The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1852-10-21


titled when he did awake. And we believe that
the public will decide, that if ever a case occur
red in which an author might innocently fall
into an error, that case was Mrs Stoves Next
will therefore come the inquiry, "But did Mrs.
Stowe take all due means of reparation, when
the error was pointed out to herr" She did
2. We are prepared to notice, now, the ALE
cation that Mrs Stowe refused to pay any
proper attention to Dr. Psrker's importantly
that she refused to reply to his three letters
that she treated with silence his offer of /" doc
umentary evidence to proue his innocence"
First: Dr. Parker knew from the beginning,
and now knows. that though Mrs Stowe did
not reply to his first letter, (being absent from
home on its arrival at Brumswick) that her
husband Prof. Stowe, did reply in her behalf
at once; that he expressed the greatest regret
that his (Dr. Parker's) name had been used,
and gave the most friendly assurance that the
matter should be Immediately attended to and
put right
DR.. Parker also knows that Mrs Stowe knew
that her husband had thus acknowledged the
receipt of DR.. P's first note for in his second
letter, above quoted, he says expressly, q let
ter from your husband has led me to understand
that my note to you was received several days
ago" No word of this has ever been whispered
Observer
They have been told by the Observer. with
Mr.. Parker's consent, that when DR.. p. wrote
his first letter to her. Mrs Stowe took no no
t,ce of his letter ;" the italics are not ours but
the Observers, y CDR Parker wrote to her again
Mrs. Stoue detgned no repiy' &c. And yet
DIR. Parker had in his possession, when he inn
pregnated the New York Observer with false
hood, and the Observer had in its possession
when 1T gave forth its untruth, this reply of
DR.. Stowe to Dr. Parker's first letter:
BRUNSWICK, Me, BowDoN COLLEGE.
May II, 1852.
= My DEAR SIR: Your name was used in Mrs.
Stoves work without my knowledge, and of
course without my consent. As soon as | dis
covered it, | told her it was wrong, and she
must have it erased She agreed with me. and
wrote to her publisher to have the name erased,
and some other corrections made. As have
not read the late issues, had hoped the cor
rections were made and am very sorry to find.
by your note of the 9Th instant just received,
that they have not been made Mrs s. is now
on visit to her brother, Rev. H. w. Beecher.
in Brooklyn where she will be happy to see
you and put all things on an amicable foot
ing. | regret the occurrence, and am glad to
ny" and a "serious matter"
Very truly yours, C. F. STOWE
Req. Joel Parker, d. d.
Second. Dr. Parker, after Mrs Stoves ap-
parent silence had been explained to him, in a
manner that no gentleman who reads the doc
uments in this case will have a doubt should
have satisfied an honorable mind. deliberately
represents Mrs. Stowe as maintaining an OBJ
Stnate silence. Yet Dr. Parker knew when
such representations were made, as our read
ers now have the means of knowing, that Mrs
Stowe was in Brooklyn when he wrote to
Brunswick, Me- and that she failed for sew
eral days to receive his letter that when it
came to hand she replied to it within ten DAYS
and that in this reply she offered reasons for
even so long delay, viz: That her health was
feeble, that she was bewildered by the "multi.
piled engagements of the May anniversary
week, which as an authoress of recent sue
cess attracted to her not a little company J
DR.. Parker also knew that after her reply was
actually written, it was delayed from the 22d
to the 29th of May, by some miscarriage which
prevented its reaching the post Office, or by
some detention after it was dropped there of
which neither she nor had or have any knowl
edge; and that he was informed by Mrs. Stowe,
Now, the reason of such apparent delay Dr.
Parker might not have understood at that time
but he did understand it afterwards not only
by Mrs. Stoves letter, but by interviews with
her. He had been assured by letter and per-
sonally, by Mrs. Stowe and by Prof Stowe,
that she was not Indifferent to his requests
that she anxiously desired to do him Justice
when she could do so with clear conviction
that she waS wrong in ascrbng to him the
language quoted in her book
Yet, so late as within two weeks from this
date, DR.. Parker permits the Observer. upeor-
rected, to say, Mrs. Stowe did not hesitate 10
avail herself OF the floating lies Of abolition
newspapers to Willy the good name of a Cos
pei minister, and to all his circumstances and
even to his offers of documentary evidence To
prove his innocence, she turns a deaf ear until
the arm of the law is raised, and then new
light breaks in, and the lar makes clear what
the Gospel could not" THE italics are the Oh
SerUer'Sl
The reader cannot but observe the marked
contrast between Dr. Parker's five years indf
ference to this report and his urgent haste and
impatence with Mrs. Stowe for the DELAY of
few days, and that, too when he had assu-
RANGES from Prof Stowe and Mrs. Stowe that
they were most kindly disposed, and that she
was investigating the matter with rs much
speed as Frustrated health and the confusion of
anniversary week would allow.
Third The quotation above introduces the
third count of DR.. Parkers disingenuousness in
regard to this part of the history The Ober-
Ter declares; for him, that Mrs. Stowe had of
ters from DR.. Parker of documentary evidence
to prove his innocence ~ again, it says that
when that injured pastor offers quietly to
,rIup har fha lat Il =
does not conde@end to look at the subject" THE
italics are ours)
All the letters of DR.. Parker referred to by
him and the Observer are now before the read
er, and he is requested to find in them if he
can the shadow of an offer of any documenta-
ry evidence, or of any evidence whatever
In his first letter, he does not even deny that
the words are his. He only implies it. by COM
plants Of being aspersed, and that his minis
terial reputation was damaged. In the second
letter. ten days later, he indeed denies the Ian
guage and the sentiments to be his, but makes
no offer whatever to put Mrs. Stowe in posses
sion of evidence to that point. The third let
ter is equally barren. The first offer ever made
to produce documentary evidence to either Mrs
Stowe or myself, was an offer from Benjamin
F. Butler, Esq, after he had been retained by
DR. Parker as counsel, conveyed to me by Mr.
Barney, on the evening of the Goth May.
And then it had its immediate effect. as it
would have done earlier, if it had been offered
by Dr. Parker, or had been procurable by us
And the Observers deliberate affirmation. made
under DIR. Parkers eye, of an offer to place in
Mrs. Stoves hands the means of ascertaning
her error, is, by his own letters, shown to be
void of truth III
3, ! must ask the public to contrast the
Snirlt of Mrs Ntnwns mind to d.