Tunnell away from this City secretly. At the evening session Mrs. Cooper gave to the council a lengthy and well-worded statement of her knowledge of the charges against Dr. Brown. With the exception | of one or two new pcints the document | presented nothing that has not already been published. She sprang a surprise on | the accused pastorand his friends when | she declared that ber first positive knowl- | edge of wrongdoing came when Rev. Mr. Coplin informed her by letter that he knew a Christian lady who was familiar with the alleged misconduct of Dr. Brown | s Overman. i ooper said that the pastor’s rela- | | with Mrs. Stockton were true in de- | tail and fact, that lady having admitted as much to her. She had learned, however, | that an effort had been made to prevent | the widow’s appearance before the coun- | cil, but that she (Mrs Cooper) had great | faith in her ultimately coming. Concera- | ing the disappearing of Mrs. Tunnell she said that she had been informed by a re- porter that the lady in question left the home of Dr. Brown about 11:30 o’clock on | the Sunday night following the arrest of | Mrs. Davidson. She made her exit by | means of a side or rear door. | On cross-examination by Dr. Brown, Mrs. Cooper was asked to repeat the state- ment about Mrs. Tunnell, and the pastor then said that he had asked this for a purpose as there was neither side nor rear entrance to his home. The full statement of Mrs. Cooper, to- | gether with the day’s proceedings, will be found below. | Cousiderable matter has been printed | recently concerning some supposed trouble Dr. Brown had with a student 2 Oberlin. The following telegram is self- explanatory: | SPRINGFIELD, OmTo, (Ohio) special here to-day the Congregational preach who has gained especial notoriety on account of charges brought by Mrs. Davidson, a_mem- | ber of his ehureh, was at one time & student at | Oberlin College. 'Young Brown and the entire | Brown family were of good character, being | considered honest, religious and upright. At | 18 of age theyoung man married Miss Mary Wheat of Oberlin, but as it was against | the rules for a student'to marry, he was com- | He pursued his studies elsewhere. The council will meet again to-day at 2 o’clock, when the examination of Mrs. | Cooper will be resumed. R CHARGES FORMULATED. One Set of Accusations Based on | Letters Submitted to the Coun- cil by Mrs. Cooper. | Dr. W. C. Pond opened the session of the council in the afternoon with prayer. He returned thanks for the harmonious | character of the proceedings of Tuesday and asked that the same conditions might bless the proceedings of yesterd The moderator—Among the last items of business last night was the appointment of a committee of three to receive and | formulate charges against Dr. Brown, to | be investigated by the council. | At this point there wasa demand for a | | tollowing THE MODERATOR ADMINISTERING THE OATH ” TO MRS. SARAH B. COOPER. use of the woras in the report of the com- | mittee which defined the duties of such a person as being similar to thoseof a judge -one who is to act in_a strictly Y ial manner—and then withdrew ail opposition to the appointment of Mr. Woodhams, who was duly elected and in- vited to take a seat on the platform with the council members, Moderator Mc 1 called for the other report of the committee. Before present- ing it Chairman Hoyt spoke as follows: There was a diiference of opinion among the emhers of the o &s to whether you s any other power than that of re. mulating charges that might be Some of the ‘committee held formulate and summarize » from newspavers and other &ve done both. I would pre- report and les on of the other. ceiving and brought tc hat we should made u W Your committee of three has received the s in writing, and_properly signed cop! hands of Dr. Brown: 1. That the Overman letters are genuine. - Brown, in his acquaintance with That Dr. Brown has been guilty of intimi dation in respect to Mrs. Leoa Blanenard. 4. That Dr. Brown was ¢ acy with Miss Overman to spirit Mss. Tun- away from the C y. e proceedings then continued as fol- Th low: Pond—I move that the committee be in- structed to present the second report. Brown—I have not received & copy of the document read before this body. 1 was not furnished a copy of the document just read. Prominent Figures at the Congregational ing the Charges Formulated From the Newspaper Articles. [Sketched from life yesterday by a *‘Call” artist.] Church Council — E. C. Williams Read- in which all the facts of the alieged act were recited. There was a hitch, however, in presenting this charge to the council, and it was found in the desire to withhold the name of the young lady. The matter was finally passed, to be taken up at the evening session should there be a demand for it. Mrs. Cooper and her daughter were the next to appear before the committee, the substance of their charges being given above. When the doors leading to the lecture- room were opened for the afternoon ses- sion there was a momentary crush, which subsided when it was found that there was | room for all. The ticket of admission | scheme seemed to have fallen through, for the gene public found no difticulty in gaining admittance. Mrs. Brown and Miss Overman came early, securing seats in the front row. Just across the aisle sat Mrs. Cooper and her daughter, Miss Hattie, and on the left of the former was Mrs. Lena Blanchard, who figured in the affidavits charging Mrs, Cooper with stuffing the church ballot. | At 2 o'clock Dr. Brown came by a side | door, carrying a handbag. Ten minutes later the council filed into the room, and was 1mmediately called to order by Mod- tor MeLean requesting Dr. Pond to | d in prayer. Rev.J. M. Tenny of San | Jose was the only member absent, he hav- | ing been called home to attend a funeral. Attorney Woodhams on motion of, Mr. Ioyt was made, not without objection from Dr. Brown, judge advocate of the council with privilege of a seat on the platform. Mr. Woodhams’ special dutes | are to look after the interest of both prose- cution and defense in a perfectly impartial way. The report of the committee on chamges was then presented by Chairman | Hoyt. He said there was a difference of opinion among the committee concerning the matter of revising the newspaper statements of the charges against Dr. | suggest merely. were not selecting a man to prosecute Dr. ! fo rolleall, and this was ordered by the mod- erator. It showed all present, except Rev. J. M. Tenney of San Jose, who had been called home on some urgent business. In response to the reguest of the mod- erator for the report of the committee on charges; its chairman, Dr. H. N. Hoyt of Sacramento, announced that the commit- tee had prepared two reports, One was formulated fiom letters making certain charges, which had been submitted by two ladies, and the other outlining the method of procedure before the council. He was asked to read the latter first, and did so, as follows: It is the recommendation of your jointcom- mittee of five that the case of Dr. Brown, before this council, be conducted by an officer or com- mitteeman, with duties similar to those of judge advocate; that is to say, said ofiicer or committeeman 1o have charge of the presenta- tion of all evidence to come belore the council and to question all witnesses in examination, both direct and_eross, excepting the right al- ready accorded Dr. Brown to appear in his own defense as counsel representing himself; and also excepting the right of any member of the council to propose questions to any witness under examination. Dr. Hoyt nominated Mr. Woodhams to take charge of the presentation of evidence to the council. This brought Dr. Brown to his feet in an objective mood. He said: 1 do not rise positively to oppose this, but to 1 would be very glad to ac- cept Mr. Woodhams as the prosecuting officer in this case. But it seems to me anomalous to me that he who has always been a friend and who has voted for me on every question that has arisen of late should be now asked to take & position directly opposed to me. It wonld be unfair to him_ and unpleasent, and he would be placed 1n an embarrassing position as my prosecutor. Hoyt—The thought expressed by Dr. Brown was not in the mind of the committee. We Brown, but one w is simply to be the busi- ness agent of the council to present the proper matters to-it for its action. Dr. Brown’s attention was called to the | vas € CWremrys _ ean—You said you were familiar newspaver reports. We agreed to ou with-copies of all documents simply that you migkt not be surprised. Brown—I ask to have a copy of all documents that are in the nature of charges against me. Ithink that T'am entitled to them. It was decided to provide Dr. Brown with copies of all papers, after which Chairman Hoyt spoke as follows: We have not selected or procured witnesses to prove these charges. They have simply been summarized. Two persons came before the committee and submitted written evidence and we have summarized it, as shown in our report. In addition to this we have prepared another paper which summarizes the charges in the newspaper articles. Mooar—I wish to know if the committee has the evidence on which the charges in the newspapers are made. Hoyt—We have not had time to secure it, but have made inquiries s to who wiil testify and where they can be found. But we are in doubt as to what the procedure is to be, and we have asked Mr. Woodhams to help us in this matter. 1 think that the report we have already made, and the letters I hold in my hands, will make clearas to what we should do. There are 1adies here who are ready to make statements to substantiate these charges E. C. Willinms—if the newspaper charges are brought up and the people who caused them to be printed do not come forward then Dr. Brown goes 2lear. If these people do not come forward we must believe that they are afraid of the truth, or that ihe matters caused to be published by them are not true. Dr. Pond's motion was adopted, and Chairman Hoyt spoke as foliows: Isit the desire of the council to hear the sec- ond report previous to hearing the letters we hold in our hands, or do you desire to leave entirely in our possession the matters pertain- ing to the first charges? McLean—The council has assumed the un- usual duty of ascertaining what charges there are in the community, and 1 do not see how they can go forward without formulating charges. Itis unusual for a council to show such a deference to & church and to an accused pastor s has been shown up to now in this case. We will, therefore, hear these second charges. Chairman Hoyt read them as fotlows; Charges and specifications preferred against the Rev. C. 0. Brown, pastor of First Congre- gational Church: CHARGE 1—CONDUCT PREJUDICIAL TO THE WELFARE OF THE CHURCH. Specification first—In this, Mrs, Davidson to be concerned in a conspiracs to extorta large sum of money from himself, he publicly rccognized and treated her as & th Christian woman and spoke of her to otbers in terms of approval, thereby misleading them as 10 her irue character and bringing reproach upon the Christian ministry and scandal upon the church., Specification second—In this, that knowing in his personal experience that Mrs. Stockton guilty of permitting immodest and im- e to you the | s of which have been put in the | Stockton, was not ministerial | wcerned inga con- | that knowing proper liberty by the opposite sex, he made no effort, s her’ pastor, to recall her to theright | path and warn her of the impropriety and dan- gerof ber conduct. Specification thi he was of a knowled specification h that possessed as e facts recited in said C. O. Brown, con- tinued his al atimecy with the sad Mrs, | Stockton, taking her on extended trips over the street ratlronds and dining with her at ublic restaurants without the company or knowledge of his wife. Specification fourth—In the alleged facts mentic | speeifications, he took n | to the attention of the ch the pastor and the said Stockton a mem- ber, but by his silence and conduct toward the said Mrs. Stockton gave ground for the belief on the part of herfellow-members of the church that she was living an exemplary Christian life and was worthy of their Christian confi- dence and sympatt CHARGE 2—CONDUCT UNBECOMING MINISTE Specificetion—In this, Brown, while pastor of ian church, paid & large sum of mo: nely & Mrs. Davidson, to be used by her in’in s. Baddin Lo withhold frc public cer- | ged information po by her relat- | ertain scandalou criminal conduct part of said €. O. Brown; which money | paid to Mrs. Davidson covertly and in | ecret ue of any intent | in such pay: 1 to secure the | silence of the said n_and with no | provision for eny s of the | transaction and convers: connected there- | with, through whose testimony the innocent and proper intention prompting the payment could be understood and made apparent. CHARGE MORAL CONDUCT. Specification first—In this, thaton the—day of —, 189-, the said C. O. Brown is alleged, in put his arms around | under what she | on, , that knowing in_the last two steps to bring them | 0t which he was | | A CHRISTIAN t the said C. O. ! e strong (ani ion. Specification second—In this, that he, the said | C. O. Browu, is alieged to have been guilty of criminal interconrse with Miss Overman, and retain her in his house, knowing that his re- jations with her were i contravention of the | law, both divine and civil. | In an evident state of indignation Dr. Brown arose at the conclusion of the report and remarked : Is any action to be taken upon a document with such important blanks in it—blank day of biank. I was once forced to defend myseif sgainst & woman whose mind was blank, and I do not think 1 should be called upon to de- fend myself against such a charge unless dates be given, Hoyt—I wish to say a few words in explana- | tion at this point. We don’t feel ourselves to be prosecutors, and don’t like to be called prosecutors. All that the committee wanted 10 do was to make everyihing clear, and if Dr. PBrown were my brother or my father—he is wy dear, personal friend—I should have to do everything that I shall do throughout this council. My idea is to make the matter as | clear as the noonday sun. And this I consider | the best act of friendship to Dr. Brown that | could be done by any one. And so I wish that the word prosecutor and prosecution would 1ot be used more than necessary. McLean—The extraordinary deference paid to the wishes of the church and its | pastor _has placed this council in the | apparent attitude of a prosecutor. Qur aticntion has been called to certain un- formulated charges, and if this investiga- tion is to amount to anything the moderator | sees 1o way except that these charges must be | formulated, and that we haye assumed to | formulate them must not be construed into an unfriendly attitude. 1 have nodoubt but that | Dr. Hoyt expresses the feeling of every mem- ber of this council. The greatest friendshi can be shown to Dr. Brown only by a thoroug investigation. Brown—Dr. Hoyt has been very kind in the | expression of his opinion and in defense of his | position. 1 would uot uave the slightest | antagonism aroused by whet I may say; but 1 | must use certain terms tosave circumlocution, and I hope the council will keep this in mind. | It is not with any feeling against any one that I used these terms, The report was duly adopted, and when Moderator McLean announced that the report was not the property of the council Dr. Brown again spoke. He said: | One thing ought to be amended. Facts are | spoken. 1 would like it better if they were | referred to as alleged facts. | ‘The suggested change was made. | Dr. Mooar suggested that in order to | avoid the use of the word ‘“prosecutor’ the term “investigating committee” be hereafter vsed. The moderator said it would be so understood. At this point the two letters on which the first series of charges were based were placed in the hands of Mr. Woodhams, who read them. They follow: For the Clerk of Congregational Council—My DEAR Str: I charge that the Overman letters incriminating Dr. Brown are genuine. I have roof to substantiate this fact. I charge that Dr. Brown in his acquaintance with Mrs. Albertine Stockton was not ministerial in his conduct and showed himself unfitted to be a minister of the {gospel in good standing. I charge that Dr. Brown dintimidated Mrs. Lena Blanchard, thr!nluning her with arrest and imprisonment if she did not sign a statement | which she told him was_false. Very truly yours, SARAH B. COOPER. Gentlemen of the Council, Through the Commit- tee on Charges—DEAR SIRS: I-charge that Miss Overman (one of the principals in the so-called Brown scandal) was in conspiracy with Mrs. Tunnell, the recipient of the famous Overman letters, and that they roomed together at the Cosmopolitan Hotel, corner Fifth and Mission streets, in the City of San_Francisco, one week Tior to the arrestof Mrs. Dayidson, now await- | ng trial. From good authoriry 1learned Mrs, Tunnell was concealed in Dr. Brown’s resi. dence, 1703 Geary street, San_Francisco, and that she (Mrs, Tunnell) was spizited away {rom the City secretly by Dr. Brown. Respectfully and sincerely yours, HARRIET COOPER. Mr. Woodhams explained that these to ladies had promilegw appear and sub- stantiate the charges contained in the let- ters they had presented to the committee-| on charges. Brown—If this letter sent by Miss Har- riet Cooper is to become a matter of record I would ask the council to stiike out all between the words ‘‘from” and ‘“‘now awu]itinz trial.” Miss Overman is not on trial. Mr. Woodbams informed Dr. Brown that he was out of order; that the council had no power to amend any documents sub- mitted to it; that it could amend only its own records, Brown—Does this letter become a matter of record in this form? It seems to be a matter of grave injustice to Miss Overman. Parkinson—Those letters are not the report of this committee. They were simply author- ized to receive letters or charges, and from :hem formulate charges or specifications against Dr. Brown. They do not say Miss Overman, or any one else, was engaged in a couspiracy. This closed the controversy on this point. Mr. Woodhams announced that he | guilt or innocence of the Rev. Was not prepared to present evidence, and that he thought he would be prepared to do 8o in the evening. It was decided to defer the taking of evidence till then. Mr. iWl?odlmms then addressed the council as ollows: The members of the council will realize that b it will be impos: evidence to s it would only be just to myself, the council and Dr. Brown to have it understood that per- sons who have evidence should present it to me as your representative so that I can place it in a proper way before the council. Mr. Me! testimon any per- son from iiability for libel or slander the same as in testifyiug in a civil court. On his own suggestion Mr. Woodhams was authorized to issue subpenaes for wit- nesses. Dr. Brown asked to have each charge separately specified, but Mr. Woodhams thought they could best be considered in the form presented. Dr. Mooar suggested that all persons who came to testify be placed under oatn, the same to be administered by the mod- erator. The motion was divided, the first part being passed and that authorizing the moderator to administer the oath being laid over for the evening session. Just before the adjournment of the afternoon meeting E. C. Williams moved that the representatives of the press be re- quested to make a prominent notice in their reports of the council that any one who knows anything about these charges should report the same to Mr. Woodhams. le for me to go out and get | The motion was adopted. Dr. Rader opened the evening session with the customary prayer. The minutes of the afternoon session were read and approved. On the motion of Mr. Wood- hams the moderator was instructed to administer the oath to witnesses. Mr. Woodhams then again defined his position in the investigation disclaiming all intention of partiality or bias and ask- ing for a suspension of judgment by any who might think he at any time ‘acted otherwise than im&mrtiully. Dr. Brown raised the question of classi- fying the charges so asto have all those relating to different individuals treated separately, but he wasoverruled by Mr. Woodhams, who stated that all witnesses would be asked to testify to everything they new in connection with any of the charges or persons mentioned in then This matter being settled Mr. Wood- hams announced he was ready to go on by producing as a witness Mrs, Sarah B, Cooper. “She has prepared,’” he said, ‘‘a state- ment on the matter which she wishes to read without interruption, after which she is willing to be examined by whoever wishes to do so.” Mrs. Cooper ascended the platform and repared to read her statement, when Dr, rown asked that she be sworn. She then took the following oath: You solemnly promise in the presence of the scient and heert-searching God that you are the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, according to the best of your knowledge, in_the matter in which you e celled as 2 witness and_respecting the Charles 0. Brown, D.D., upon the charges before this council as you shall answer it to the great judge of the quick and the dead. Dr. Brown then asked: “Am I to under- stand that I am to be debarred, if the mat- ter prove irrelevant, from my privilege as a defendant? Am I to sit here and be compelled to listen, possibly for an hour, to matters irrelevant?"’ Moderator McLean informed Dr. Brown that Mrs. Cooper would be allowed to read her paper without interruption and | that other witnesses should be allowed to do the same. Mrs. Cooper read as follows: Gentlemen of the Council: As preliminary to the main statement which I have to make, I desire to say, that whatever I have said or done and whatever 1 may say or do, in_regard 10 this unhappy affeir has been inspired by one sin§le motive, and that is, to getat the essentiel truth of the matter in qfi\esuou, namely, the guilt or innocence of Rev, Dr. C. 0. Brown, as respects the grave rumors (I will not say charges) that have been and are current against him. 5 That my earnestness in this matter to get at the truth was inspired by no previous prejudice or aversion to Dr. Brown, I solemnly afirm. In support of this affirmation I challenge any one to truthfully testify to a single disloyal word or act on my own part, from the eariiest date of his ministry up to the time of the pub- lication of the Overman letters in the Ex- aminer of January 2 of the present year. On the contrary, I call to rewrembrance my many public utterances, at the meetings of the Bay Association and at the social festivals of the church, such as Forefathers’ day and the like, where I have, in response to toasts and other- wise, uttered the strongest words in commen- dation of Dr. Brown’s zeal and labors in behalf of the church. I desire, also, to refer to m{ weekly reports of Dr. Brown’s sermons in the Bulletin, in all of which I have shown myself, by the printed and published records, from the earliest date of his pastorate, Auf\ln 14, 1892, up to the date of the publication of the Overman let- ters, to have been his loyal friend and sup- porfer. Many who did not like Dr. Brown’s pulpit ministrations will bear me witness that they have asked me not to report his sermons, on the ground that it tended to strengthen his ministry, and they desired him to resign. I invariably replied that I believed it to be the duty of every church member to work to build up the church. I always argued with them that when we united with the chursh we pledged our vows to seek the highest good of the church; that pastors were local and transi- tory, but that the church of God was univer- sal and permanent. Ihave been the stanch friend and defender of Dr. Brown in his min- istry and work to scores who have not liked him personally or in the pulpit. This is well bstantiate these charges. I think | ‘Frcu\-h, Protessor Lloyd occupied the pulpit. | or done, or what I may hereafter say or do, is entirely free from personal prejudice, or pre- conceived notions or opinions in” regard to Dr. Brown; and that it is done only in the inter- estof purity, truth and righieousness. Any one who knows, or thinks he knows, of dire contagion, whether physical or moral, in the community, or in the church, and ddes not do his utmost to present its propagation, Is, in truth, responsible for the result thal may ensue. To conceal anything bearing upon a case like this where the best intersts of soclety are involved is to be an abettor and coadjutor; or, to use a legal phrase, is to be accesscry be- fore the fact. | What it has cost me of anguish and suffering | to take the steps I have taken, God alone knows. Isaw Gethsemane before me, but 1 dared not shrink from it. With deep humility and greet pain I quote the words of the Master whom T seek toserve: “The cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it?” And now, trusting to the eternal strength and in the ultimate triumph of truth and righteousness, 1 take up the plain, simple | statement of facts and incidents as they have been unfoided to me since the beginning of this sad affair. | On the morning of Sundey, December 29, T | was startled and astonished by the publication | of & terrible scandal concerning our pastor, Dr. Brown. Loving the church as I do, next | to my home, I felt as 1f my own home had | been assailed. At the close of the morning service, just be- | fore I opened my Bible, cl T extended my hand to Dr. Brown and ured him of my earnest sympathy, my perfect confidence in his integrity, and of my unqualified support in | this fearful attack upon his character, which I felt sure was born of malignity and evil. He | thanked me heartily and said: * ter Cooper, the blush of shame shall never be brought to yout cheek by anything which I have done.” The utlerance seemed to me to be heartfeit and sincere. I have oiten been called a born advocate. 1 certainly am a true and | loyal defender of my iriends, and of those whom T believe to be misjudged and abused. | ot satisfied with my verbal expression of ympathy and profter of help in the aiternoon, after having completed my report of Dr. Brown’s sermon for publication, I wrote him a letter full of encouragement, bizding him be brave and hopeful, reminding him of the woras of the poet-philosopher: For right s right, since God is God, And right the day will win, To doubt would be disloyalty, To falter would be sin. This letter I directed to his'home address, 1708 Geary street, my daughter consulting the | telephone directory to make sure of the num- | ber. My diary confirms these facts. I mention this fact in connection with this matter be- cquse Dr. Brown reproached me publicly on the platiorm on the evening I made my pro- test for never having written him on the sub- ject. This protest was made against the adop- tlon of the resolution of confidence in his | integrity, after asking for a suspension of judgment, which I then characterized as a ogical absurdity, and which position I still | maintain, _ But to return to the chronological order of | incidents. Bear in mind that this letter of mine to Dr. Brown, wherein I expressed con dence in his innocence, was wri ber en on Decem- ), the last Sunday of the year. I proffered mpathy and any servica I could rende; days later, on Thursday morning, Jan- | fresh revelation of detailsan: uary 2, the Examiner published the fifst in- stallment of the Overman letters. And it was | just at this point that my confidence in the | integrity of Dr. Brown began to falter. why? Because a fac-simile letter of Miss O man’s, published in that paper, was in thed exact chirography of 1{tters which Miss Over- | man had written to our Normal Kindergart trainer and 1o me in regard to en‘ering the normal training eclass for kindergartners, | Striking peculiarities in orthography and syntax, in the use and non-useé of capitals, and many other distinctive characteristics con- vinced me that the letters came from the same | hand. My faith in Dr. Brown’s integricy was somewhat shaken, but Istill hoped that the | carkness might give place to dawn. | On Sunday, January 5, Dr. Brown did not | reported the sermon, as usual, and after com- pleting it I agein wrote to Dr. Brown. I could | not speak as cheerily asin iy former letter, but I wrote as strongly esI could. Isaid it | was right to apprehend a blackmailer, but I | asked him why he did not take the precaution to have an officet of the law secreted in his study and then draw out Mre. Davidson’s state- ment from her, pay her the money, give her a receipt, and at that point have the officer take her into custody? “In that way,” I added, | ‘‘you would have protected the church, your- self and saved greatpain to all your friends, But I closed the letter with words of hope, quoting that fine and stalwart sentiment: Right forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne. £ s & % % % Yet behind the dread unknown Standeth God within the shadow Keeping watch above hig owp. My confidence has been shaken, but not de- stroy From this letter, to which my diary of that date bears record. I received no reply. Next came the publication of further letiers from Miss Overman to Mrs. Tunnell. These letters were dated from early in June, 1895, to August 1-—covering two months. And it was these letters that still further shook my confi- dence in Dr. Brown. In every one of these let- ters, save that of July 24, Miss Overman writes of the kindergarten, of her desire to hear from our normal trainer, Miss Stovall, and from me, and of her having been accepted for training, She says in her letter of August 1: “Yesterday Ireceived a letter from Miss Stovall informing me that the position of assistant teacher was still open for me in the school supported by the First Congregational Church. Strange, adds Miss Overman, “that she should have so placed me.” Miss Overman further wrote that Miss Stovall spoke of Dr. B., and_that “‘he very hly recommended my moral cl Very kind of him, don't you think? castically adds. On making inquiry of Miss Stovall, our nor- mel trainer, she informed me that she had | asked Dr. Brown for credentials, according to Miss Overman’s suggestion, and that he had refilied to her question in a Somewhat curt and hasty manner, as if annoyed, in the words, “Above reproach—above reproach,” leaving the impression upon Miss Stovall's mind that he did not care to have Miss Overman take the kindergarten course of training. Thus you will see that every fact and circumstance in the Overman letters reearding the kinder- garten, as published in the Examiner, corre- sponds exactly with the facts and circum- stances as they occurred in our experience with Miss Overman. It is, therefore, neither upjust nor illogieal to infer that other facts and circumstances contained in the Overman letters might have a basic foundation in fact. Atall events, by the laws of evidence, such & conclusion cannot be called un-Christian or unkind. Iam certain those letters are gen- uine, and, heing genuine, I cannot see how Dr. Brown can be & man of integrity. The publication of the Overman letters, with 50 much in them relating to the plan for her kindergarten training, naturally turned the tnought of the daily press toward me for in- formation, and from that time to the present I have not been forgotten by my friends of the press. And I will say just here that in all the numerous interviews in the search after news 1do not know of a single instance in_which I have been fincorrectly reported. It has been my experieuce thata polite and sincere treat- ment of the representatives of the press has been met with a corresponding polite and sin- cere treatment on the part of the press. There was one expression which I made in great earnestness, “Oh, why does he not con- fess?” which leaped to my lips unbidden at a of incidents that fairly overwhelmed me with their corrobor: tive strength and confirmation. I felt thai a full and hounest confession was the only road to peace. David sinned deeply, but he con- fessed and was forgiven, and some of his noblest work was done after his great sin and confession. Peter denied his Lord, but he was forgiven because of his penitence. And, feel- ing as Idid, that Dr. Brown might have gone wrong, 1 longed to have him confess and repent, knowing that ‘‘he that covereth hissins shall not prosper; but whoso confesseth and forsaketh them shall have mercy.” “If we confess our sins he is faithful and just to_for- give us our sins, and to cleanse us from all un- righteousness.” This was why I cried out, “Why does he n ot confess?"” Ifelt thatit was the oanly road to peace. Then came a deluge of letters of all sorts and kinds. From December 29 to the present time I have received over 450 letters. Some of them were strongly confirmatory in character. As for example, one was from a clergyman who said that he had been in the ministry for nearly forty years. From his lengthy letter of aboutsix pages I quote the following: “I am acquainted with a Christian lady who knew of their (Dr. Brown’s and Miss Overman's) rela- tionsin 1394, and warned Miss Overman and Mrs. Tunnell of the storm that would ineyita- bly break upon them in the future. One of the strongest links in the chain of evidence,” con- tinues the writer, “is the hasty flight of Mrs. Tunnell, who knew more of Miss Overman’s secrets and life than any one else. She had no reason of her own for going. She must have disappeared in the interest of one or more who desire to get her out of reach of both the civil and ecclesiastical courts.” The name of the J. M. CLIFFORD. YESTERDAY I CONVERSED WITH Mr. J. M. Clifford, of 265 S. Main street, Los Angeles, California. He is one of the leading merchants of Los Angeles,and isa gentleman of strict integrity and high aims. He told me much about the city of Los Angeles, its boom, its collapse, its steady growth and its now thriving import- known to many who are here present and to scores of others who would bear witness to the truth of what I here affirm. In support of this statement I would say that on Sunday evening, July 21st, of last year, in response 1o an invitation from Dr. Erown, I spoke in bis gulpfl on “The Religious Train- ing of Children.” The church was filled, many strangers being present. In introducing me Dr. Brown characterized me as ‘“Assistant Pastor,” to which kind allusion I eraciously demurred, at the same time admitting that 1 desired to do all in my power i0 aid him in church work. This shows the true state of ieeling as it existed up to January of the pres- ent year. I donot remember to have ever been refused a favor by Dr. Brown, except when 1 endeavored to secure the church for the o]genln; meeting for one of the congresses, the Religious Congress, when Dr. Brown ob- jected to'having a Jewish rabbi in his pulpit. I remarked pleasantly thatour Master used to g0 into the synagogue to teach on the Sabbath day. The trustees and deacons were all de- sirous for the congress to have the church. That was but a passing matter, ana I never gave it another thought. Ideem it necessary to say this at the start, | in order toshow clearly that whatI have said ance. Then he spoke of Joy’s Vegetable Barsaparilla. Said he: “I have no hesitation in indorsing Joy’s Vegetable Sarsaparilla. I believe it is a vety fine spring medicine. The early spring has caught many men and women unpre- pared, and there is much Jassitude and dull feeling. One can’t always be just well, so one needs a spring medicine to tone up and cleanse the system. I have used Joy's Vegetable Sarsuparilla to my great advan- tage. Before using the remedy I felt ont of sorts, blue. I was not a sick man, yet I did not feel as rugged as I desired. Joy's Vegetable Sarsaparilla has its advantage over other spring medicines in that it con- tains only herbs. There being no minerals in this remedy, one does not have to show its effect in facial blemishes, blood spots and Sarsaparilla trademarks. If you take the remedy you will soon begin to realize its importance. - Again its action on the bowels is simply remarkable. There are no griping pains, no nauseating feelings to go through. Yes, I recommend Joy’s Veg- etable Sarsaparilla.” » The experience of this Los Angeles mer- chant is the experience of hundreds of men and women who have usel Joy’s Vegeta- ble Sarsaparilla. Many people are at first averse to using Joy’s Vegetable Sarsapa- rflla, but when they once try the grand herb remedy, they invariably recommend it to their friends and even chance ac- quaintances. The people of the Pacific Coast are now alive to the substitution business. There are still a few draggists trying to palm off something “‘just as good,” but you don’t have to take the ““justas good,” you can get Joy’s Vegetable Sarsaparilla, if you insist. Baja California ‘Damiana Bitters Is a powertul aphrodisiac and specific tonie for the sexual and urinary organs of both sexes, and a £Teat remedy for diseases of the kidneys and blad- der. A’ great Restorative, Invigoratorand Nervine, Sells on its own Merits—no long-winded testi- monials necessary. ASPBLR, ALFS & BRUNE, Agents, 323 Market St., S. ¥,—(Yend for Circular) NEW TO-DAY. Sole Agents for the MAGGIONI KID GLOVES. HSH DRESS FABRICS Organdies, Crepes, Sateens, Plain and Figured Dimitios, Batistes, Lawns, Crepons, Swisses in Dotted and " Eyelet Effects, Bte., Ete., In Patterns and at Prices Never Offered Before. The following are Special Values just opened : All new. Dresden designs. 40 pieces Dresden Stripe Eateen, effect marvelous for inexpensive material. 40 pieces New Cotton Crepon Wavelet, in all evening shades, cannot be surpassed for evening waists lnd2 s dresses. . . Yard. 50 pieces xtra Fine Importe Dimitiesin....... Plain and Figured, Yard. 30 pleces new and handsome Persian and Dresden designs,in imported Swisses, exclusive patterns. The most beautiful material in the market, which must be seen to be appreciated............. Yard. Samples Mailed Free Upon Application. EXTRA: DRESS SILKS! Grand exhibit of advance styles in high- class Noveity Silks for spring, comprising Colored Persian, Dresden, Chameleon, Marbie- ized, Mottled and Pompadour Silks, in the handsomest patterns ever shown. See them. MAIL ORDERS PROMPTLY FILLED. NEWNAY & LEVINSON, 125, 127, 129, 131 Kearny St. Branch Store 742 and 744 Market St, HACKMEIER'S HOTEL, 123-129 EDDY ST. HAS CHARGED HANDS, AND IS NOW U der new msnagement. First-class in all ) polntments, with secondclass prices Room ana 01 $la and up; rooms without board 50c a up. Special rates by week ormonth. Meals 25¢. Free bus (o and from Hotel. GEORGE GRUKENIG, Proprietor.