The San Francisco call., 1896-03-14
A Strong Vote on the Grave
Charge of Intimidating a
Young Lady.
MATTE QUIETLY DEPARTS.
The Pastor Made Dramatic Argu-
ment in DefenSe-A Verdict
Expected To-Day.

they were called upon to adjudicate with
that wisdom and conscienciousness with
which they themselves would like to be ad
judged.
Last night at 1890 o'clock they ad-
journed to meet this morning at 10. They
declared that 10 conclusion had been
reached as to whether the pastor is guilty
as charged. it was evident from their reti-
cent manner that the subject of their con-
sideration bore heavily upon them.
Not one of DR.. Browns ecclesiastical
brethren but bore look on his face of in
tense sorrow and in some instances look
of extreme sadness. They seemed to ap-
preciate the fact that DR.. Browns life, as
that gentleman often expressed it, was in
their keeping TO do with it as they willed.
If an unfavorable conclusion was reached
it meant the utter ruin of the accused pas
tor On the other hand, partial exoner-
alton would surround him with an atmos-
phere which would cling to him the ball
ance of his days. Should verdict of &C
quittal be handed in they appreciated the
fact that not few would be willing to cry
''whitewashI' ~
Altogether DR.. Browns brethren recog-
nizeG the weight upon them, and no better
evidence of this can be found than that
they labored for nearly eight hours and
then announced that they had determined
nothing.
Immediately after retiring to the library
DR.. Mclean called the council to order
and then in plain though terse language
outlined the work before them. Just what
happened at the afternoon session is not
n dafi al TN hut ha
coming from one who claims to know. that
the entire case was briefly reviewed, not
with view of reaching a verdict in so in
formal a way, but rather with the idea of
refreshing the minds of the council as to
the earlier details of the scandal.
Miss Oyerman's explanation of the in
eliminating Overman-TunneD letters was
discussed at great length. Some few men,
hers of the council were outspoken as to
their belief of the truth or falsity of her
story. Others had become impressed with
the fact that whatever else had gone before
DR.. Browns chief witness had in this in
stance at least related a plausible tale.
Then the evidence of Mrs. Thurston was
canvassed, as well as that of Mrs. Barton,
Mr. Bickford and the widow Stockton.
This last ladys statement, evidently
told by her with keen relish, was no: con-
sidered by the council as worthy of belief
entirely blameIess for certain details con-
nected with Mrs. Stockton s first appear
ance in the church. It was argued that
the pastor would have been much nearer
his duty had he told his wife of that first
impassioned kiss voluntarily offered by
the winsome widow and lnvoluntarily re-
ceiyed by him. This was not considered
particularly non-ministerlal, for the one
reason, probably, that the osculation was
not of his own seeking, but the fact that he
waited nearly one month before recount
Ing this episode to his better half was con-
sidered at least mistake of judgment.
At 6 o'clock the council took a tenn
one hour later. As the reverend
gentlemen flied out of the Mason-street en-
trance. en- route to the hotel, reporters
vainly sought to learn something of the
proceedings. DIR. Mclean merely put mis-
finger to his lips and passed on. The
other members OF the council took the cue
and did likewise.
The evening session was productive of
something tangible in the way DR.. Browns
judges feel concerning the evidence intro
duced against him. Enough was said and
done to show that the council thought Dr.
Brown guilty OF unministerial conduct, ii
nothing more.
The layman from Stockton introduced
resolution in effect that DIR. Brown was
charge of intimidation brought by young
lady member of the church. Thirteen
mem bers voted for this expression or opin-
ion, for such II was, for the reason that the
council will take no definite action until
such charge has been thoroughly sifted to
the bottom.
Rev. Mr.. RAIDER, Mr.. Mckee and DIR.
Williams spoke at great length on this
subject. Dr.. Williams said DIR. Brown had
come to him soon alter this matter became
public property and told him the whole
story. He personally did not think that
the accused man meant actually to in
1lmldate the young woman, but rather to
urge upon her suspension of Judgment
in his Own case. Mr.. Scudder and Dr.
HoyJ also took part in the general debate,
the latter claiming that anasmuch as Dr.
Brown had apologized to the young lady,
the matter shc uld be allowed to 20 at that
DR.. Freeland, however, took quite another
view OF the case.
He said that Brown only added insult
TO injury IN commenting in any way on
the visit OF the young woman to the
church and her subsequent inspection of
the organ. When this witness had ap-
peared before the council, the reverend
gentleman said, she had shown herself to
be modest and unassuming, and one upon
whose character not breath of suspicion
had ever rested. DIR. Freeland added that
more angry over that matter than any.
thing else.
Then another vote was taken on the in
timidation matter, and it was voted as the
sense of the council that the accused pas
tors conduct on this occasion was, in a
srnse, unministerial. This action of the
council is not to be considered final, but
merely a.means of getting things in shape
for to-day work.
Rev. DR.. Pond surprised his brethren by
offering a supplementary motion to the
effect that DIR. Browns conduct on this oc-
casion was unbecoming that of Christian
gentleman. Mr.. Barker, who had voted
on the previous question, asked the privi-
lege of Withdrawing his vote. He thought
that if the matter was brought to the at
lention of DIR. Brown in this way it would
be of lasting benefit to him
Rev. Mr.. Hatch, who had voted against
the original motion, gave another little
surprise whtn he declared with much ear
nestness that, though he was opposed to
the council taking the action suggested by
Or. Pond, he personally felt that DR..