Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1896-01-18
DIR. STARR'SREMOVAI
An INTERVIEW WITH REV. DIR. A.
q. BROWN.
His Correspondence with the Peters,
burg Marixet-Strcct Church Board
of stcwards-An Overture Rejected.
lie VIII Answer in Print.

terview with DR.. \. 6. Brown. was told
by the reverend gentleman that he then
had nothing TO SAY I'm regard to the
Petersburg Washington-Street church
Starr trouble. but was given to UNDER
stand that I'm the near future he would
talk on the subject. and when he was
ready to give out anything would gladly
let the Dispatch have It.
/ visited Or. Brown this afternoon and
was cordially received, and after short
conversation on other subjects. he came
TO the church trouble. and spoke in a
most feeling wGy.
The Doctor said that his admiration for
the church Of his old friends. Darcy
Paul Williams T. Davis, and others OF
precious memory. was so great that he
was surprised and shocked when he heard
Of its attitude with respect TO the action
of Bishop Galloway in the removal OF
DR.. Starr. His surprise and sorrow were
increased when he read the recent pub
liehed manifesto OF the Board OF stewards
of Washington-Street church. wherein
they set up defence of their radical
and revolutionary action. and both named
and blamed him In connection with the
official acts and utterances i'm the Bishop
council. without notice or opportunity
given for explanation or defence. lie
kept silence. however. hoping that the
sober second thought would bring them
TO a better mind and open the way for
a friendly interview and settlement or
all matters in controversy on principles
thoroughly honorable and satisfactory 10
all parties.
4 LETTER TO THE STEWARDS.
AT proper time, therefore he adj
dressed to the Board Of Stewards, the foi-
lowing letter: 900.
Ashland. Va. January 2 1925,
To The Board of Stewards. Washington
Street church. Petersburg. va, .
Dear Brethren.-Wishing. If possible 10
avoid newspaper controversy, ana 10
remove. If | can. any occasion you ma
think TO exist for the present unhappy
and painful attitude OF your churcn, WIN
respect to DR. STAIRS removal, write 10
ask the privilege e OF PSay on that sub
fect. Hoping you will accord that prlyi-
lege. and accept 1t cordially, as the
better way j am
Yours very truly, .,,.>-
THE STEWARDS REPLY.
In reply to the above the following was
received:
Petersburg. Va. January IL. 1896
Dr. Alex. q. Brown: -,
Dear Sir.-Your letter To our board
was before The meeting last nlght, anu
/ beg TO hand you the resolution pdsseu
at that meeting:
Whereas. Rev. A. G. Brown has re-
auested by letter personal interview
10 remove. If he can, any occasion To-
The present unhappy and painful attitude
of our church with respect to the matter
OF DR.. Stars removal: therefore be IL
Resolved. That the secretary De m
s'tructed to write TO l)r. Brown anu ~
form him that the church has ALREADY
taken final action with reference 10 the
matter referred TO. and that In The opin-
ion of the Board of Stewards II Is mex
pedient TO agitate the question iurtner
irs our midst But If DR.. Brown desires
or claims the privilege of personal
explanation with reference TO the mater
the board will gladly afford him the op-
portunty for such explanation on ThuIs-
usual place of meeting of the board
If the time appointed FOR the meeting
will suit your convenience, please advlse
me at once. so THAI | can notify the
board. j beg To remain, sir,
r. 4. HARRISON. Secretary.
CLAIMS NO PRIVILEGE.
This letter was received in due course
of mail and, in reply to IT, the following
was sent:
Ashland. Va. January Il. 1895.
Mir r. a. Harrison, secretary, Board
of Stewards, Washington-Street churcn,
Petersburg, Va:
Dear Sir and Brother.-1our letter OF
the 18th instant has been received. and
replying, | have only 20 say t!it, as
the resolution of your board restricts the
proposed interview 10 a personal expla-
nation on my part, | neither desire or
claim that privilege.
Thanking you and The board, / am,
dear brother, Yours very truly,
ALIEN c. BROWN.
WILL ANSWER IN PRINT.
As the matter referred to was not al
lowed TO be discussed on its merits,
DR.. Brown felt. he said. that he had
no personal claims on the board, and was
unwilling to consume their valuable time.
BY their publication in the religious
and secular press they had appealed to
10 American citizens. and, having made
this appeal, and refused any effort at
friendly and brotherly adjustment, he
could do nothing more than appear be-
fore that High Court of his Church and
fellow-citizens.
DR. Brown is therefore preparing a
reply TO the recent manifesto OF the
Board of Stewards, which will first APP
pear In the Richmond Christian Advo-
cate.
1t is safe TO say that this article will
be looked for with great interest by
members of the Methodist Church gene
rally and by the friends of those who
have been brought prominently into the