The San Francisco call., 1898-01-28

/ \ occasion for speaking once frankly concerning the Rev. C. O. Brown.
 All men are so far from perfect that grievous shortcomings may be overlooked, more especially if followed by repentance. The book from which Brown still has the presumption to select texts teaches that only the without sin has right to cast stone at the offender. But minister of the Gospel stands on different plane He is supposed to be qualified to point out the way of salvation others and when he descends from the pulpit reve in wickedness he makes of his high calling mock cry and scofing. Therefore Brown is not exempt from correction by decency either in or out of the church.
 The appears to have no good in him. So far may be judged by his record and his present attitude he is moral pervert incapable of genuine remorse as was Durrant, and with egotism as mon strous From the time he first exposed as hypocrite there has been in his conduct no geam of a noble nature, hint of generous sorrow. Throughout his trial he lied sometimes with unction sometimes with a venom undisguised. And at the end he deliberately abroad false reports of the result, crime which he later repeated at Chicago.
 Before the mask had been torn from him Brown pursued course which could only have been ac- tuated by depravity the most shocking. He gath cred about him a brood of evil women, taking one Of these into his domestic circle her presence there being unspeakable insult to his wife. These women he dared to address as sisters in assem- blages where people had gathered to worship God called upon them to pray, openly clasped them by the hand. Then meeting outside he plotted with them how his deeds might be covered He did not hes- tate to slander the innocent did he stay his ton tongue when the grave had closed over two of them. With blasphemy appalling and disgusting he ascribed their takingo to the wrath of the Almighty exercised in his behalf. Now, after there is no longer question of his guilt he "confesses To what?
 The so-caled confession is only another of the long list of Brown deceptions It is really attempt at selfglorifcation By implication it tries to convey the impression that although Brown was not wholly innocent, he had been far more snned against than shining. It speaks of "a deep and malignant con- spracy against his home" He knows that no such conspiracy ever existed; he knows that people are of this knowledge on his part The charge comes with i'll grace from who had deliberately sued that home by installing within its walls as avorite creature of the streets There is naught in the confession indicating regret its abjectness has ring of sincerity, its promises are hollow It is not what it purports to be. It is a papabe sham crowning infamy born of character wholly barren of the elements tending to respond to an impulse toward reform. Yet this calmly proposes still to serve a cause to which he is than reproach He has become stench in the nostrils.
 If Brown ordinary scoundrel caught in his guilt he would have seized upon the chance to snl from the gaze of men. Realizing that he had yielded to temptaton he would at the first awakening of his better have deserted the pulpit he had made unclean nor thought boldly of demanding the privi- ege of returning. Rather in solitude would he have suppicated not alone to be forgiven but forgotten and upon his bowed head have heaped the dust of abasement. His contrition he would have showed in good works and mayhap have won his way anew into esteem Brown did none of this He had no better nature to awaken. With lie on his lips he sought other fields, and with another lie he comes back unbushng, unregenerate.
 Now let him go or let him stay; this paper is through with Brown.