The New York herald., 1875-12-17
TROUBLES TO BE SETTLED.
1t Is Resolved to Call an
Advisory Council.
DEACON VESTS LETTER.
The Great Preacher Challenges Comparison
with His Enemies.

were hear the reading the report Of the Ex
amining Committee in response to Mrs Moulton's last
letter 1t fully fifteen minutes to eight O'Clock be-
Moderator Edgerton took his chair the platform,
and as he not followed by any and seemed to
be waiting, Brother Hill asked for the singing Of .
hymn. The Moderator then explained that Brother
shearman would be in attendance presently, and
hymn sung. In the meantime Mrs. Beecher Mrs
Colonel Beecher Colonel Beecher and some friends OF
the family arrived and occupied seats in front Of
the platform. AS 1.-THE hymn was concluded Mr..
bhearman arrived, and the meeting was opened by
prayer and the reading of the minutes of the last meet
ing by Brother Talmadge during which Mr.. Beecher
himself entered. He soon, however, left the PLATFORM
and was followed by DR.. Edward Beecher, with whom
after short Absence he returned carrying in his hand
large envelope. All this gave rise to anxious expec
tation of something very exciting to come Off Some
routine business having been disposed OF Mr.. Shear
announced that the report Of the Examining Com
mittee to present which this meeting had been called
ready, and he forthwith read it, as iolows:-
REPLY TO MRS MoULToN
BROOKLYN, Dec. 10, 1875.
MADAM-Your letter to Plymouth church. dated De-
pember s. received the evening OF that day and
referred TO the Examining Committee, which, as you
are aware was placed IN charge OF the whole subject
but you have addressed yourself to the church, the
committee have desired the church to reply
Your whole letter is based on assumption Of the
truth of statements concerning our pastor contained in
your first communication 10 the church. This assump
on we meet at the outset by reteratng our convection
that these statements an entire pcrversion OF
the truth But as they not material to the issue
which relates to your conduct and position and not TO
the conduct Of any elsewe pass them by for the
present to answer those points IN your letter which
have bearing the subject properly before
us These points appear us be follows-
Ffrst-You claim that your absence from communion
and your irregular attendance at this church began in
the year 1871, and not before.
Second-You, consequently, assume that this church.
beng well aware Of such change in your habits be-
you for the purpose OF bringing you back.
Third-You aege that we have complained that you
did ask for trial.
Fourth-You suggest that you had in your own tes-
tmony accused yourself of having privately
slandered our pastor and that you might have been
tried on this charge by the church.
Fffh-You claim that the Moderator of the church
meeting ruled that questions to were out of order
!Siah-You claim that your protest against the ap-
plication of rule concerning the dropping Of mem
bers made your case an exception and required that
you should be dealt with in some other manner.
Seremh-You appear to insist that we ought to have
placed you upon trial for false swearing in court OF
justice against the pastor Of this church.
EghM-You propose series OF questions to submit
90 the Council in addition to those which naturally
out of your first letter The statements and
propositions thus made we will briefly review in this
order
l. Your letter assumes il as conceded fact that your
absence from communion. and your irregular attend
at public worship both dated from the year 1871;
that prior 10 that time you were regular worshpper
and COMMUNICATE with and that then practice
changed Thus you say concerning your relations TO
Plymouth church, 81 do not believe Nere was any
faithful to it or fond OF it than was up to
the beginning of 1871 when became acquainted with
the great wickedness which Mr. Beecher had
mIttedn You also say, "After that it did not
possible for me to go TO church and hear him preach
and take the sacrament from his hands and stopped
doing So"
Now your own public testimony before the civil
court showed that the period Of change in your
habit of attending public worship in 1860 eleven
years before you profess to have received any lnfoma
from the day of your marriage in 1860 you ceased
attend any church whatever for two years; and Tor
the nine years next afterward you were un-
glafn nj
your presence at communion with the church. or to
receive with certainty any year in which you com
the two years Immediately following your marriage
you lived in the city ofNew York and might, therefore,
be excusabe for not attending at Plymouth church.
although many of members meet US with unfaihng
regularity, Notwithstanding they have resided in New
York for years But your neglect to join IN public
worship anywhere from 1850 until 1862 demonstrates as
think concusivey that the change in your religious
habits, which you now assign TO the year 1871, and
account for by personal to pastor did in
tact in the 1860 and to be accounted for by
reasons personal to yourself It Is quite possible that
But 1t Ne clear that they were reasons which had no
connection whatever with the case OF our pastor
Since You take we think, ungenerous advantage
Of past orbearance in proceeding upon the assump
tion of the truth of your testimony in court so far
THE BASIS OF ACTION
on our part, compelled to say that in making
that assumption we were not actuated by any belief
that your testimony correct when you asserted
that your attendance nrequent after the be-
ginning of 1871 than II had been before ON the con
trary, have TO believe that your attendance
quite frequent after that period 1t before,
and as late as January 1874 application was made on
your behalf TO the officers for regular sittngs in the
church So far could see, you appeared TO use
your own anguageJ "faithful and more fond' of the
church and its services after the spring of 1871 than
you we're before
Upon the faacious assumption OF your sudden and
marked change of demeanor in 1871 you now complain
that this church not faithful TO its covenant with
you because ii did not labor 10 bring you back.
No such suggestion made by you when you ap
peared before the church. but this be passed over
for the present. because the assumption being entirely
untrue, the complaint is necessarily unfounded No
member OF this church. so far as we are aware ever mo-
tced any change in your habits in 1871 nor from that
time down TO the OF 1874; and II, therefore,
never occurred any of that there any necessity
for labor with you. When the real change in your
habits occurred, in 1860 you the city Of New
York, and we supposed that you attending public
worship there II was only by your own public testi
mony, In the spring of 1876, that learned the
tary 10 be the TACT and while, after you returned TO
Brooklyn you were always irregular in attendance. 1t
generally understood down the summer Of 1874
that your frequent absences were caused by
sufficient domestic reasons Why should we
remonstrate when those Of who noticed your
absence believed that you were struggling to attend
divine service with us under difficulties surrounding
the management Of household when the Sabbath was
made mot by your fault day Of general hospitality
and the house Of public worship swallowed up by
household We bad no suspicion then and we
have no belief that your attendance was. more
Irregular from 1871 to 1874 than II had been the
average for the ten years previous.
II cannot be possible that you complain orour failure
TO labor with you account OF your absence after
August 1874 In that month your husband assumed
publicly attitude OF the bitterest enmity toyard this
church and It's pastor He professed to speak in your
name as indorsng his accusations, and 1t was every
where announced that you we're 70 be witness against
MIR Beccher In the then approaching trial II would
be absurd suggest that the pastor OF this church
any Of his associates upon the Examining Committee
ial OF whom had just united ia pronouncing
THE CHARGES
10 be alse ought to have gone individually or in
BODY, TO your husbands house TO exhort his wife to
attend public services with u.s. OF course any officer
of church who should have called upon this errand
must necessarily have sriven to convince that the
party whose preaching you were desired 10 attend was
an innocent man; and who would have been louder In
condemnation OF such effort attempt to tam
per with witness than those who now sympathze with
Tour complaints Of neglectH From the moment al
which the action was commenced In which you finally
appeared a witness the officers OF this church con-
Tcicntously abstaned from every attempt TO influence
Fou and left you absolutely free to decide your own
sourse. For them 10 have done otherwise would have
dshonorabe and for you your advisers 70 COM
plain Of their action would be monstrous.