nd John Chambers! _Reverend_ for what? For his piety;
manifested in the fact that he, a professed minister of the
gospel, could by rowdy tumult drown the voice of another minister
of the gospel while she was asserting the religious character of
the Temperance Reform! _Reverend_ for what? For his charity;
manifested by low cries and insulting gestures, to a gentlewoman
who stood there firm yet meek, before him! Strange that he, of
all, should thus seek a bad eminence in outraging the decencies
of social life; for unless report is false, John Chambers owes
whatever position he may have to woman. It is said--I believe on
good authority--that he was educated for the ministry by the
contributions of women; that he preaches in a church built and
endowed by a woman; that his salary is chiefly paid by
hard-working needle-women; finally, that he married a rich wife!
Now what a sight was there! A man, whose brain had been fed with
books by woman, whose body had been fattened with bread by woman,
every fragment and stitch of whose ministerial garb, from his
collar to his boot-heels, had been paid for by woman, whose very
traveling ticket to that convention had been bought by woman,
could find no better way to discharge his mission as minister of
the gospel than to point his finger and shout, "Shame on the
woman!"

Mr. Channing then bore his testimony to the admirable combination of
energy and mildness, by which Miss Brown's whole air and manner were
distinguished amid these hours of tumult. He said: "Such serene
strength comes only from religious principle and life. I know not how
it may have been with nerves and pulses--there was no apparent tremor.
But of this I am assured, whatever disturbance there was in the outer
court of the Temple, in the Holy of Holies was the heart of peace, and
the dove of the Spirit brooded in light on the tabernacle of
conscience."

In an editorial of _The Una_, headed "Rev. John Chambers Recommended
to Mercy," Mrs. Davis says: "We publish the letter of Rev. Wm. Henry
Channing because it is a noble defence of woman and a part of the
history of the movement. We do not give Mr. Chambers' reply, 1st,
Because we find in it no evidence of penitence nor any testimony as to
who was the guilty party--if he was not; and 2d, Because the tone and
language of the letter is of a character we trust will never