The San Francisco call., 1896-03-20

Mr.. Mccoy said last night: CDR. Brown
came here with Mrs. 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 committee-room for a
meeting or private conversation. There
was nothing unusual in such a request,
for ministers of all denominations use the
rooms here for committee meetings. 1
called the ianitor 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 corroborates that of Mrs.
Davidson as to the manner in which she
and Pastor Brown entered the building.
Why Secretary Mccoy and the ianitor
were not summoned as witnesses by the
Judge advocate he, perhaps, can explain
satisfactorily.
1t has been urged by prominent Congre-
gationalists that DR.. Browns methods
during the church trial 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.
1t 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-
tween the hours of and P. NJ, the period
during which Mrs. Stockton said 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 Lolita Fountain
and walked up Market street together. DIR.
Brown rode in 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
Matte Overman from Pine and Kearny to
his Office, and he took promenade with
Mrs. Davidson one evening. yet his four
witnesses did not see the doctor on any of
those 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.
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
eliminating epistle was inspired by the
Bulletin, they in some way having secured
possession of the facts set forth in the
original letter.
The fictitious Mayer then turned his at
tention to the Chronicle, alleging that that
papers supposed unfriendliness to Brown
was due to personal grievance.
The council employed private detect
i've to look up Mayer, but no trace of such
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 DIR. Brown is slowly
but surely crystallizing. Deacon Barnard.
Deacon Hatch and Or. Mcdonald are lead
ing spirits in the movement DR.. McDon-
aid will to-day circulate a petition among
the members, asking the deacons to take