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

THE SAN BROWN MAY BF TRIED Indignation Expressed for the Fraudulent Press Report. THE PASTOR CENSURED. McLean and Rader Give the! Defiant Minister Some Hard Raps. THE CONGREGATION AROUSED. | Steps Will Probably Be Taken To- Day With a View of Forcing Brown to Resign. Rev. Willzam Rader—It is not clear what Dr. Brown did before the council | met, but it is painfully certain that since it ndjourned he has done some things which deserve unqualified con- demnation. Rev. Mr. Sink, Stockton—If it be true that he dictated that dispatch to The United Press, intending to give out the impression that he had been acquitted, Dr. Brown las lost all principle. Layman Curtis, Sacramento—At first it was plainly apparent that Brown was extremely antagonistic tous. He seemed to think that we all stood in the light of enemies. Rev. Dr. Cruzan, Park Congrega- tioual Church, San ¥Francisco—The First Congregational Church would have the right to let the matter drop after filing the findings of the council, but it would look like ignoring not only the findings but the charges against Dr. Brown as well. Rev. F. Flawith, Fourth Congrega- tional Church—If Dr. Brown has said that he would not thank the couneil I think he has done wrong. I certainly would thank a council if, like Dr. | Brown, I had been a party to its hav- ing Deen called. At any rate, what- cver Dr. Brown may do, his church should not fail to be courteous and to | thank the council, which it had called to settle a matter pertaining to itself. G. C. Dodge, Alameda-1I think his remarks about the council unjust and uncalled for, and indicated ungrateful- ness. Dr. Brown has certaluly been very lenieutly deait with, Itev. H. Melville Tenney, San Jose— If our verdict has not cleared his min- isterial character from all taint of sus- picion, the facts must be blamed and not the council. Dr. McLean, Oakland—If he really left the church and went to The Call office after saying he was going home, and gave or caused to be given any such | false report as he is said to have given, then he has most certainly thrown him- self liable to discipline by the Bay | Association. Any man who would give out such a false report would even do worse to protect himself. Pastor Brown to Secretary McCoy— Allow me to introduce Mrs. Davidson, one of the best workers in my church. Dr. Brown’s abortive attempt to foster on the people of the United Statesa false impression of the findings of the council meets the unqualified condemnation of his late juages and others interested in Congregational affairs. This dispatch will | bear repeating first on account of its utter falseness and the figure it will cutin Dr. Brown’s futare ministry. It reads as fol- lows: BAN FRANCIsco, March 17. LIThe ecclesiastical court of inquiry which has been engaged in investigating certain charges preferred against Rey. Dr. C. O. Brown of the First Congregational Church of this City con- cluded its labor this evening at 10 o’clock, bringing in a unanimous verdict acquitting the pastor on every charge againsthim, and conciuding with “a hope and prayer thatthe sharp lessons of recent months may be taken to heart by him, and in consequence his future years may be more fruitful than any in the past, and especially that this experience has left this loved and honored church and its pastor with a clearer understanding of their duty to each other and to the Divize Master.” The doctor is satisfied with the decision of the court, which could go no further in vindi- cating him than it did. The finding will have & material bearing on the charge of extortion now pending against Mrs. Mary A. Davidson. When interviewed by a Carn reporter last evening regarding the extraordinary dispatch dictated to him by Dr. Brown, George Fraser, night editor of The United Press, said: “You of course understand that The United Press is wholly unbiased in this as in all other cases of a similar nature, and that personally I am not acquainted with a single member of Dr. Brown’s congre- gation nor with the pasior himself and have no interest whatsoever in the scandal. “In company with Mr.Nagle and another gentleman, whose name I did not catch, Dr. Brown called upon me on Tuesday night last at about 11:30 o’clock. After an exchange of greetings the doctor said: * *Mr, Fraser, I wish vou would say to the American public through The United Press that the ecclesiastical court of in- quiry has concluded its labors and has found Dr. Brown innocent of every charge preferred against him. The verdict is an absolute vindication.’ “‘After congratnlating the pastor I asked him if he would kindly indicate just what he desired me to say. He thereupon dic- tated the story in question precisely as it bas been published in Tuk Cary, being as- sisted by Mr, Nagle, who offered sugges- tions as to its wording. In reply to a ques- tion from me the doctor concluded : “‘Yes, you may say that Dr. Brown is thoroughly satisfied with the verdict of the council. The members of the court could go no further in vindicating him than they did.” O ANOTHER CHARGE which I did, leaving the reading public to | judge the verdict for themselves.” The reception and filing of the findings of the ecclesiastical council by the First Congregationai Church does not end the Brown scandal by any means, as had been generally supposed. According to the opinions of persons well informed on parliamentary law and in the procedure of the Congregational church, the next thing in order is to take the report from the file and adopt or reject it. If it is al- lowed to remain on file that condition of affairs will be construed as a deliberate nub to the council, the members of which neglected their own business affairs for a whole month to comply with the disagreeable duty thrust upon them by the First Congregational Church of this ity. Since the council closed its proceedings it has been ascertained that two new and important witnesses were neglected and unsummoned by Judge Advocate Wood- hams. Those witnesses are Secretary Mc- Coy of the Y. M. C. A. and his janitor. It will be remembered that Dr. Brown testified that on the evening on which he took a little walk with Mrs. Davidson that lady expressed a desire to inspect the inte- rior of the Y. M. C. A. building. Dr. Brown volunteered to show her through the building, and according to his sworn statement he and Mrs. Davidson went into toe office of Secretary McCoy and had a conversation, in whick Mrs. Davidson spoke in high terms of Miss Overman’s ability and pietv. Secretary McCoy’s version of the affair is altogether different. According to his statement Dr. Brown asked for the use of the room in which he and Mrs. Davidson might have a private conversation and they were shown to the committee-room by the janitor. steps looking toward securing another pastor. It was rumored last night that Mattie Overman had returned to the City, and was again comfortably sheltered at Brown's house, Inquiry at the pastor’s home failed to elicit any information on this point. AR RS RADER’S PLAIN TALK. Brown’s Attack on the Counclil Will Only Harm Himself. “Dr. Brown's attitude toward the coun- cil is to be greatly deplored. It surely does not impress his friends favorably. There was only one thing for him to do under the circumstances; that is patiently and politely await the action of the church.” . Such were the remarks made by Rev. William Rader yesterday. Continuing, he said: *It was most ungracious for him to in- terfere or in any way influence the pro- ceedings of the Wednesday evening meet- ing. How he can collect sufficient courage | —no, not courage, but a mysterions au- dacity—to occupy the pulpit next Sunday | morning Tam at a loss to know. If he does not wish to await the action of the church, let him honorably withdraw.” “What effect will the verdict, rendered by the council have upon Dr. Brown's future relations'with the Bay Conference ?”’ ‘was asked. “‘The church musi take some actio non this verdict, or the church and Dr. Brown may become a subject for the further con- sideration of the Congregational churches of the Bay Conference,” said Mr. Rader. ‘‘Personally, I have been a friend of Dr. rown, but his mexcusable opposition to the council and his bitterness to all who are unable to see things to suit him will go far toward a general destruction of ministerial confidence in him. > 111t is not clear what Dr. Brown did be- fore the council met, but it is painfully certain that since it adjourned he has done some things which deserve unquali- fied condemnation. If Dr. Brown dic- of the committee’s work is attempted then the factions will show themseives. This may or may not be attempted at the next meeting of the church. The church has nothing at all to do with the ministerial standing of Dr. Brown, and any action they may take will cut no fizure with the Bay Association. The latter place is where his standing will be settled. This body will meet in April, and at that time there promises to be some intergsting de- velopments. “I'am greatly surprised at the report in Wednesday’s CarL of Dr. Brown’s giving out the news of his own vindication. If he really left the church and went to THE CALL office after saying he was gbing home, and gave or caused to be given any such false report as he is said to have given, ihen he has most certainly thrown himselt liable to discipline by the Bay Association. “Any man that would give out sucha false report would do even worse to pro- tect himself. I can bardly believe that he did such a thing. If we can get the origi- nal copy of that statement or the affidavits of the gentlemen who received it that Dr. Brown did furnish such a report to them, then we will have sufficient evidence to sustain a serious charge of unministerial conduct against him.” Dr. McLean seemed greatly grieved at the blow that religion bad received by the conduct of pastors and laymen who had been connected with the church scandals at Portland, Tacoma and San Francisco during the past year. He declared a be- lief at the close of the interview that all would be overruled for the furtherance of the gospel of salvation. Dr. Freedland, acting pastor of the First Congregational Church of Oakland, was asked his opinion of Dr. Brown’s conduct at the Wednesday evening meeting. He replied: ““I have nothing to say.’§ He was next asked what effect the investigation would have upon Dr. Brown’s future. To this he made ihe same reply. He absolutely re- fused to talk upon the subject, and when ‘FRANCISCO CALL, FRIDAY, MARCH 20, 1896. the council. Of course that had to be done. | document it would have borne much “If any vote of approbation or censure | harder on Dr. Brown than it di least, as hard as the testimony would admi Attorney Parkinson, who was a lay member of the council, did not attend the sessions during the last week, and accord- ingly bad nothing to do with the findings. SO g S SMILING TENNEY TALKS. Thinks the Verdict Is Weil Within the Bounds of the Evidence. SAN JOSE, Car., March 19.—Rev. H. Melville Tenney, pustor of the First Con- eregational Church of this city, and who Was a member of the Brown court of in- quiry, when qnestioned to-day as regards Dr. Brown’s attitude toward the members of the council, said: As & member of the council I wish to treat Dr. Brown and his attitude toward our verdict with the same sourtesy and Christian kindli- ness with which I tried to treat himduring the sessions of the council. I feel that in his expressions before his church meeting, if we can trust to reports in newspapers, he has done scant justice toward the council and its opinions as expressed in its findings. There was the most earnest desire on the part of all members of that body to give every item of eyidence in his favor its utmost weight. If our verdict has not clearea his ministerial character from all taint of sus- picion the facts must be blamed and not the council. Ifeel that our findings, so far as they cen- sure Dr. Brown, are well within the bounds of the evidence adduced, instead of being in any degree beyond them. It will be an occasion of sadness to other members of the council; as it is to me,if Dr. Brown does not receive our kindaly admonition in the same spirit in which- 1t was given. s “SHOULD BE GRATEFUL.” Dodge of Alameda Writhes Under Pastor Brown’s Comments. G. C. Dodge, one of the laymen on the Brown jury, was seen by a reporter last evening at his home on Alameda avenue, Alameda. He expressed himself rather yigorously in regard to Brown’s utterances about the to desire to have all the facts brought out, giving to the evidence such weight as it ought to have. *In this matter I feel only the strongest sympathy for Dr. Brown, and 1 appreciate the peculiar circumstances under which he has staggered. 1 have expressed this sympathy to him personally and the hope and the wish that he woula be able to make everything clear and go ahead in his ministry. “Congregationally, the church has a right to stop with the filing of the report, but it would look like ignoring not only the findings of the council but the charges as well.” S THANKS WERE DUE. If. Dr. Brown Was Ungraclous His Church Should Not Be So. Rev. F. Flawith, pastor of the Fourth Congregational Church, on Green street, was asked yesterday as to his opinion on the action of the First Church. He pre- faced his remarks with the statement that he had not been a witness in the case, nor had he been a member of the council, and that he spoke as a clergyman of the Con- gregational church having the good of the church and the dignity of his profession at heart. Hesaid: ““The members of the council will be the proper persons to give their opinions as to the duty of the First Congregational Chur¢h in the matter. The duty of the Ecclesiastical Council is. simply to advise, and, as a rule, where a mutual council has been convened its advice and findings are accepted. The opinion of a mutual council carries with it great weight, because both sides have con- sented to the council being called. It can be readily understood that an ex-parte or one-sided council would not be worth much. “I don’t think that the council intended to say anything with respect to Dr. Brown’s being retained or being advised to hand in his resignation. If the other Congregational churches thought that MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL WHO Rev.J. K. McLean. Rev. R. H. Sink. CENSURE DR. BROWN FOR HIS PECULIAR PRESS DISPATCH. Rev. Dr. Tenney. Layman Dodge. Mr. McCoy said last night: “Dr. Brown came here with Davidson and intro- duced her to me with the remark that she was one of the best workers in his church. He then asked for a committee-room for a meeting or a private conversation. There was nothing unusual in such a request, for ministers of all denominations use the rooms here for committee meetings. I called the janitor and he showed Dr. Brown and Mrs. Davidson to that room facing’ the hall. They went in there and nobody could have overheard their con- versation, because it was held in private.” This statement corroborzates that of Mrs. Davidson as to the manner in which she and Pastor Brown entered the building, Wiy Secretary McCoy and the janitor were not smmmoned as witnesses by the judge advocate he, perhaps, can explain satisfactorily. It has been urged by prominent Congre- gationalists that Dr. Brown’s methods during the church tnal were not always those of the average innocent defendant. They have called attention to Dr. Brown’s abuse of the witnesses against him, notably Mrs. Davidson, Mrs. Stockton, Mrs. Thurston and Mrs. Barton, as being not in consonance with the teachings.of Christ, who did not abuse his enemies, but blessed and forgave them. It has been remarked as a significant fact that Dr. Brown called four witnesses to testify that although their business called them on Montgomery street be- iween the hours of 4 and 6 . a1, the period during which Mrs. Stockton sald the doc- tor waited on the corners for the patter of her pretty feet, they never saw the doctor in company with Mrs. Stockton there or anywhere else, or with any woman other than his wife. Yet Dr. Brown went on the stand and swore that on two occasions Mrs. Stockton came upon him unawares and walked with him for several blocks along Montgomery street. Dr. Brown, Mrs. Brown and Mr. Eaton met Mrs. Stockton at the Lotta Fountain and walked up Market street together. Dr. Brown rode in a car to Castro Heights alongside of Mrs. Stockton, but he did not know that she was in the vehicle until he had entered the car. He also walked with Mattie Overman from Pine and Kearny to his office; and he took a promenade with Mrs. Davidson one evening, yet his four witnesses did not see the doctor on any of these occasions. ‘The late ecclesiastical council received a score or more of letters purporting to give valuable information either for or against Dr. Brown. One letter in particular caused them considerable worry, and incidentally, some loss of time. A person signing himself Henry Mayer and claiming to be a reporter made a startling charge, involving the City editors of the Chronicle and Bulletin. The writer with some show of regret acknowledged that he was the author of the famous Valentine epistle, and that his reason now for exposing the scheme was that he had not been paid. He claimed that the in- criminating epistle was inspired by the Bulletin, they in some way having secured possession of the facts set forth in the original letter. “After reading the storyas T had itto the three gentlemen Ihanded the type-written copy to Dr. Brown and Mr. Nagle, both of whom carefully scanned the dispatch and read it alond, handing it back to me with the assurance that it was perfectly correct and satisfactory. “Acting in good faith I sent the story out 1o such of our Eastern papers as had not already gone to press. In accordance with the agreement between THE CALL and The United Press the former was furnished with a copy of the dispatch. Later my at- tention was called to the apparent discrep- ancy between the statement given me by Dr. Brown and the copy of the verdict in possession of THE CALL. Nothing then re- mained for me to do but to place on the wires a verbatim copy of the council’s finde The fictitious Mayer then turned his at- tention to the Chronicle, a|leging that that paper’s supposed unfriendliness to Brown was due to a personal grievance. The council employed a private detect- ive to look up Mayer, but no trace of such a man could be found at any of the news- paper offices. They agreed that the author of the letter was indeed responsible for the Val- entine document, but they were also unanimous in the belief that some one deeply interested in the verdict of the council had inspired both. The opposition to Dr. Brown is slowly but surely crystallizing. Deacon Barnard, Deacon Hateh and Dr. McDonald are leaa- ing spirits in the movement. Dr. McDon- ing without any comment whltevar,lthe members, asking the deacons to take | ald will to-day circulate a petition among | tated, according to newspaper report, the | United Press telegram containing what is clearly a misrepresentation of the verdict, he committed a serious offense, which | even his best friends cannot excuse or condone. “I am profoundly sorry, as a brother minister and hitherto a warm friend of Dr. Brown, that he has taken the course he has. It is not ecclesiastical; it is not right.” Concerning the deposition of a pastor Mr. Rader referred to section 7, chapter 5, of Dexter's “Handbook of Congregation- alism.” It reads as follows: In the possible case of gross heresy or evil life in its pastor a Congregational church should proceed to discipline him for the same as if he were only a private member, until 1t has reached the stage of full conviction of guilt. Then—in virtue of the involved fellow- ship of churches—instead of proceeding to pass the final vote and pronounce sentence, it should call a council to advise in the sad case. Shouid the pastor be 8o excessively unwise as to decline to unite with them for this purpose they may call one ex parte. Tnis council should go over the case, and if satisfied of guilt, and the pastor remains unpenitent, or if, though he be penitent, the aggravated cir- cumstances of the case seem to require it, it shonld advise the church to depose the offender from the ministry, and perhaps excommuni- cate him from its fellowship. It will then be orderly for the church to accept and follow" this advice. In order to apply this rule Mr. Rader says it will be necessary for the First Church to call another council. They would not be called upon to review any of the evidence in the case, but merely to pass on or fix the punishment to suit the crime. Should the majority of the congregation seek to retain the convicted pastor, then the minority is privileged to call a council out of courtesy requesting the majority to join them. The rule for this line of pro- cedure is found in section 8 of the same chapter. It also defines the rights of dis- satisfied sister churches. The section named reads as follows: Any church grieved by the econviction that s sister church “deliberately receives and main- tains doctrines which subvert the foundations of the Christian faith, or that it willfully toler- ates and upholds notorious scandals, or that it communion of churches,” may in & Christian spirit admonish that church, and labor with 1t to bring it to a better mind. (2) “If the ad- monished church refuse to hear its neighbor church, and to removye the offense, it violates the communion of churches, and the admon- ishing church may order & council to advise concerning the acts and administrations of the offending body. (3) Finding ground for the same, this council may fitly admonish that body. (4) Should this prove ineffectual in gaining the desired reliet, such council may advise the churches—all others &s well as those of whom it may be composed—to withhold {rom that erring church all acts of communion till it shall give evidence of reformation. (5) Afirmative response to this will put the offending church out of the fellowship of all the churches thus acting, and by inference of | all non-protesting churches.” DR. MCLEAN’S OPINION. Censures Pastor Brown for Giving Out a Report Which Was False. OAKLAND, Car., March 19.—The Rev. J. K. McLean, moderator of the late eccle- | siastical court which investigated the charges against Dr. C. 0. Brown, was seen this evening at his home on Telegraph avenue, Oakland. In answer to a question he said: “It would not be in place for me to express an opinion upon the conduct of Dr. Brown at the prayer meeting in the First Congrega- tional Church on Wednesday evening, I have only newspaper reports, and besides I am in a most peculiar pcsition. As moderator I was more or less drawn into the disputes of both sides, and both Dr. Brown’s friends and foes were at times dis- pleased. As to the church’s action upon the report, I understand that nothing more was done than to accept the reportof persistently disregards and condemns the:] Rev. William Rader. asked what he would do if he was situated in a like situation he burst into a hearty laugh and said: “I am not on the stand to be cross-examined. Please excuse me,” and left the reporter standing in the hall. SRS S “LOST ALL PRINCIPLE.” o Mr. Sink of Stockton Thus Characterizes Dr. Brown. STOCKTON, Car.,, March 19.—Rev. R. H. 8ink, pastor of the First Congregational Church of . this city, who was a member of the council in the trial of Dr. Brown, was seen this evening by a CALL representative in reference to Dr. Brown’s criticisms of the findings.of the council. I utterly fail to see bow these tindings exonerate Dr. Brown in any way of the serious charges which called the council together,” saia Mr. Sink. “I sincerely be- lieve that every member of the couneil met for the purpose of doing justice with- out fear or favor, and Dr. Brown’s criti- cisms of the tindings are not only uncalled for, but discourteous to every member of the council. “I will say frankly that if it betrue that he dictated that dispatch to the United Press, intending to give out the impression that he had been acquitted, Dr. Brown has lost all principle. Dr. Brown ought to re- sign. The sense of the council was just explained in the paragraph where reg Rev. was expressed that the findings could not be made more explicit. ““The findings of the council were not in the nature of an acquittal, neither were they & whitewash, and I believe that Dr. Brown does not consider them such. And further, I do not see how any one can in- terpret the findings as meaning that the council considered Dr. Brown innocent. “‘The findings were drawn without passion or feeling, and this being the case, the conncil could not render a verdict on charges which could not be proven by evi- dence adduced before them. *‘Dr. Brown is of a very irritable temper and has been under a great strain, but this does not excuse him for his conduct in crit- icizing those who were called together to try and arrive at a decision in the matter. Those fiudings leave a cloud banging over Dr. Brown that could hardly be made worse by an actual conviction. I would hate to sec a dear friend of mine under a similar one. “Should the Association ot Congrefational Ministers take such action as would dis- qualify Dr. Brown from farther member- ship in the association any chureh calling him as pastor would be outside the pale of Congregationalism. ‘‘Personally, I approve of the strongest planks in the findings, and I do not see how Dr. Brown or his friends can consider that document as excuipating him from the serious charges which called us together.” ! The Rev. Mr. Sink spoke with perfect frankness on the subject, and it is very evident that had he bad the drawing of the council as contained in yesterday morne ing’s papers, and did not hesitate to say that the pastor was a most ‘ungrateful being. He thinks that Brown has been most leniently dealt with by the council and that he should be perfectly satisfied with the verdict. 8aid he: I know that three-fourths of the council would have been for a stronger verdict, but to arrive at a unanimous finding and avoid a ma- jority and minority result they were willing to compromise. It is my opinion that most of the members did not entertain at the end the ighest regard for Dr. Brown, but that did not affect the verdict. They were actuated in ren- dering the verdict tney did with kindliness toward the accused, and they wanted to give him the benefit of every doubt. I think his re- marks about the conneil are unjust, uncalled for, and indicate ungratefulness. Dr. Brown certainly has been very leniently dealt with. S e IGNORING THE FINDINGS. Why the First Church Should Take Scme Declded Action. Rey. Dr. Cruzan of the Park Congrega- tional Church said: “It seems to me that the church has not expressed its opinion at ail in regard to the council. If the reportof the council had been adopted, instead of being merely filed, it would have carried the vote of censure with it. The report has been sim- ply received and filed and no action upon it has been taken. Now, it remains for the First Church to take action congregation- ally. The procedure is to adopt the re- port, or to set 1t aside entirely, or to pro- ceed to investigate the charges already in- vestigated by the council. It seems to me that the First Church has left the whole matter open. *“If the church should see fit to ignore thereport by allowing it to remain on the file without further action, and should go ahead and retain Dr. Brown as its pastor, it would be 1n order for the othar Congre- gational churches, in their discretion, to withdraw from the fellowship of the First Church, and it would then stand as an isolated and independent church. Ithas taken the first step toward action, and it is in order for the church to take this report from the file and act upon it, or else brush it aside entirely and indorse Dr. Brown. . *‘It would have been the courteous thing for them to have adopted the motion to spread the report upon the records and to have thanked the council for having so faithfully performed the duty entrusted to it. Itcertainly seemsto me that a body of men who would leave their work and spend a month of their time in the very disagreeable duty, and in a matter on which the verdict might be displeasing to the members of the church, should receive thanks, and the more especially in view of the fact that the members of the council worked without any compensation what- ever. Some of the members were obliged to neglect their business for four weeks, and in addition had to spend some of their own money for their actual expenses. “The First Church should be allowed a reasonable time within which to take the report from the file before the other churches should exercise their discretion in the matter. 5 ““With regard to the jurisdiction of the council in the intimidation chargo pre- ierred by the young woman, who was men- tioned as a niece of a member of the conncil, I would say that it seems to me that the council was called to investigate charges against Dr. Brown, and anything contrary to his character would be ger- mane. Suppose it had been proved that Brown had cowmmitted theft since the council was called, there can be -no ‘doubt that the council had a right to investigate it, because that act would have an im- portant bearing on his fitness to remain the pastor of any church. Dr. Brown ought to be glad to have every charge, no matter what its date, that might implicate his character thoroughly investigated. ‘‘An innocent man on trial is supposed the First Church had ignored the coun- cil and its findings, they could, if they | choose, withdraw from fellowship with it and leave it in a state of .isolation or in a condition of religious ostracism, but whether the churches would take any action in the matter would depend upon the seriousness of the case. “With regard to Dr. Brown’s contention that the council had no jurisdiction over the charge of intimidating the young woman who had inspected the church organ, I would say that that would depend upon the letters missive. As I understand it, the council formulated its owncharges. Dr. Brown invited a full and complete investigation of anything and everything that might be urged against him, and I should think be would have been glad to bave everythihg investigated that had ocenrred before or after thie coun- SUNE STRONG HER The Way In Which They Pose Before the Public. Truth About the Workings of These “Men of Muscle.” HERE ARE NOT A FEW ENTHUSIASTS T who are wrapped up in thefeats of the men with highly devemped muscles who are known as the “strong men”’ of the world. Those easily impressed wonder—they admire—they in fact worship. Butit only needs the most ordinary industry to develop as the result ',".‘ inqyir)’ !hn‘s the faculty of these “strong men’’ as ‘‘stayers is very small. And, indeed, if the trl},!h were told, they would most of them have ‘‘a weak Dback” very suddeniy if they were called on to do an ordinary day’s work. Most people know what that weak back means. It means a cer- tain indication that the individual who has it is not in good heaith. It may mean (taken in the abstract as a symptom) that one is suffer- ing from a severe nervous disorder, for ine stauce. But asa rule it means that tne system is “run down,’’ and from this state the most serious illnesses of which the world has any record grow. Any one who has any doubt on that matter may vari' readily have his ide: put right by consultis who has ever suffered from it. Perhap brighter or better example could not be found than Mr. George H. Bent of Rochester, Cak Not long ago glr. Bent found himself with a weak back and a completely shattered syste: and placed himseii——nfi he n;sfl:n lann}i?a:. er—in communication w: e siois g?‘tl e great HUDSON MEDICAL lgh ITUTE. That was the most sensible thing he could have done under thé circumstances, of course, and now that they have saved his 1ife (as he is abundantly wiflln; to testify) he has written them & letter of thanks. Itisof interest be- cause, although he has virtually been snatched from the jaws of death, his back still bothers himalittie, showing how vital is that symptom. ROCHESTER (Cal.), August 3, 1895. Hudson Medical Institute, San Francisco, Csl,—Dear Sirs: Yours of 24th duly received. This is where the good feeling comes in, for I am sure that you like to hear from patients who, like myself, are about cured. 1am sure 1 like to be able to write in this way, foras I am now, I think that by the time thai I get the medicine taken that Iam on now Ishan’'t need 1o take any more if you think I will stay this way. My back dgea not‘bolher me nlrdl§ .nr! now, and I feel better in every way. You very truly, GEORGE H. BENT. Mr. Bént’s letter bears on it the very impres sion of truth, and hadls llik? hllllnflree(lvt:(::‘hg atients of thet grandest of all curat a! l’;snmen{l, the HUDSON MEDICALINSTITUT! in that he, knowing where he has receiv reat good, is not ashamed or afraid to tell of it. For examplo: 8. M. Hooker ot Los Angeles says; ‘‘I am very grateful for what you have done for me.’ E. \g.fi‘owler, Kamele, Or.: ““Iam feeling as g00d now as it 1s possible for & man to feel.” : very pleased to rible disease that I had.” 1If testimony of this sort does not show skill that cannot be surpassed, what on _earth can ? No! Itdoes bring conviction to every honest mind, and as relief is certain it is a truthful motto that if you are i1l at all “THE HUDSON MEDICAL INSTITUTE is by all means the best place to apply for help.” All the Following Cases Are Curable: Catarrh of -the head, stomach or bladder; all bronchial diseases; all functional nervous diseases; Bt. Vitus’ dance; hysteria palsy; epilepsy; sll venmereal dise kinds of blood troubles; ulcers; waste of vital forces; rheumatism; gout; eczem: diseases, from whatever se arising; psori- asis; all blood poisoning; varicocele; poison ost or impaired manhood; spinal troue ble; nervous exhaustion and prostration; ine ‘ciplent paresis; all kidney diseases; lumbago; sciatiea; all bladder troubles; dyspepsia; ine digestion; constipation; all visceral disorders, which are treated by the depurating departe ment. Special instruments for bladder troue bles. Z@ Circulars and Testimonials of the @reat Hudyan Sent Free. HUDSON MEDICAL INSTITUTE, Stockton, Market and Eilis Stee Fattens Fortifies Stimulating beverages, from cil had been called. So far as I'know, the council acted entirely within its rights. ““It seems to me if I had been a party to the calling of the council I should feel that courtesy demanded that I should ihank the members whatever might be their ver- dict, but I would never thank a council that I had never cailed. AsI understand it Dr. Brown called or requested this coun- cil to be called. He did that, and he fur- thermore invited all tbe world to appear and tell what they knew about him. “I think if Dr. Brown said he would not thank the council he did wrong. I certain- ly would thank a council if I had been a party to 1ts having been called, but never if I had not consented to it. At any rate, whatever Dr. Brown might do, his church should not fail to be courteous and to thank the council which it had called to settle a matter pertaining to itself.” BROWN ANTAGONISTIC. Curtls of Sacramento Thinks Him the Victim of a Plot. SACEAMENTO, CAL., March 19.—M. J. Curtis, who was chosen by the members of the Sixth-street Congregational Church to represent that body at the late council which convened in San Francisco for the ————————————— NEW TO-DAY, 1 AM — ' A WORKING GIRL. . — 1 I Stand Ten Hours a Day. e i R [SPECIAL TO OUR LADY READERS.) “I have suf- fered _terribly with bearing- down pains, giddiness,back- ache, and kid- ney trouble, Lydia E. Pink- ham’s Vegeta- ble Compound has given me new life. I rec- i ommend it to all.” — MageIE LukExs, Thirteenth wnd BoMe Streets, Nicetown, Pa. ™ absinthe to weak tea (even if they contain some nourish-~ ment, which few do) are cudgels for the tired nerves. Don’t stimulate but invigor- ate the source of your strength. Drink daily the rich, nutritious, highly pa- latable and instantly pre- pared. VDOV VVVDTVARVTVVOVD ¢ Ghirardelli’s Ground Chocolate 4 The best ever made, ¢ [ 2 o IRON BEDS, BRASS BEDS, FOLDING BEDS* Wire and Hair Mat- Chaire: Wheel Chairs TS, e Commodes, Back Rests ‘W. A. SCHROCK, 1 New Montgome! St., under Gran; Hotel, 5. F. COSMOPOLITAIN, Opposite U. 8. Mint, 100 and 102 Fifth st., San JFrancisco, Cal.—The most select famlly hotel in the city. Board and room, $1, $1 25 and $1 Bort day, according 10 room. Meals 25c. Rooms, 50a 80d'750 & day. - Free coach to and from the hotel. Look for the coach bearing the name of tho Cox mopolitan Hotel. WM. FAHEY, Proprietor. tloi MANHOOD RESTORED.-5seio5ns: b o - \talizertheprescrip- Y vous or Jiseases of the Pimples, g to %'c “CUPIDENE" ysiclan, will quickly cure you gflgfmfl such as Lost Man] arry, missions, Nervous Debility, austing Drains, Varicocele and tion. It stops all losses b; hi B o’alnchn[of Which if notehecked Joads b permaton oG BEFORE ano AFTER :‘u‘:‘m hortors of Impotency. CUPIDENE cleanses the liver, the inevs and the u: Organs: 'S, LUPIDENE strengthens and restores small wek organs. Prostatitin COPIBER B13 i m;y' “"’x'-" nl.:;:dl[ o cire ehthony a "ng%‘ Frr ) t’fl'm- bo%, 1% for $A0, by mail. Rend Tor TRER iroular 86 tosraoniai Seasy aer Address DAVOL MEDICINE ©0., 693 Market street, San Francisco, Cal. For sale by BROOKS' PHARMACY, 119 Powell street