The San Francisco call., 1897-10-27
Anarchy by the Men Who Are
Alleged to Usurp Undue
Power.
REVIVAL OF THE DAYS OF
INQUISITION.
Now the Ex-Pastor OF the First Con-
gregational Church Is Trying to
Put His Peers on Trial.
Special Dispatch to The CALL

CHICAGO, Oct. 26.-The official inquiry
into the conduct and character of the
Rev. c. o. Brown of San Francisco, but
now pastor of the Green-street Congrega-
tIonal Church of this city, began to-day
in the Y. NJ. Z. A. lecture-room. Numer-
Gus delegates from California and promi-
nent dignitaries of the Congregational
church had stated their intention OF at
| tending the trial, and local Congrega-
tional ministers seemed greatly inter-
ested.
The proceedings, according to DR..
Brown. were intended more as an arraign-
ment of the Bay Conference, which sus-
pended him from his California post
without trial, than as a probing into the
ministers behavior.
DR.. Bradley and DIR. Hollister, both of
| Grand Rapids, Mich, we're the first min
listers TO enter the hall. Among the dele
| gates who later reached the scene, besides
| a mum Ter Of laymen, were the following:
DR.. Martin, Detroit; DIR. Wallace, Chi
cago; DR.. Waterman. Chicago; DIR. Burn
| ham, ST. Louis; DIR. Blanchard, Aurora.
! Dr.. Brown, with his counsellor, J.
| Adams, came in with a brisk step and
smiling face.
Il think this council" said he twill set
| me right. The conference seems, as far
as l can ascertain. determined on justice,
| while every circumstance since my
trou bles in San Francisco has been in my
| favor"
The Rev. Philip Krohn, DID,, who was
! to have participated in the trial, was not
present, as last night he was stricken
| with paralysis and is now at his home in
a critical condition.
| The session was rather stormy. After
! DR.. Boynton of Detroit had been ap-
! pointed temporary chairman the mem
bers de bated the advisability of having an
| open investigation, and involved them
| selves into an almost hopeless muddle
| with motions, amendments and sug-
gestions. DR.. Brown urged through his
| counsel an open session. 1t was finally
| decided to hold open meetings, and a
committee composed of the three dele
gates from the Bay District Conference,
Rev. DR.. Brown and his counsel. J.
| Adams, was appointed 10 decide upon the
method OF procedure.
| During the debate over the question as
| TO whether the sessions should be open
| or secret. Rev. Dr.. Mclean, chairman of
| the Bay delegation, arose and registered
| strong objection against admission by
| ticket, saying the committee had had ex-
/ shoulder the weight again.
! The three delegates from San Francisco
| sat al the right of the chairman and took
| no part in the discussion, aside from
| Moderator McLean's objection to tickets.
| Layman Nickerson. who first made the
m otion for star chamber session, then
stated that he, too, was in favor of an
| open session, and wanted the matter over
with as soon rs possible. Then it was
| discovered that Dr.. Boynton had not BEEN
| regularly appointed temporary chairman,
| and vote was taken to clothe him with
! tuli powers. Alter the withdrawal of a
mum Der of amendments it was voted to
admit clergymen. laymen and reporters.
! Ii was decld- d TO open the morning seS-
| sions al $50, the afternoon sessions at
o'clock and evening a. 1880 o'clock.
| DR.. Brown opened his case in lengthy
statement, reviewing the finding of the
California council and the consequent de-
Cision of the Bay Conference, "ich sus-
| pended him. He denounced in pas
sionate language the action of the con-
| ference, which he said violated it. own
constitution and all recognized authorl-
! lies of the church in suspending him
from mem bership.
| These men who have made charges
against me, said DR.. Brown, violated
all the provisions OF the constitution.
| They should have turnis Ied me with q
statement of the charges and specifica-
|
fend myself. | was ready to meet Them
Did they meet me? They did nothing OF
| the kind. My accusers were not there
| Instead they sent letter saving that
they did not regsr1 themselves as stand
| ing in the light of prosecutors to PRESENT
proofs. The action of the Bay Conference
| was based on the report of a numbe of
| men who were hostile to me and who had
| a siar-cham Der meeting and recommended
that l be suspended. That meeting was
| without authority and vas a usurpation
of the power resting in the conference
1T was anarchy. They recommended
that Dr. Brown be suspended till he could
clear himself from what? From proofs
| No, from suspicious. You will have 10 90
back 10 Smit field and the Spanish in
| QUESTION before you will find ecc esiastical
tyranny that will compare with thar.
| Deacon Dexter, who was a mem Der of the
! credentials committee OF The council that
tried me, declared the action of the Bay
| Conference was farca."
=Dr. Brown subst quently read a letter
| from Rev. j. a. Cruzan, one of his prose-
! cutors. to Rev. L. E. Hopkins of DUBUQUE.
| in which he said that the action of the
| conference that suspended DR.. Brown was
n-Congregaiional. DR.. Brown went on
TO quote from Dexter, Ross and other
| authorities to show that the action of the
| conference was without sanction of Con-
| gregational law. Later he quoted from
the charge of Judge Tuthil in the Luei-
| CERT trial and said the same law held
| good IN church cases. that Il man should
be adjadged innocent t Ii re is proved
| guilty. HIS congregation was a proper
| body to pass on his conduct and the FRS.
| Church of San francisco has remained
| loyal to him by an overwhelming major
1tv. and when he said farewell the church