Plymouth Church Council: Bowen Examined at Evening Session

Rev. William Ives Buddington, D.D., to come before the council to aid us with any facts which may be within their knowledge as touching the questions before the council.

A delegate asked what the committee expected to reach by inviting these two ministers. Dr. Strong said that the committee were unanimous in the desire that it should be adopted. Should they shut out anybody they would be doing injury to Plymouth Church. Judge Withey said he considered it more important to hear these two gentlemen than any others who could be invited to appear before the council. The moderator, Dr. Bacon, said that from the first he had been impressed with the fitness of inviting these two brethren to appear as brethren before the council. They should not be summoned as witnesses, but as brethren, to come in and make any statements in relation to the questions before it. After further discussion the resolution was adopted and a committee of three appointed to invite Drs. Storrs and Buddington to appear before the council. A motion was adopted to adjourn from noon to-morrow to Monday at two o'clock. Opportunity was given to Plymouth Church committee to make additional statements, and Mr. Shearman said he had been instructed by the committee to lay before the council a paper which had not yet been presented to the church for the reason that a meeting could not be called since it had been received. He then read a letter from Andover Seminary, proposing a mutual council.

This letter provoked a great deal of discussion, and was eventually referred to a committee of three. Deacon Isaac Claflin, of Lombard, Ill., wanted to have it stated in the report of the committee whether or not the Andover Seminary church had a right, under the rules of Congregationalism, to call this council. He made a long, rambling address and was interrupted several times by delegates rising to points of order. Mr. Shearman, in reply to the question relating to further investigation of the charges against the pastor by the church, said the first reason why they had not opened the case again was because no charges had been presented. Mr. Beecher also spoke at some length on the subject, his point being that he was tired of a community who had not sense to read the court reports of the case and stop continually sending complaints that they had not challenged the world as witnesses. Dr. Wolcott's resolution, that Henry C. Bowen be invited to communicate to this council any evidence he might have in regard to the questions before it, was adopted. H. W. Raymond stated that further investigation was not required by man, woman or child in Plymouth Church.

Dr. Bacon, on behalf of the committee to invite Drs. Storrs and Buddington, reported that they had seen and been received kindly by both gentlemen and that both of them had said they had nothing to communicate to the council. The report was adopted and the council adjourned.

EVENING SESSION.

The crowd of people that attended the evening session was so immense that it was found necessary to close the doors about seven o'clock in order to prevent any more entering. It is estimated there were about 3,000 people present. Rev. Dr. Fay, of Bangor, led in prayer, after which assistant moderator ex-Gov. Dingley said that the hour having arrived at which Mr. Henry C. Bowen was asked to appear, they would proceed at once with his examination. Mr. Bowen, accompanied by Dr. W. E. Ward, of the Independent, had come in previously and seated himself near the platform which he now ascended. Dr. Bacon propounded the questions. After reading Bowen's communication, he said the first question he would ask would be, "Who told you that you were not wanted by the committee?" Mr. Bowen said that he did not remember any special conversation on the subject of his being present with any one of the members. He would ask if what he said in his communication of last evening had been denied by anybody. Dr. Bacon said his communication was a denial of something said in the council, yesterday, and he was invited to come there for the purpose of stating what facts he knew in relation to the matter. He then asked him if he would have fully testified if he had been invited to do so by the investigating committee in 1871, and he replied he should have testified, but to what extent he could not then state. In response to a question as to how long a notice he would have required, he said he had frequently stated that he was always ready — five minutes would do him. He was then asked if he had not kept the examining committee of Plymouth Church waiting some weeks for him to get ready what he knew, and why the delay? His reply was that he was waiting to find out what they wanted of him. Dr. Howe, assistant scribe, did not think the question a proper one. It was entirely outside of the matter for which Mr. Bowen had been invited and he hoped it would not be repeated, or followed by others of the same character. Bowen said he was ready to answer any questions put to him in relation to his communication, but if that had been denied he would like to know it, and by whom. In reply to the question put by Dr. Bacon, as to whether he could remember the conversation between himself and H. B. Claflin, during which the latter told him he was not wanted by the committee, he said that it seemed to him he had a right to know if his communication had been contradicted. [...] What the moderator had said in regard to the nature of the communication and Mr. Bowen said he had evidence that he was not wanted there. It was the report of the investigating committee containing the list of those summoned as witnesses, which he requested the scribe to read. His name was not among the number and he considered that ample proof that he was not to appear. The only conversation he had on the subject was with H. B. Claflin, [...] he did not think he (Bowen) would be called. He then read a letter from Claflin which he had received at Woodstock, relating to the tripartite agreement, in which he said that Tilton asked for the papers. He came to New York on the morning of the [...] and Claflin called at his office. He said that to refresh his memory he would refer to the memorandum taken at the time, which had since lain in his safe. He was prepared to prove the authority of this by Dr. Ward, who had also made a memorandum of the occurrence in his diary. He read the paper which was to the effect that Claflin had stated that he called by [...]. Did not say who requested him, and asked him if he could not arrange the Woodstock letter so that it would appear to relate to business. Claflin asked him if he would speak if he could crush anyone, and he said no: he had no desire to crush anybody. After answering several other questions, Mr. Bowen left the platform and Dr. Ward took his place, corroborating him in regard to the statements made.