1 20 12 https://archives.kentshill.org/files/original/6/21/Collectio_AlmiraJGoss_RuinsPoem1847.pdf e9f639c02d0f0bc9cc8bde6df40a2ade PDF Text Text RUINS I I X f OF THE MM MHffl & DEDICATED IT® A FRIEND BY ALMIRA J. GOSS. I RUSSELL EATON, PRINTER. 1847, �, b D J y. L!_■ j £T*tsZ >4 <^-* * ?/* tj, jb-h-L^* • tx> /l-O Aa " l'- e t. - ?. ■ ’-s’’-- C £ Z- Cl ./ 7;i'.' ct.4 v?> i 5\-- ' . z / . ■ /. z ; #e c*v«-•? t t-* &%?// PREFACE. ■ e- c. <£-t.t,.^..J c/i- ?. ~ Z- /> Jti '•■ This Poem is the production of a youth, written with a view to pas a few leisure hours, without a most distant thought of its ever being seer by any but indulgent friends. It was suggested by the demolition of tin Seminary building at Kent’s Bill, after a new and more aspiring structuri had been erected for the purposes cf the institution. The old building wasj one full of delightful associations to hundreds, who, in times past, had re-1 paired there for the purposes of receiving instruction, and more especially } I so, to one endowed with youthful enthusiasm and a strong love for the! 1 scenes and grounds so intimately connected with the very morning of hen j life. Every spot brings forth some interesting reminiscence and calls up* thoughts of happy hours and absent faces that come clustering around her,' like the visions of a sweet and pleasant dream. The author makes no pre­ tensions to faultless skill in poetic arrangement of language; to the weaving of harmonious numbers—to deep knowledge of classical literature, sq con­ ducive to smooth and expressive diction. All she cun claim for this pro­ duction, which her friends have overpersuaded her to give them, is,—that it is the simple language of the heart, indulging in the outpourings of affec- . lion and love for the old schoolroom and surrounding grounds, where were spent so many happy and innocent hours. The memory of them is like the songs of Ossian, pleasant but mournful to the sou), and the intensity of this affection, must be offered as the excuse for daring to express her fecliugs in the following imperfect form, by way of an offering on the altar of love , and gratitude. �4 i o -t j Harp of the Hill! that long hath hung, Scarcely a note has yet been sung By me, the lowli’st of that train Who’ve touch’d thy strings, and not in vain, Oh! not in vain—and would that I Might with some skill the harp-strings try, Might wake one chord—but not to Fame, I ask not that to keep my name. Come, oh, my harp! and bid one strain— In metn’ry of the fallen fane Awake, and consecrate the dome, Where Learning erst did make her home, To Metn’ry. Bid each youthful heart Which in these halls once took its part, The lovely girl, the noble youth, Who here have drank thy waves, oh, Truth! Remember days, the past, the dear, And bathe their metn’ry with a—tear. Thou’rt lying in ruins—thy brave old walls No more will resound to mirth—or the calls Of happy youth with their notes of glee, Thou’rt lying in ruins, we mourn for thee. Thou’rt lying in ruins—never again We’ll meet as we’ve met, in sunshine or rain, Never shall meet at the call of the bell, It long since has sounded that note—farewell. Farewell—o’er hill and valley it sounded, Farewell—each grove the echo resounded, Farewell—the saddest, the loneliest note That has, or will e’er on the glad air float. Lonely the sounding, and sad was the knell When peal’d o’er our Hill that mournful farewell; Falling were tears when that silvery chime Broke on the silence and for the last time, The last time ’twould sound from that belfry tow’r Whore oft it had noted the passing hour. Well may we weep when to drea?y decay Is consign’d the halls ot the young and the gay �[; MAINE WESLEYAN SEMINARY. Many’, oh, yes, very many have met In these once proud halls, who cannot forget Who’ll never forget the days of the past/ ind hours that were all too blissful to last. What one of the many who’ve gather’d here In these now ruin’d balls but holds them dear, Who of them will tell us this lovely spot,— Hill, valley and lakelet are now forgot? dill, valley and lakelet!—how lovely they lay' lath’d in the light of a glad summer day, 3r wrap’d in a silv’ry veil by the moon, 111 hush’d in the silence of nights’ still noon, That mystic hour when, we have all heard say, sprites o’er the earth are wending their way. ?erchance it is so, or, it may be not, 8ut this 1 know, it were a dreary lot for us, poor mortals, if there were no space 3n our earth for a spirit’s resting place, if we’d not one guardian angel to keep Us safe on the way over life’s rough deep. Many, old fane, ay, many there be When they hear of thy full, will weep for thee. Many will pay the sad tribute—a sigh To the mem’ry of days long since gone by, To the mem’ry' of friends, the lov’d, the dear— Dearer perchance that they first met them here— Here, where, from the censer, kind Learning flung incense over the shrine where knelt the young. Of that beautiful band, the bright, the gay, Many, yes, many have passed away,— Many, who here, in their hour of bloom, □nee met, now rest in the shadowy tomb; But friendship’s strong chain that once link’d us here Is binding us now to a brighter sphere, A happier, lovelier band than this, May we meet them there in their bow’rs of bliss. But turn we from tho’ts of the blessed now, To those who, perchance, with a care-worn brow, Are struggling on in this world of strife, And find that the dreams that they drenm’d of life,— [rhe beautiful viaionn that gather d heie Iwere not of this earth, but a brighter sphere, ll'.lse were this world too lovely—oh, yes! l\Ve else should forget there is greater bliss, flight cease to reinember our fairer home, MAINE WESLEYAN SEMINARY. 1 1 1 And be all too willing on earth to roam. Those visions of bliss, of beauty and heav’n On the threshold of life alone are giv’n. Alas, for us, as we cuter life’s hall Those gleams are hid by a shadowy pall, Spread over them by the fingers of care, Alas, for hopes of the young and the fair, Alas, that a worldly spirit should fling A cloud and a shade o’er youths’ bright spring. Yet Memory rules—and now with her hand She has raised the veil, and her magic wand Has bidden sorrow depart for awhile, I Her sceptre is moving. Ah ! see that bright isle That rests on the shaded sea of the past, See now, into beauty ’tis gath’ringfast. Look, look! and behold those radiant flow’rs, We have seen them before—our school-day hours,— The joys that are flitting with rainbow wings, And such radiance on that fair isle flings, Alone could have rear’d to beauty so rare The flow’rs of joy that arc blossoming there, The veil rises higher,—I see a band A smile on each lip, a book in each hand. A bell is ringing—with hurrying feet They’re hastening in yonder ball to meet. The teacher is there—with a kindly' smile He welcomes each as they enter the while. Tasks are recited—some timidly meek, With trembling arise—with diffidence speak— Others repeating with voice loud and bold— Their well conn’d lesson is speedily told; On the brow of a few a proud seal is set, They’ll rule in the halls of the Senate yet. Those are there who have thoughts of the boundless sea,’ “Like an eagle caged” they’ pine to be free. I fear me much some are thinking to weave The poets sweet song. Oh, much I should grieve, If any one there, in that happy band, Should give their best tho’ts to a stranger band, Should forma lyre of their hearts’ finest strings, The breath of the world breathes there, and it wrings From the harp a moan, where music should be, Alas! for the poets’ sad destiny. The lessons arc told—the prayer now is done, Afar m the west, as a king, rides the sun, Again is the sounding and hurry of feet Again does a band with welcomings meet. �MAINE WESLEYAN SEMINARY. MAINE WESLEYAN SEMINARY. I They are winding now in the vale by the hill, I And now they have paused by a babbling rill I Where a sweet cascade in mimicry plays, I It looks like a haunt for naiads and fays.’ The botany class have met in the bower, See! they have pluck’d a wild-wood flower, I hear them telling the order and class As fall its torn petals abroad on the grass. rTis lovely “Viola,” with meek blue eye, I They rudely have rent and left her to die, The queen of the flow’rs must think with myself Oh! Science! thou art a stern, cruel elf, Thus, mangled and torn, to cast at your feet The loveliest gem of this sylvan retreat. Again in gay groups they hasten along, Now echoes a laugh—now echoes a song. Lengthen the shadows—now rises the moon, Bright hours ye have sped, ye hasten too soon, Laden with leaves, sweet buds, and sweet bells,— Fast are they leaving the bow’rs and the dells, Seeking their rooms with a wealth of rich thought From woodland and vale, and bright flower caught. ’Tis.night!—how calmly, how gently they sleep! Their watchings bright angels over them keep; But scarcely has risen the morning sun Ere each is aroused and their tasks begun: i Oh, how pleasant a task to gather flowers I From gardens of science and learning’s bowers. The days have pass’d quickly, and Friday night Has come. In school-days how rapid Time’s flight!. A glad joyous shout rings out on the air, Farewell for a day to study and care. A long day is theirs for walk or for play, Now see them to ball or grace-hoop away; Some here, and some there, now gaily they trip, With joy-glancing eye and gay smiling lip. Ah! this world has no hour so joyous—believe— Or bright than the students gay Friday eve. Oh! Mem’ry, we thank thee for the blest pow’r Thou hast to soothe us in each weeping hour, (HowS'the words mmeT’hiever forget.” And lovely thou art, oft with painter’s hand Thou makest of the past a picture land. If darkness there was thou has softened the shade, If light was too strong—its brightness allayed, Thy colors on the canvas glow more fair Than we had hoped—when Hope was sketching there, Hope, that so fondly here once seem’d to roam, That I tho’t this earth would e’er be her home, Has fled. She plum’d her many color’d wings, Now near the gates of fadeless beauty sings. Cease, cease, my fond heart—thy throbbings, oh, cease, Hope sings nearer Heaven, oh, look there for peace. My harp return 1—and bid thy strain Be near the ruin’d hall again. J 7 Many a student who’s heard the bell Sending sweet music thro’ woodland and dell, Calling from circle or leafy bower All those who must meet at reciting hour, Or the bell that each evening call’d them, where Their spirits should bow in humble prayer, Will deem, oftentimes, that they hear it now, When the Spirit of Dreams her bright wings bow To the shaded earth. They will dream the gay Are yet untouch’d by the breath of decay, That their smiles are yet glad—their steps yet light, And their hearts unstain’d by mildew and blight. They will dream affection has not grown weak, That distrust has never, with vulture beak, And talons, struck deep in the trusting heart, Till they bade the life-spring of Love depart. They will dream that friendship has not grown cold. That hearts are unsoil’d with a wish for gold, They will dream their wealth is still a flower, And all that Nature has, giv’n as dower To hearts that love her. They’ll dream, and the past With its lovely scenes, will come thronging fast. They will dream such dreams till the glare of day With its thousand cares will fright them away. And yet, tho’ the past you cannot forget, Tho’ but in dreams it will visit you yet, Look to the prize that is yet to be won— And on! let thy course be ever right on! And carefully fold up the pinions of thought Over the work that is yet to be wrought Now set the standard! and let it be high What tho’ it waving should meet with'th’e sky’ What tho’ its folds should envelop a star? J Would’stdeem the banner hud floated too far’ No, let it only in Heaven find rest— Let not its foldings by earth be caress’d. �MAIME WESLEYAN SEMINARY. ■ 0 MAINE WESLEYAN SEMINARY. ■■ Tho’ ns mortals, ours is a lowly lot, Scarce dare essay one simple note, That might, an echo, onward float. I scarce dare sing, in humble lays, The names that merit loftier praise, Yet, if the heart’s deep rev’rence pay, For simple note, for humble lay, I’ll even onward with my song, And know that they who linger’d long— In days gone by, long linger’d here, Still love these names, love and revere. I As living immortals,—we know it is not! I The mind, the mighty, all glorious mind, I What tho’ it now with this earth be entwined? I Is it not sublime, in a world such ns this, I Tho’ stain’d, to mate with the spirits of bliss? I Is it not grand, tho’ our way it be dark, I 'Thatyet we possess one radiant spark? I' Glorious! all brilliant! that never’s to die, I Each hour showing clear that its destiny’s high! | Know, that laying our clay prison aside I We mount into Heav’n, an angel our guide? I Know, tho’ bound in so narrow a place, The home of the spirit, is space, all spnce? , And tho’ we’re imprison’d, we know not why, | In a world such as this, our home is the sky? Then bend the pinions of thought to the sun! I Faint not, oh 1 rest not, the goal may be won! I Onward and upward, thy course shall be free, I And thy rest with thy God eternally be. ’ Many have met here who’ll ne’er meet again, I Some died on the green earth, some on the main, I And some are ploughing its bright waters yet, I And some are where lovely Islands are set, I Like gems on the ocean. Why went they there? I They have gone to teach the dark Indian pray’r— B They left their homes and the beauties that wrought ■ Around those homes by associate thought. I And I think me now of one noble youth* B Who caught, from this altar, bright sparks of Truth, I He tho’t to have left his lov’d native strand I As missionary to a distant land, I With the dearest one on earth by his side F He deem’d it not hard to brave the rough tide I Of “Old Ocean:” but alas, for the love I Of earth. Her spirit like a weary dove I Fled to its home in God. From that same hour I He languish’d, as if her love had power I To bind his heart to earth: the chain was riv’n, I He long’d to bind the broken link in Heav’n. He linger’d here not long, but droop’d and died, . In peace now he rests on the green hill-sido. No marble column o’er Ins grave 18 plac d, L But from our niem’nes he’ll ne’er be efiaced. * There’s yet one strain I’ve left unsung, 1 And my poor lyre, so badly strung, 411 ■, :■ I was a child—a tiny one, 1 know not now how old, When Caldwell good In these halls stood, I’ve heard all hearts he won; And I remember now His calm and placid brow. His manner gently mild, His voice was kind As music wind, I lov’d him, as loveth a child. 1 He had a brother here before. But him, I never knew, But many say, That, every day. All knew and lov’d him more; And they often have said That they all mourn him dead, All those who knew him here, And oft I know I have seen flow, To his mein’ry, a silent tear. My childhood’s years were passing away, When Larabee knelt in these halls to pray, The kind, the noble, the lofty, the true, All lov’d him well who his goodness knew. He had ever a tear for those who wept, His steps were where sorrow its vigils kept. Here might my lyre cease full well, It cannot of his virtues tell. Too feebly weak the untaught strain, let will I try its strength again. 1 was an orphan, and a widow’s si"h Was my infant brother’s lullaby, “ r : ■ i �MAINE WESLEYAN SEMINARY. MAINE WESLEYAN SEMINARY. Aly widowed mother’s heart wns drear, Sad and faint-hearted, I’d much to fear, But he to our lonely and humble cot, Like a pitying angel sought the spot. He came with a sad, but a gentle smile, He sought from our hearts dark sorrow to wile, In kindness he came, and drear carking care Fled from our roof with its look of despair. A widow’d heart blesses, and orphans pray That his path with flowers may spring alway, That never a stormy cloud may arise To dim one star of his home paradise. Oh! yes, we will beg kind Heaven to save His generous heart front sorrow’s dark wave. And many whose youth with sadness grew dim, Whom his kindness has cheer’d, will pray for him. Do you not recall where his cottage stood Embower’d in trees almost like a 'wood ? And the garden where his amiable wife Hnd planted sweet flow’rs, till the air seem’d rife With sweeter perfume than ever might rest On a gale just wafted from Araby blest? There oft I have stood when the young Twilight, A child at play with the mantle of Night, Had flung its slight shade o’er leaflet and flow’r, 1 lov’d them all better at that still hour. Oft I visit them now, but one by one, They, too, are departing, since she is gone. Ah! rude, rude harp, so rough thy strain, How dare I touch thy chords again! Yet, Allen, some kind thoughts of thee— Kind thoughts in mem’ry set, Thoughts of past days, the gay, the free, That I can ne’er forget. My girlhood’s earliest days were when Thy footsteps linger’d here, And I was glad, and gay, and then I dream’d not of a fear. To those whose brightest hours wcro spent When thy smile lighten’d here, Thon’lt come with many mem’nes blent, Of joys that ask a—tear. Torsev, thy voice was last, that here Echoed oft with kindly cheer, But it were hardly meet for me To sing the praises due to thee, Yet might I sing what others say, I’ll hasten onward with my lay. I need not tell, the midnight oil Hath been a witness of thy toil, For who ere gain’d a height as thou, Without a trace upon their brow— Of tho’t, such tho’t as only’s found, When all is hush’d and silent round, But tho’ it have no line to trace, Its secret tells its dwelling place. And leaves a light where ere it rest, As tho’ with angel seal imprest. I need not say, that oft, thy feet Seeks Nature in her green retreat, Nor that thou lovest all that’s giv’n As links to bind us unto Heav’n, For who has seen and cannot tell The beauty drawn from Nature’s well, That leaves a light, we know not how, Of better thought upon the brow. Nor will Isay thy low-toned voice Has made the desolate rejoice,— But well I know a sad one’s prayer, Is sent to Heav’n for thy welfare. Oft as the garish light of day Has wrap’d itself in mantle gray, I’ve listened to thy eloquence, And held my breath in rapt suspense, And I have seen the throng, as bound Their every sense in that of sound, List to the melodious rush Of thy grand thoughts, that like the rush Of mighty torrents’ influence, Held all bound with power intense. E’en seem like those, which we are told Were bound in stone by magi old, Only we know the strong of mind Have sway o’er all, of deeper kind Than they in fairy times of yore, As sung in tales of minstrel lore. Oh! much we hope thy coming days May be all that thy morning rays Of life foretell they yet may be, How bright then’s thy futurity. �11 MAINE WESLEYAN SEMINARY, Opso, cease, my harp, thy forward song, Lest he should weary, ’tis so long. Old ruin ! one more thought of thee, Then I will set this worn harp free. I I I I I But shall I cense, and not one word ; Of generous Sampson here be heard? No thought of him, who caused to rise The walls whose mem’ry thus we prize? It were not meet, methinks, that I, In such a lay should pass him by. What shall I say? Has any told All beauty that the stars enfold? No, we may worship from afar, Who is there that loves not a star? We see them radiantly bright, And blesss them for their lovely light. Has any ask’d the gentle show’r, And it has told them of its power To renovate the drooping flow’r? The stars and showers’ influence, Are types of his benevolence. I And now we’ll bid the fallen fane farewell, i Yet know that thoughts of it shall be a spell I To guide us ever on in virtue’s ways, r And they shall be as sunbeams to our days I Of stormy sorrow. Well we’ve lov’d the hall, ' Not that it boasted fine wrpuglit.capital L And architecture’s device, rich and rare; I Not that its beauty ever bound us there With such strong ties. Little had it of all i That made Rome mighty, even in her fall, Not that the hopes of greatness, no, it sought Grandeur in the magnificence of thought. “Science crosvns her votaries,” that’s a spell Deeper than words of Eastern Oracle. “Science and Religion,” the surest guide Man ever had in his, else, path of pride. This was the motto, and thus let it be— Science—Religion—to Eternity, * •9 :■ � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Greene, Louise Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Ruins of The Maine Wesleyan Seminary; A poem dedicated to a friend Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Goss, Almira J. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Augusta: Russell Eaton, Printer Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1847 https://archives.kentshill.org/files/original/b416615145df57b084e08d3792c81646.pdf 69a32c9b87cd2643fc9d2e8b28b9e982 PDF Text Text JU | NT i THE i CROWI WON BUT NOT WORN; I OB, II ft ’ . II: TOi A IL LOUISE GREENE, 1;! I ■ ' ‘I k | l i <• oI ■*^rr ' - A STUDENT OF FIVE YEARS tLt■ h r4 AT TENTS HILL, MB. I'W J . i ■I BY ; I- \ ! '' - I, d JONAS GREENE. . 0 . A ': I ;***•■ ; ?.*< .. - �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN; <¥ OB, I M. LOUISE GREENE, 1 4 I • STUDENT OE FIVE YEARS AT KENT’S HILL, ME. i-. I . j i BY JONAS GREENE. L T 4 1 BOSTON. 1868. >0 ! I �r It being the object of Ux writer to circulate this pamphlet as extensively as pos­ sible, he offers it at a very low price, and has made arrangements for the sale and delivery of the same at the following places, viz. : <■ S. H. COLESWORTHY, Bookseller, Stationer, and Dealer in Paper-Hangings, Engravings, Picture Frames, and Fancy Articles, »2 Exchange St., Portland, Maine. T. M. VARNEY, Bookseller and Stationer, and Dealer in Paper-Hangings and Fancy Goods, No. G Lisbon St., Lewiston, Maine. Orders can be directed to either of the above houses. Price 60 cents per copy. A fair discount will be made to those who buy to sell again. For further information, please inquire at the above houses, or of Jonas Greene, Peru, Maine. �PREFACE. With an aching heart, pierced by the keenest arrows of affliction — with fondly cherished hopes blighted — with feelings of sensibility stung to the very quick by the wrongs and injustice which I feel have been done to a near and dear one, as also to myself and my family, I come before you, kind readers, to tell the sad story of my bereavement and my afflictions. I cannot promise you a literary work. If I can present my story of sorrow, my ideas, and views in language that you can compre­ hend, you will please overlook my awkward style, and want of literature; and you will “ pardon something ” to the feelings of a bereaved parent. If I shall appear too zealous in the performance of what I feel to be a duty, I will say to you in the lan­ guage of Job, —"Hear now my reasoning, and hearken to the pleadings of my lips. Suffer me that I may speak; and after that I have spoken, mock on.” The reading portion of the community, generally, in Maine, and thousands out of this State, have heard of the sad tragedy which transpired at Auburn, near Lewis­ ton, not long since: how M. Louise Greene, a student at the Female College at Kent’s Hill, Me., left that institution in a wretched state of mind, on the 23d day of May, 1866, travelled to Lewiston, was seen weeping in Auburn, purchased poison, and mysteriously disappeared; how her father, for many weary and anxious days and weeks,’searched in and around Lewiston for his lost child; how he em­ ployed detectives, circulated handbills and photographs all over the State; while the kind and sympathizing people of Lewiston, Auburn, Lisbon, and other places generously assisted him in many ways, and by hundreds, in searching the wood, the canals, end river to no purpose; and how her bleached remains were accidentally discovered in a lonely spot in the forest, in Auburn, in October following. They have also seen, in some of the journals of the day, paragraphs, afloat in the country, containing the statement that she was detected in pilfering on Kent’s Hill, and committed suicide. This Is nearly all that the public generally know of the matter, except what busy tongues, and sometimes prejudiced, have breathed, often incor­ rectly, into the public ear. Thus, thousands, who otherwise would never have heard her name, heard it, for the first time, coupled with infamy and disgrace. �IV PREFACE. This M. Louise Greene was our daughter, our oldest child, — who for twenty-two years had been the recipient of a father’s indulgent care, a mother's kindest affec­ tions, — one whom we loved and doted on, and for whoso physical comfort and intellectual culture and improvement we had been sparing of neither pains nor money. Her kind affections ever clung to us, as tne tendrils of the vine cling to the oak which protects it. While living, she looked to us for counsel and protection; and though now dead and lost to us forever, as a father I will be faithful to her memory, and protect it, as far as in me lies, against false stigma and unjust reproach. I have carefully and candidly investigated this affair with the zeal and scrutiny of a deeply interested father, and have formed the opinion that my daughter was the victim of prejudice, improper treatment, erroneous or injudicious management, or culpable neglect. This is the settled conviction of my mind, whether real or imaginary, from which I cannot recede after months of reflection. To me it appears that some party or parties other than herself are culpable and responsible before God, if not before human laws, for this sad and afflicting occurrence. “ To err is human.” If I am in error, after giving the facts and circumstances on which I base my opinion, — if the public shall decide that I have no cause, — I stand corrected. In view of the condition of the case, and of the many rumors and state­ ments that had been sent afloat, seemingly for effect, to exonerate the culpable and reflect on the character of my child, — after gathering up her bleached yet precious remains from the forest, where they had lain in silence for months, and given them a proper burial, —I felt that I still owed an important duty to her memory, which I could not go down to the grave and leave unperformed. This duty was to lay be­ fore the public, in an intelligible form, a portion of the circumstances and facts which led me to form the opinion I have before expressed, that others may, in a measure, have the means of judging for themselves whether or not I have reasons for my conclusions, and whether or not my daughter was guilty of such enormous offences that her earthly hopes and future prospects should have been blighted and forever extinguished. V �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. The charges, or allegations, preferred against Louise, as far as I have been advised, were, in substance, these: that in her and her chum’s room were found several articles of wearing apparel that were not her own, but belonged to others connected with the institution ;—that she took five dol­ lars in money from the room of one of the students; —that she had in her possession a skeleton key. I propose now to introduce to my 'readers some facts, circumstances, testimony, letters, and certificates, and leave them, after a careful and can­ did perusal, to form their own opinions, and judge for themselves whether or not the following propositions are not amply sustained, namely: That the printed rules of the institution at Kent’s Hill, “ to have all articles of clothing put in the zcash plainly marked with the owner’s name,” was not enforced or adhered to, but that many articles sent to the wash by teachers, students, and even the help, were unmarked; — that much of the clothing could be recognized only by the quality of the cloth, or the peculiar malic, stitches, or hems ; — that articles not uufrcqucntly got exchanged, and fi-equently lost, and that exchanges would naturally and innocently occur; — that for students to take articles from the unmarked pile, not their own, when their own were missing, was not only practised, but allowed, if not advised, by those having charge of that department; — that the articles found in L.’s and her mate’s room, of which she had any knowledge, and which were not hers, were there by necessity, and not by theft, her own being gone ; — that Miss Case and others claimed and took from L.’s and her chum’s room some unmarked articles, claiming them as their own, when the chances arc equal that they were Louise’s ;—that there is no proof that all the articles found in that room, and said to belong to others, were there by any act of L.’s, or that they were all there at the time she left, mid that all those articles not her own, of which she had any knowledge, she took without any concealment, in lieu of her own, with no intention of keeping 5 �6 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORM. them; —that, at the time of taking the five dollars, she was suffering under partial, if not serious mental aberration, and the act was to her a mystery, no less than to her fellow-students, who knew her character, and to her friends everywhere; and that while she could not account for the act, she did not equivocate nor deny it, but confessed and restored without hesita­ tion, when no evidence or proof was attempted to bo brought against her; — that up to this occurrence, from her childhood, she had sustained, both at home aud abroad, an irreproachable character ; — that she was a pro­ fessor of Christianity, and lived a virtuous life ; — that in searching and • examining to fix the guilt of theft upon her, but little leniency or feeling of mercy was manifested towards her; — that attempts were made, while in her “ distracted state of mind,” to fix upon her the theft of other things which had been missed, and to impress upon her already bewildered mind the “ enormity of the crime ” of which they accused her ; — that she was accused, tried, condemned, and virtually expelled from the school,— as she understood it, — only two weeks before she expected to graduate, without the benefit of counsel or assistance, or a consultation with father, mother, or friends, and informed by Dr. Torsey, that “ she had better leave that day,” the very day on which she did leave ; — that she left that day in the morning, in a state of extreme mental excitement, in her soiled every-day apparel, after divesting herself of her jewelry, and taking nothing but her reticule with her; — that it was known to Dr. T. that she had so left in the forencon, and concern and fears were expressed to him that she would destroy herself before night; yet no means were taken to watch, follow, or protect her, until her sister, at six o’clock in the afternoon, was sent home,f a distance of twenty-five miles in a direction opposite to that L. had taken, to give me information, where she did not arrive till twelve o’clock that night; — that the skeleton key was given her years before, by a student, and kept as a kind of keepsake; and that while having the key was charged against her as a crime, no attempt has ever been made to prove that “ she ever used it wrongfully; ”— that a prejudice had existed against her, which had been indulged previous to this last affair; — that threats had been made to her, seemingly on account of this prejudice ; — that she had suffered under such threats, till there existed in her mind a presentiment that she should never graduate, which had been frequently expressed to her friends; — that in fact she did not find at that institution that “ safe and pleasant home ” which she had been promised by their circulars ; but that, being driven to despair by cruel or indiscreet acts, she was left, by her promised protectors, with indifference, to self-destruction. In order that my readers may understand the position, condition, and �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 7 standing of Louise at the time this affair occurred, which commenced on the 21st and terminated on the 23d day of May, 1SGG, I will give a brief outline of the history of her connection with this institution. In March, 18G1, we carried our daughter, M. Louise, to Kent’s Hill, Readfield, Maine, where she entered, as a student, the Maine W. Seminary, located at that place. After a preparatory course of two years, she entered the Female College department, for a three years’ course of hard study. She accomplished all the studies, and advanced in all the branches she was required to study, to the satisfaction of her teachers and friends. She successfully studied Latin, French, German, and various other studies required in the course, together with book-keeping, drawing, wax-work, pencil-drawing, and oil painting. A large number of drawings and oil paintings, executed by her, are left in our hands, which will attest to her proficiency in these branches, and .to her genial powers to accomplish much in the fine arts. When she was three years of age she was sick for a long time, and it was with the utmost care and exertion that we succeeded in saving her life. Again, from the age of twelve to seventeen, her health was extremely poor; so feeble that she lost much of the advantage and opportunity of common­ school education. At an early age she exhibited much tact and aptness in learning, espe­ cially in spelling. At the age of twelve, she composed and wrote, unaided by any one, quite an interesting story, which was published at the time. She soon became much interested in literature, and desired a liberal educa­ tion. We wished the same (when I say ice, the kind reader will understand that I mean myself, and the afflicted and loving mother of our deceased child), but did not think her health would admit of the attempt until she was seventeen years of age, when we took her, hesitatingly, to that relig­ ious institution, being somewhat influenced and induced to this step by the • promise and inducement held out in their circular, which gave us the assur­ ance of our there finding “ a safe and pleasant home” for our daughter. For the purpose of showing the blandishment of that assurance, and the fidelity with which, in my case, it has been carried out, I will quote a few sentences from the circular, which is now before me : — “ Most of the teachers board with the students, and no reasonable pains are spared to promote the comfort and improvement of the boarders. Par­ ents may feel assured that their sons and daughters will find here a safeand pleasant home. Students will furnish their own sheets, pillow-cases, • towels, and toilet soap ; and they should see that every article for washing is plainly marked with the owner’s name.” �8 i THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. Louise continued a student at this institution until May 23, 18GG. She had been successful in her studies, the goal of her ambition was almost reached, and she expected to graduate with honor in two weeks, and receive her diploma. I had no notice of her being in any trouble at school until the evening of May 23, at twelve o’clock. At midnight my third daughter, Chestina, arrived home in a state of extreme excitement, and informed me of the case, and that L. had left the Hill, in an awful state of mind, and gone towards Lewiston. I was informed that she was accused of taking things not belonging to her. Subsequently I had a specification of these charges from the pen of Dr. T. himself. In a letter to me dated June 30, 1866, he says : “ The facts, I believe, are these: Louise sent, at different times, bundles of clothing to the wash, from which were taken by the wash-girl five articles of clothing not hers. In her room were found nine or ten articles, some of them marked, and some of them not having been sent to the wash, — some of them belonging out of the building. Before they were shown her, she denied she had such articles in her room. The money she took and put out of her hands at once. For three years she had kept a skeleton key opening all of the students’ rooms.” Prof. Robinson, in a letter dated November 12, 1866, makes the follow­ ing statement: “ The facts in the case are these : after as private an inves­ tigation as possible, Miss Greene acknowledged that she had taken several articles that did not belong to her; also, that she had taken money from one of the young ladies ; also, that she had had in her possession, for two years, a false key, which would open most all the students’ rooms in the college.” The public now have before them all the charges made against my daughter by the authorities of the institution at Kent’s Hill, in the lan­ guage of the president, and one other member of the faculty. It will be noticed that the first was written to me, at a time when it seemed possible that my daughter was yet alive, while the latter was written to another person, after it was known that L.’s tongue was forever silent. It is a bold and positive statement, not qualified by an “ I believe,” of which, in its proper place, I will take further notice before I have done. These charges have been reiterated and circulated, and, in their circula­ tion, have been magnified and put in their worst possible form, until a por­ tion of the community have been led to the conclusion that her character was truly so infamous, that her friends’ mouths were so completely closed, that they dare not appear before the public in her defence. Certain talka­ tive persons have said: “ Mr. Greene dare not make a statement of her �I i THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 9 case to the public.” Even certain Methodist clergymen, as I am informed, have alluded to this matter in their churches, reiterating Dr T.’s fourteen or fifteen counts.against L., evidently with prejudice against the deceased, or to clear Dr. T. and the faculty from censure. The misconstruction put upon the language of L.’s letter to her class, — brief extracts only being given to the public, — the misquotation of her let­ ter, and other damaging insinuations and acts, have determined me to lay that letter, and some others, before the public, that public opinion may have some more reliable base than incorrect rumors, or pretended and prejudiced quotations. It is not that I seek controversy, or would willingly enter the arena be­ fore the public uncalled by duty; but that I seek at the tribunal of public opinion that justice to my loved, lost, and unfortunate child which was de­ nied her elsewhere; and I feel confident that, before this Superior Bench, though the heavens fall, it will be awarded her, however high in community may stand those who would deny her it. You will bear with me patiently, kind readers, when you consider that almost all the direct aud important testimony in this sad case is in the pos­ session of those whose fame and interest might require that its dark feat­ ures should be withheld from public gaze; aud that she who was the re­ cipient of the wrong — if wrong was done her — now sleeps in death. Iler silent tongue can make no reply, nor testify as to what grating or burning words crushed her hopes, broke her heart, distracted her brain, aud severed her ties to life forever. You will be aware that I shall be under the necessity of going over much ground to get at the circumstances and facts bearing on this ease, in order to give the public a proper understanding of the whole affair. As to the character of Louise, I cannot, perhaps, better express my views, knowledge, and opinion, than to repeat what we said to Dr. T. at a faculty meeting, at which myself .and wife were present, one week after L. left the Hill. In answer to the charges there brought against her we said: “ We do know that a more honest, upright, aud truthful girl than was L., when she came here, never came under your care. She was strictly honest from a child ; and if she is now dishonest you have made her so. She has been under your care and control three-fourths of the time for five years past, and you are, in a great measure, responsible for her character.” Dr. T., in the course of the conversation that day, told us that hitherto our daughter’s character had been irreproachable. Miss Case, the precep­ tress, told me, in substance, the same, on the second day after L. left. She said, in substance, that no suspicion had ever rested on L., aud that �\ 8 r r THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. Louise continued a student at this institution until May 23, 18GG. She had been successful in her studies, the goal of her ambition was almost reached, and she expected to graduate with honor in two weeks, and receive her diploma. I had no notice of her being in any trouble at school until the evening of May 23, at twelve o’clock. At midnight my third daughter, Chestina, arrived home in a state of extreme excitement, and informed mo of the case, and that L. had left the Hill, in an awful state of mind, and gone towards Lewiston, x was informed that she was accused of taking things not belonging to her. Subsequently I had a specification of these charges from the pen of Dr. T. himself. In a letter to me dated June 30, 1866, he says : “ The facts, I believe, are these: Louise sent, at different times, bundles of clothing to the wash, from which were taken by the wash-girl five articles of clothing not hers. In her room were found nine or ten articles, some of them marked, and some of them not having been sent to the wash, — some of them belonging out of the building. Before they were shown her, she denied she bad such articles in her room. The money she took and put out of her hands at once. For three years she had kept a skeleton key opening all of the students’ rooms.” Prof. Robinson, in a letter dated November 12, 1866, makes the follow­ ing statement: “ The facts in the case are these: after as private an inves­ tigation as possible, Miss Greene acknowledged that she had taken several articles that did not belong to her ; also, that she had taken money from one of the young ladies; also, that she had had in her possession, for two years, a false key, which would open most all the students’ rooms in the college.” The public now have before them all the charges made against my daughter by the authorities of the institution at Kent’s Hill, in the lan­ guage of the president, and one other member of the faculty. It will be noticed that the first was written to me, at a time when it seemed possible that my daughter was yet alive, while the latter was written to another person, after it was known that L.’s tongue was forever silent. It is a bold and positive statement, not qualified by an “ I believe,” of which, in its proper place, I will take further notice before I have done. These charges have been reiterated and circulated, and, in their circula­ tion, have been magnified and put in their worst possible form, until a por­ tion of the community have been led to the conclusion that her character was truly7 so infamous, that her friends’ mouths were so completely closed, that they dare not appear before the public in her defence. Certain talka­ tive persons have said: “ Mr. Greene dare not make a statement of her i ■■ r �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 9 case to the public.” Even certain Methodist clergymen, as I am informed, have alluded to this matter in their churches, reiterating Dr T.’s fourteen or fifteen counts.against L., evidently with prejudice against the deceased, or to clear Dr. T. and the faculty from censure. The misconstruction put upon the language of L.’s letter to her class, — brief extracts only being given to the public, — the misquotation of her let­ ter, and other damaging insinuations and acts, have determined me to lay that letter, and some others, before the public, that public opinion may have some more reliable base than incorrect rumors, or pretended and prejudiced quotations. It is not that I seek controversy, or would willingly enter the arena be­ fore the public uncalled by duty; but that I seek at the tribunal of public opinion that justice to my loved, lost, and unfortunate child which was de­ nied her elsewhere; and I feel confident that, before this Superior Bench, though the heavens fall, it will be awarded her, however high in community may stand those who would deny her it. You will bear with me patiently, kind readers, when you consider that almost all the direct and important testimony in this sad case is in the pos­ session of those whose fame and interest might require that its dark feat­ ures should be withheld from public gaze; and that she who was the re­ cipient of the wrong — if wrong was done her — now sleeps in death. Iler silent tongue can make no reply, nor testify as to what grating or burning words crushed her hopes, broke her heart, distracted her brain, and severed her ties to life forever. You will be aware that I shall be under the necessity of going over much ground to get at the circumstances and facts bearing on this case, in order to give the public a proper understanding of the whole affair. As to the character of Louise, I cannot, perhaps, better express my ■snows, knowledge, and opinion, than to repeat what we said to Dr. T. at a faculty meeting, at which myself .and wife were present, one week after L. left the Hill. In answer to the charges there brought against her we said: “We do know that a more honest, upright, and truthful girl than was L., when she came here, never came under your care. She was strictly honest from a child ; and if she is now dishonest you have made her so. She has been under your care and control three-fourths of the time for five years past, and you are, in a great measure, responsible for her character.” Dr. T., in the course of the conversation that day, told us that hitherto our daughter’s character had been irreproachable. Miss Case, the precep­ tress, told me, in substance, the same, on the second day after L. left. She said, in substance, that no suspicion had ever rested on L., and that J �I 8 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. Louise continued a student at this institution until Slay 23, 18GG. She had been successful in her studies, the goal of her ambition was almost reached, and she expected to graduate with honor in two weeks, and receive her diploma. I had no notice of her being in any trouble at school untu the evening of May 23, at twelve o’clock. At midnight my third daughter, Chestina, arrived home in a state of extreme excitement, and informed me of the case, and that L. had left the Hill, in an awful state of mind, and gone towards Lewiston. I was informed that she was accused of taking things not belonging to her. Subsequently I had a specification of these charges from the pen of Dr. T. himself. In a letter to me dated June 30, 1866, he says : “ The facts, I believe, are these: Louise sent, at different times, bundles of clothing to the wash, from which were taken by the wash-girl five articles of clothing not hers. . In her room were found nine or ten articles, some of them marked, and some of them not having been sent to the wash, — some of them belonging out of the building. Before they were shown her, she denied she bad such articles in her room. The money she took and put out of her hands at once. For three years she had kept a skeleton key opening all of the students’ rooms.” Prof. Robinson, in a letter dated November 12, 1866, makes the follow­ ing statement: “ The facts in the case are these : after as private an inves­ tigation as possible, Miss Greene acknowledged that she had taken several articles that did not belong to her ; also, that she had taken money from one of the young ladies; also, that she had had in her possession, for two years, a false key, which would open most all the students’ rooms in the college.” The public now have before them all the charges made against my •daughter by the authorities of the institution at Kent’s Hill, in the lan­ guage of the president, and one other member of the faculty. It will be noticed that the first was written to me, at a time when it seemed possible that my daughter was yet alive, while the latter was written to another person, after it was known that L.’s tongue was forever silent. It is a bold and positive statement, not qualified by an “ I believe,” of which, in its proper place, I will take further notice before I have done. These charges have been reiterated and circulated, and, in their circula­ tion, have been magnified and put in their worst possible fornj, until a por­ tion of the community have been led to the conclusion that her character was truly so infamous, that her friends’ mouths were so completely closed, that they dare not appear before the public in her defence. Certain talka­ tive persons have said: “Mi’. Greene dare not make a statement of her k �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. & case to the public.” Even certain Methodist clergymen, as I am informed, have alluded to this matter in their churches, reiterating Dr T.’s fourteen or fifteen counts.against L., evidently with prejudice against the deceased, or to clear Dr. T. and the faculty from censure. The misconstruction put upon the language of L.’s letter to her class, — brief extracts only being given to the public, — the misquotation of her let­ ter, and other damaging insinuations and acts, have determined me to lay that letter, and some others, before the public, tLat public opinion may have some more reliable base than incorrect rumors, or pretended and prejudiced quotations. It is not that I seek controversy, or would willingly enter the arena be­ fore the public uncalled by duty; but that I seek at the tribunal of public opinion that justice to my loved, lost, and unfortunate child which was de­ nied her elsewhere; and I feel confident that, before this Superior Bench, though the heavens fall, it will be awarded her, however high in community may stand those who would deny her it. You will bear with me patiently, kind readers, when you consider that almost all the direct and important testimony in this sad case is in the pos­ session of those whose fame and interest might require that its dark feat­ ures should be withheld from public gaze; and that she who was the re­ cipient of the wrong — if wrong was done her — now sleeps in death. Iler silent tongue can make no reply, nor testify as to what grating or burning words crushed her hopes, broke her heart, distracted her brain, and severed her ties to life forever. You will be aware that I shall be under the necessity of going over much ground to get at the circumstances and facts bearing on this case, in order to give the public a proper understanding of the whole affair. As to the character of Louise, I cannot, perhaps, better express my views, knowledge, and opinion, than to repeat what we said to Dr. T. at a faculty meeting, at which myself .and wife were present, one week after L. left the Hill. In answer to the charges there brought against her we said: “ We do knoto that a more honest, upright, and truthful girl than was L., when she came here, never came under your care. She was strictly honest from a child ; aud if she is now dishonest you have made her so. She has been under your eare and control three-fourths of the time for five years past, and you are, in a great measure, responsible for her character.” Dr. T., in the course of the conversation that day, told us that hitherto our daughter’s character had been irreproachable. Miss Case, the precep­ tress, told me, in substance, the same, on the second day’ after L. left. She said, in substance, that no suspicion had ever rested on L., and that J �r: 10 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. she would as soon have thought of any one of the teachers being suspected as she. Mr. and Mrs. Daggett, each, distinctly, made similar statements as to her good character and standing up to Monday night,. May 21st, two days only before she left. I have noticed that, while none of those who first accused L, of misdeeds, and examined into the matter, have ever de­ nied the truth of the statement made to me respecting her former good character, the “ facts ” of her misdeeds are brought prominently before the public on every opportune occasion ; and this other important fact, to the benefit of which she was and her memory is entitled, is not even alluded to To show the truthfulness of the statements just alluded to, respecting her good character, I will lay before the reader a few certificates from those with whom she boarded while teaching five terms of school, one yearly, at each vacation while attending college. It will be readily seen that few, ex­ cept her parents, could have a better opportunity than they of ascertaining her true character. CERTIFICATE OF CITIZENS OF ROXBURY. “ The undersigned, inhabitants of School District No. 2, in the town of Roxbury, do hereby certify that Miss M. Louise Greene, of Peru, taught our school in the summer of 1860. She boarded with us during the whole term of her school. We can truthfully, and do most cheerfully, say that Miss Green?, was strictly honest and truthful in all things during her stay with us. She was a social, agreeable, and affectionate member of our family while stopping with us, and gave good satisfaction as a teacher. “ Her moral character stood high and.above reproach in this community. Many of ns in this school district have known her from her childhood, and we never heard a word against her character until certain reports reached us since she left Kent’s Hill in May last. “ Amasa Richards, School Agent. Jane Richards. ilRo:cbury, Dec. 18G6.” “ We can truly indorse all Mr. Richards and his wife have said, in rela­ tion to Miss Greene, and to the best of our knowledge we believe her to have been honest and truthful in all things. “ John Huston, Stillman A. Reed, Arthusa Huston, John Richards, John Reed, Louise Richards, Hannah D. Reed, Virgil F. Richards.” ■ �the crown m but not worn. 11 CERTIFICATES OF ClTrZENS OF MEXICO. “ We, the undersigned, inhabitants of School District No. 3, in the town of Mexico, do hereby certify that M. Louise Greene, of Peru, taught our school in the summers of 1863 and 1865. We, Benjamin Allen and wife, certify that she boarded with us the whole of the term of her school, in 1863, and that we do cheerfully and heartily say that Miss Greene sustained an unblemished character. She was strictly honest and truthful in all things during the time she stopped in our family. She was an affectionate, social, and agreeable member of our family. She sustained the same agreeable manners in the school, and throughout the district, giving general satisfac­ tion as a teacher. “ Benjamin Allen, School Agent, 1863. Sally Allen.” “ I roomed and slept with Miss Greene this whole term, and, iu my opinion, a better girl than L. scarce ever lived. I greatly loved and re­ spected her. I am the daughter of Mr. B. Allen. “LoVina S. Richards.” “ We, the subscribers, Victor M. Abbott and wife, do certify that Miss Greene boarded in our family the whole term of her school in 1865. We can truthfully say that a more social, agreeable, and accomplished girl than she then was, is not known to us. We cheerfully and confidently say to the public that we kuow she was strictly houest and truthful during her stay with us. She was very particular in small, as well as in larger, mat­ ters and things,— the most so of any person we ever had in our house. She gave full and perfect satisfaction as a teacher, and was loved and much respectedby all the citizens of this neighborhood. “Victor M. Abbot, School Agent, 1865, E. A. Abbot. ° “Mexico, Dec. I860 “ Every article of jewelry, belts, buckles, trinkets, and fancy articles of various descriptions, which I owned, were in my bureau-drawers, and other boxes, in the room which Miss Greene occupied, and in which she slept all the time she boarded with us ; and all were left unlocked, open, and at her view, at all times. Nothing was missed or disturbed by her during her stay with us. “ E. A. Abbot.” t �12 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. “ We cheerfully indorse all that Messrs. Allen and Abbot and their wives have said, as to the qualifications and accomplishments of Miss Greene, and the general satisfaction she gave, as a teacher, in our district. “ Her moral character stood high, and above reproach, in our district, and in this town. No tongue of slander ever uttered aught against her, for truth and honesty, during her stay with us, in the summers of 1863 and 1865. She was loved and respected by all. “ Dura Bradford, Lois Bradford, Wm. M. Hall, C. E. Hall, Mary A. Brown, Neri D. B. Durgin, Henry W. Park, Benjamin Storer, Eliza L. Storer, Lucy Richards.” 1 “ In 1863, I visited Miss Greene’s School, and gave her the best report of any teacher in town. “ L. S. Richards, “ Chairman of S. S. Committee of Mexico in 1863.” i CERTIFICATES OF CITIZENS OF PERU. “ I hereby certify that Miss M. Louise Greene taught the Summer School in district No. 9, in Peru, in 1862. She boarded in my family during the term. I can truly say, she was truthful and strictly honest during her sojourn with us. I never had a more particular, honest, and straight­ forward person in my family. I have known Miss Greene for sixteen years, and never heard anything against her character, except what has come from Kent’s Hill since May last. I believe her to have been one of the best of girls. She was the pride of her parents, and an honor to the society and community in which she lived. “Eunice Trask. “ Peru, Dec. 1866.” “ We, the undersigned, inhabitants of the School-District before named, so far as we know, or believe, can fully indorse all Mrs. Trask has said, in regard to the character and good standing of Miss Greene. We had known her for a long time, in the store and post-office kept by her father. Asa teacher, scholar, and public reader, she had scarcely an equal in this com­ munity. “ B. F. Oldham, Daniel Oldham, Jr., (School Agent). Columbus Oldham, Sophrona Oldham, t ! 1 I ! �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 13 Daniel Oldham, Sarah Oldham, P riscilla Oldham, Sidney Oldham, P. F. Oldham, Joanna Oldham, M ary J. Oldham, Freeman Irish, W m . C ox, Almeda Irish, L ouise Cox, S. F. Irish, T haddeus Oldham, Lorenzo Irish, T haddeus Oldham, Jr., Rose Irish, Sarah P. Oldham, Lysander Foster, John Oldham.” “ We, the undersigned, inhabitants of School-District No. 4, in the town of Peru, do hereby certify, that Miss M. Louise Greene taught the school in our district, in 1864. She boarded in our family during the term, and we can truly say that she was strictly honest and truthful in all things, during her sojourn with us. We never had a more social, pleasant, and agreeable boarder in our house. “Having known Miss Greene for seventeen years past, ever since she was five years of age, we freely testify that we never heard a word against her moral character, until after she left Kent’s Hill, May 23,1866. We were acquainted with her in the store and post-office kept by her father, and knew her as a scholar and teacher, and never knew aught against her. “ George W. White, (School Agent), Polly’ K. White. “ Peru, Dec., 1866.” “ We can cheerfully indorse all that Mr. and Miss White have said, relative to the character and standing of Miss Greene in this town and community. , “ Her fine accomplishments and brilliant powers of mind, made her an ornament and honor to the community and society in which she moved.” Thomas Burgess, “ E. G. Austin, Elizabeth Burgess, Wm. A. Austin, Otis Wyman, A. L. Haines, Mary- A. Wyman, Lydia Austin, S. S. Wyman, Judith Austin, Mehitable A. Wyman, Lorenzo Knight, Relief E. Knight.” J �14 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. I will here state that in the year 1849 I became a resident, and went into trade in the town of Peru, my place being central in the town, and but a few rods from the house where the town meetings are holden. I have kept the central post-office of Peru all of the time since I moved into tliis town. Having no boys to assist me, and L. being naturally active and expert with the pen, when at home, was much in the store, assisting me in the post-office, and in waiting on customers, frequently having the whole care and charge in my absence,— thereby becoming acquainted with a great portion of the citizens of the town. To show the tone of public opinion in her own town, where she has been known from her childhood, I will introduce to the public a certificate of promiuent citizens of Peru, who, from the circumstances just named, have had good opportunities of knowing the character of Louise, and they well understand the sentiments and feelings of the people generally in this vicinity concerning her. These are citizens who have held places of honor and trust in tliis town, within a few years past, and many of them are well known to the public. CERTIFICATE OF PROMINENT CITIZENS OF PERU. “We, the undersigned, citizens of Peru, hereby certify that Miss M. Louise Greene, the young lady whose tragical death occurred in the woods in Auburn, sometime .in the month of May last, under such painful cir­ cumstances, bad been a resident of Peru from her childhood. From personal acquaintance and public report, we knew her to be a girl of irreproachable and unblemished character, and of unsullied reputation. Her amiable disposition and affability of manners won for her general respect and esteem. She had the reputation of being an excellent and accomplished scholar, and a competent and successful teacher. Her truth­ fulness, honesty, integrity, virtue, and fidelity were never subjects of doubt or suspicion in this community. “Being naturally kind-hearted, and of a very sensitive temperament, she was generous and charitable, and a ready sympathizer with suffering humanity. “ While we freely and unhesitatingly bear’ testimony to the virtue and good character of this lamented young lady, justice to her memory impels us to say, that in our opinion, whatever unfortunate circumstance or occur­ rence might have operated, directly or indirectly, as the primary cause of her untimely end, it was not her fault or crime, but her misfortune. 1 �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 15 “ Town Officer for 1866. Selectmen. Andrew J. Churchill (Ex-Mem. of S. S. Committee). Isaac Chase (Ex-Member of Legislature). Henry S. McIntire (Ex-Mem. of Leg.) Town Clerk. Sumner R. Newell (Ex-mem. of Leg. and Chairman of S. S. Committee). Town Treasurer. Wttt.tam H. Walker (Ex-mem. of S. S. Committee). S. S. Committee. S. G. Wyman. Charles B. Woodsum (Cons, and Collector). Wm. K. Ripley (Ex-Selectman). Clergymen. William Woodsum. Samuel S. Wyman. Peter Hopkins, Jr. Ex-Officers of the Town. William Woodsum, Jr., Trial Justice (Ex­ Clerk). L. H. Maxim, M. D. (Ex-S. S. C.) L. D. Delano (Ex-S. S. C.) Daniel Hall (Cons, and Col. 1867. Ex-S. M.) Thomas I. Demerits (Ex-mem. L. Ex-S. M.) Wm. B. Walton (Ex-mem. Leg.) Otis Wym\n (Ex-S. M. and Ex-S. S. C.) Benjamin Lovejoy (Ex-S. M.) Cyrus Dunn (Ex-S. M.) James Barrows (Ex-S. M.) Wm. K. Greene (Ex-S. S. C.) Samuel Holmes (Ex-mcm. L. and Ex- S. M.) Benjamin Allen (Ex-S. M.) �16 THE CROWN AVON BUT NOT WORN. 0 ■ Ira Wormell (Ex-Cons, and Col.) Charles F. Deshon (Ex-S. M.) Winslow Walker (Ex-S. M. and Ex-Clerk). Jabez M. Phillips (P. M. E. Peru). Merrill Knight (S. M. 1867, Ex-S. S. Com.) Public School Teachers. Wm. S. Walker, ’ II. Albert Hall, Mercy C. Lunt, Elisha S. Wyman, William P. Brackett, Jr., Sarah M. Brackett, A. M. Knight (Member of S. S. C. 1867.) Olevta Hopkins, Martha A. Hopkins, Benj. F. Walton, Mary A. Carter, Noah Hall, Addie H. Dunn, Phebe F. Churchill.” The reader perhaps may ask, How did it happen that, contrary to the rules of the institution, requiring “ every article for the wash to be plainly marked,” your daughter’s clothing was not all properly marked ? In ex­ planation, I will here state that the first term she went to that school, and boarded in the college building, all her articles of wearing apparel, hand­ kerchiefs, and such things as go into the wash, were plainly marked, as required by the rules of the institution; but this did not protect them. She lost, at that term, three pairs of black woollen stockings, plainly marked “ M. L. G.” with red woollen yarn; two linen handkerchiefs, plainly marked ; one pair high rubbers; one good umbrella; and three dollars in money, — it being all she had at the time. She immediately wrote home to know, or inquire, what she had better do about it. Her mother sent her more money, and replaced the articles lost, and said to her, “ If you make a stir about the matter your chum will be suspected, ' and as she is sent there by the kindness of her friends, and is a poor girl, it may seriously injure her by destroying their confidence ; and you had better lose the money.” This was in 1861, when she had not the same room-mate as when she left the Hill. Soon after this a dollar’s worth of postage-stamps were taken from a book in her trunk. Being postmaster, and having a supply of stamps, I thought best to furnish her with a suffi­ cient number to last her through the term. The money and stamps were lost in the early part of the term. Louise did not think it was her chum that took the money or stamps. At the close of this term I carried my second daughter, Estelle, down to the closing exhibition. On the way down she purchased a pair of long mitts, for which she paid a dollar. Leaving them in Louise’s room while she went to a meal, on returning she r �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 17 found they had disappeared, She never found them. She lost, ?lso, at that time, a black veil there. During her second term Louise lost some small articles, such as hand­ kerchiefs and towels, and one plainly marked chemise. Third term she lost one pair lace under-sleeves, one flannel under-skirt, marked, and two marked nightcaps. Fourth term: one pair sandal rubbers, new that term. Fifth term : one pair marked ruffled drawers, some napkins, and a handkerchief. Sixth term : one pair of spotted muslin under-sleeves, three pairs of white woollen stockings, — all she had, and all plainly marked. Seventh term: one veil, some napkins, and other small articles. Eighth term : she lost one new cotton skirt, marked on the inside of the binding, one wide red silk scarf. And, in fact, at every term when she boarded in the college building, she lost more or less of such articles as napkins, towels, handkerchiefs, veils, gloves, drawers, stockings, etc., etc. Marking appeared not to protect her against loss, nor prevent articles from mysteri­ ously disappearing. In this condition of things, was it any wonder that we should become remiss or careless about seeing that every article was “ plainly marked ” ? And was our daughter alone guilty and censurable for such neglect, when other students, and even her teacher, one of the faculty, could go into her room, and, without hesitation or apology, claim and take unmarked articles therefrom which came from the unmarked pile sent to the wash? Louise’s mother would sometimes upbraid her for meeting with so many losses. She would reply, “Am I to blame for these losses? I put these articles into the wash. They were lost there, and not returned to me. Some of them may yet turn up. We do sometimes get them, after a long while.” The high price of board at the college, and the annoyance of losing clothing in the manner I have just stated, induced me, in the fall of 18G5._ (being Louise’s thirteenth term) to hire a room in Sir. A. Packard’s house, where Louise and her two sisters set up house-keeping, so far as to board themselves, while attending school. While they boarded themselves in this house, which was through Louise’s thirteenth and fourteenth terms, they hired a lady to wash for them, and every article was returned to them correctly. There was no more trouble about losing clothing until Louise went back to the college building to board, in March, I860. This was her fifteenth and last term at this school, and she was to have graduated at the close of this term. As soon as she came in contact with this loose practice of mixing unmarked articles of clothing, she began to lose again both marked and unmarked articles. She went to board in the college just 2 �r 18 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORP. eleven weeks before she was sent away, or “ advised to leave,” on the 23d of May, 18G6. Had she continued to board with her sister in the Packard house (which had been purchased by Dr. T.) through this her last term, I have no doubt she would have graduated, and would have been now living. I charged Dr. T., in that faculty meeting to which I have before alluded, with permitting a practice in its nature demoralizing to the young, by allowing the rule, of having articles for the wash “plainly marked,” to be disregarded; that it had a tendency to lead them to dishonesty. I now repeat the charge, and will explain how I found matters connected with the washing business, or laundry, and leave the public to judge whether I was, and am, right. The disposition of articles of clothing washed and ironed I found to be in this wise: — All marked articles, sent down to be washed by two girls who occupy a certain room,— for example, we will say No. 20, — are washed, ironed, and put into a box by the side of the room marked No. 20, corresponding with the number of the room from which they came. But if there were unmarked articles, they could not be so put into the right boxes, as the person who irons them could not possibly tell where they belonged, but they were thrown in a pile on a large table. Thus the unmarked clothing of sixty girls, more or less, from about thirty-three rooms, would make a very large pile, from which, at the usual time, the girls came in and hastily selected such articles as they thought were their own. There was no person to see to the delivery of them ; so said Mrs Dagget, the matron, who showed us the condition of things, and told us that there was a great pile of unmarked articles of various descriptions, from the smallest to the largest, which came from the rooms of these sixty female students, and were deposited on this table; and that the girls came in squads, or singly, and after taking their marked articles from the boxes, if they had any that were unmarked, or if, by mistake, some that were dimly or unplainly marked had got on to the table with the unmarked ones, they went sometimes in a lively mood and in a hurly-burly hastily and thoughtlessly selected from the pile, as before stated, there being no one to look after ami deliver the clothing. In this state of things, I would ask, would not many mintuLci be very likely to occur? Would it not be very easy for any one, who should feel disposed so to do, to say, “I have lost such and hucIi arl.iclea,”-- whether t hey have or not, — and take from this common pile article > not, their own, an it m known to all that nobody is rcHponidble for ouch unmarked clothing? Thom* who wash aud iron fully under.itand that, they cannot ho hold reiipousiblo for the return of this amount of iinmmlo'd Indies’ clothing, of every description. Was it strange tbat I,ouicloilimg .hould 1'3'1, nilscd up with others’, and that ibr arti- �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 19 cles she had lost in the wash she should take others to wear, until her own should “ turn up”? However wrong it might be, it was a practice, as it appears, that was indulged to some considerable extent at that insti­ tution. In my judgment the faculty are censurable for this palpable disregard of this their printed standing rule. It was, as I told them in the faculty meeting, demoralizing to the young, and alike tempting to students and those who bad the care of, or access to, the laundry, to allow such a prac­ tice to exist. It would have been very easy to have said to the laundress, “ Return every unmarked article to the room from whence it came, unwashed ; ” or, “ Return the bundles containing such articles, and say to those to whom they belong, ‘Nothing will be washed, until the well-known rule of the school is complied with.’” Had this been done, my child, I believe, would have been this day living. Who is responsible for her fate? Why should the “ sin of omission ” be passed over in silence, while the act to which it directly leads is dealt with without mercy, palliation, or for­ bearance ? The reason of Louise’s leaving self-boarding at the Packard house, and going to the college building, was that the rest of her class seven in number, were all going there to board through this their last term, and it was deemed advisable, by her and us, that she should go with them. She did go directly from the Packard house to the college, the same day that I took Estelle, her eldest sister, home. Estelle helped her pick up her clothing, and other things, to take to the college, thereby knowing what she had to take with her there. In two weeks after Louise went to the college building to board, her mother went down to carry our third daughter, Chestina, to the school, and to the same room to board which L. and E. had occupied the previous term. She carried also articles of clothing to Louise. In about seven weeks Mrs. Greene went to Kent’s Hill again, to carry provisions to the* self-boarder and clothes and money to both. At this time L. remarked to her mother that she and others were losing things iu the wash worse than ' ever, and named several articles she had lost. This was about ten days before L. left the Hill. When Mrs. G. arrived at the Hill, on this visit, she found that L. had not been up much through the day, and complained of her head, and said “ she had experienced much severe pain in her head, — had strange sensations in her eyes and head, and was afraid her head would be in as bad a condition as it was some years ago,” before she came to Kent’s Hill. Some seven or eight years previously L. was so severely afflicted with neuralgia, as to incapacitate her for much physical or mental �20 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. labor, and it prevented her from attending the town schools, much of the time, for nearly two years, — her head, especially, being much disordered. In a conversation with her mother, at the time I have alluded to, being the last time they ever saw each other, she said, “ I feel so tired that I think, after I get through here, I shall want to sleep all summer.” An old student, who had not attended school at that institution for about a year, writes me, and says: “ I saw her a short time before her death, and she seemed to be considerably worn out by hard study. I think if the thing could have been kept quiet, and she allowed to graduate, the offence would not have been atoned for by her life.” Before her return home, Mrs. G. went with L. to Lewiston to make va­ rious purchases preparatory for exhibition, and other purposes. On return­ ing to the Hill, Mrs. G. found that L. was much worn and tired out. The fatigue and many demands on her, — the much she had to do and attend to,— her studies, composition, exhibition-piece to write and prepare to read on the stage, — the excitement as the time of graduation was drawing near, — how she should appear, and how succeed, — all combined, wrought heavily upon her tired and worn constitution, and overtaxed mind, ■which had endured the pressure, the wear and tear of five years of close mental labor. A constant and terrible fear, which had troubled her mind for two years, — that the prejudice, which she conceived had existed against lier, in the miifds of a portion of the faculty, and with Dr. T. in particular, would be brought to bear, and tell against her, to prevent her from gradu­ ating, — now haunted her with renewed intensity, as the time drew near. She seemed to have a presentiment that she should never graduate, and often expressed it. All these things had operated, with her physical weak ness, nervous temperament, and sensitive nature, to nearly dethrone rea son ; so much so, that when Mrs. G. left her, only nine days before L. left, the Hill, she caught hold of her mother’s dress, and made a singular and wild request, of which Mrs. G. informed me when she returned home. In writing to me, another old student says: “ I went tb Lewiston at the time she and her mother did. I noticed that she was remarkably still; that is, did not appear so cheerful as she was wont. I had been well ac­ quainted with her for some four years. I have no doubt in my mind that she was not herself at the time. I have thought all the time that she studied so hard as to affect her mind.” I have named these circumstances, that the public can judge whether L. was in a condition of mind to endure the severe and heartless ordeal through which, with no mother or earthly friend on whom to lean, she was forced to pass ; and to see if the heart of charity among my readers can �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 21 find nothing that will plead in extenuation of the guilt of that act, com­ mitted only a few days after the period to which I have alluded. They will also explain the condition of L.’s mind, and why she said to Miss Case, when she and Mrs. Daggett were ransacking Chestina’s and Miss Reed’s room, to see if they could not find more articles that others would claim, “ I feel so strange ! I wish I could think; but I can’t.” These expressions were made after this Christian lady had so welt suc­ ceeded in impressing upon the mind of her old pupil, whose “ character had hitherto been irreproachable,” the “ enormity of her crime.” These cir­ cumstances, before named, will show whether L. was a Ct subject, at that time, upon whom that cold-hearted yet fluent lady ought to have exercised her power of language, further to confuse and distract her mind. And they likewise show why L. said in that memorable class-letter: “I think, maybe I am not exactly as I used to be, while I write this, for my head whirls, and I cannot seem to think, — to say what I am trying to say; ” and also in her last letter to her sister: “ If I know myself, it was not the true, real Louise Greene that'did this. She was trying to live an honest, womanly life ; or. if she was indeed drifting into disgrace, she never real­ ized it.” Who will doubt that, under prolonged mental labor, her active and ever sensitive mind bad become unbalanced? and that injudicious, indiscreet, and unchristian treatment, and unpardonable neglect, springing from prejudice (as we believe), closed up every avenue of hope for the future in life, and sent this poor, heart-broken, despairing girl into eternity ? The last words she ever wrote in the college, as it appears, were these: “Heart breaking. Dearly beloved, adieu I ” These were evidently written directly after the interview with Dr. T., when she was advised “ to leave that day.” As I have said something about L.’s fear of the operation or consequences of prejudice, I will now give some of the reasons why she and we knew that prejudice existed against her. It was known to us that a prejudice was growing up between her and Dr. T., in the summer of 1864. As I shall occasionally quote from various letters, and from other writings which she has left, I will here state that when I quote from any letter, or writing, I use the exact language, having the originals before me. She complained to her mother — and her writings show the same complaints — of petty annoyances, of insinuations to her, by Dr. T., that she was not just what he wanted her to be ; and of his explaining some petty rule of school, and ridiculing some little acts of students after prayers, etc., in a sarcastic way. I received a letter from her dated “Kent’s Hill, August 28, 18G4.” in �22 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. which she says : “ I have kept almost all of the little unpleasant things which have troubled me, from you, thinking not best to trouble you with them; but the denial of my reasonable request to go home with May Chapman, who lives less than two miles from the Hill.” — May C. had been L.’s room-mate for some time ; but on account of some difficulty, her father had decided to take her from this school, and send her to the institution at Westbrook. The difficulty appeared to be like this: Miss Case had asked May to rise for prayers, and she declined. This, with some other intima­ tions from Miss Case, or some of the faculty, which annoyed May, coming to her father’s ears, he questioned her relative to the matter. She informed him of the case, and told him she thought Miss C. appeared different towards her after this transaction. Mr. C., after having some sharp talk with Dr. T., took M. home. Louise had written to May that she would come down on Friday, after recitation, and stop with her till Monday morning, as this would be the last opportunity she would have to see her before she went to Westbrook. Accordingly, M. came up to carry her hom’e with her on Friday, as had been suggested. They both went to Dr. T. together, to get permission for L. to go, she carrying my general, written permit in her hand. They saw Dr. T. on the street. L. made known her request, and he refused to grant it. They both returned, sorrowfully, to the college, where they saw Miss Robinson, L.’s teacher in painting, and sister to the wife of Dr. T. She asked them if they explained all to Dr. T., and advised L. to go to his house, and ask him again, saying, “I think he will let you go.” They both went back to Dr. T., and L. stated the reasons why she desired so much to go just at that time. He had before let her go, and no good rea­ son, seemingly, existed, why he then should refuse her. She named her general good conduct, which he admitted. I will now further quote from her letter of August 28, 1864 : “ He gave me no answer,” she says ; “ but turned to May, who had not spoken a word, — she was not then a member- of his school, — and asked her questions, implying that she had told her father that Miss Case asked her to rise for prayers, and because she did not do so, she appeared different to her after. May says, ‘ she did tefl her father so, and such was her impression.’ T. says, ‘ it was not so, and that she had no right to judge Miss Case. Ton must not report such things to hurt the school.’ May replies that ‘her father had questioned her about these things, and she told him; had not mentioned it to any one else. She did not intend to hurt the school.’ ‘Well,’ T. said, ‘you had better see Miss Case about it.’ May says, ‘I I I �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 23 see no necessity,’ or something to that effect. Returning to the object for which I came, I said, ‘ Mr. Torsey, if your decision is final, I submit; but must say I think it is unjust.’ He said, ‘ You have no right to judge my actions.’ I knew that, although I had spoken the truth, yet I had better not have said it. Almost crying as I was with the bitter disappointment, I said, ‘ I beg your pardon, sir, for saying it to you. I spoke before I thought.’ He said, ‘ Hereafter you need not ask any favors. You nave prevented the possibility of your ever receiving any.’ I said, ‘ It is few favors that I have asked ; still less I have received.’ I was standing in the door. He replied, in a voice full of WTath, ‘ Miss Greene, you will iilease leave the house! ’ ‘ Yes, sir,’ was all I said to him; and turning to Mrs. Torsey, said, ‘ Good-night.’ I held my temper well, for I was boiling over with rage at that moment. Denied, insulted, and ordered out of his house1 I was advised to go home with M., and take the consequence ; but I did not. One thing is sure, I did not deserve, nor will I bear, such treatment. “ Please preserve this letter. This isn’t the first of his tyrannizing, nor the first insulting words I have borne. I will not bear it any longer. I will leave, although I do not want to give up my course of study. Neither will I be any man’s dog for the crumbs that fall from his table. I do not feel greatly indebted to Dr. Torsey. All he has done is to drain father’s pockets, and give me what justice demands he should give the meanest stu­ dent. If I stay here I know the man so well! He has bidden me to expect no favors, and I know that a teacher, watching for a chance, can make school life mighty uncomfortable to anybody without doing any open act of injustice or petty revenge. No matter how careful one is to obey the rules or perform all duties, if he detects the least sign of mental insubordination, his wrath is kindled, and finds vent in acts of petty revenge. “ Dr. T. last winter found a way to give Alice White permission to go to ride to Augusta with Mr. B., to see a mutual lady friend aud school-mate. Now that was a direct violation of one of the fundamental rules of school, for a gentleman to take a lady, miles away, out to ride! I don’t believe another couple in school could have got permission. But Dr. T. found a way by which he could consistently (?) let them go, where he had always re­ fused others ; and yet I could not go down with my room-mate, when he did not pretend but what my parents wore willing, and no damage could bo done to my studies or anything else.” She wrote other circumstances in detail connected with her case, and finally said : ‘‘ I shall leave and go to Westbrook next Tuesday if I don’t hear from yen by Monday night.” This statement of Louise, made to me, I believe to be true to the letter. She said she would read this letter to T. in my presence, and he would not �24 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. deny it. To my knowledge, he never sought to impeach her truthfulness in this affair. I now ask the candid reader to pause and reflect. What had my daughter done, in this case, to deserve to be cut off from the possibility of ever receiving any favors at that institution, where she had demeaned herself as a dutiful scholar for three years, and had nearly two years longer to stay? And what had she done that she should be expelled wrathfully from the bouse of its principal? Stung at an unjust disappointment, with­ out reflection, on the spur of the moment, she gave words to a thought, and that thought was the truth. She immediately, and in respectful language, begged pardon for giving expression to that truth: “I beg your pardon, sir, for saying it to you ; I spoke before I thought.” Was not this apolo­ gy sufficient and the petition for absolution respectful enough to insure for giveness from any Christian heart? Yet she was warned that she need ex­ pect no more favors at that institution, if her words, which have never been contradicted, were true. With what fidelity of purpose this position, this threat, was adhered to, let the history of May, 1866, testify and proclaim. M. Chapman was her old room-mate. They had spent many pleasant hours together, and loved each other. M. was about to leave for a distant school. As it was not infringing upon her studies, L. requested the privi­ lege of spending the next Saturday and Sunday with her old chum, at her quiet home some two miles distant, to which place M. had expressly come with a carriage to carry her. No valid reason existed, or was given, why her request could not be granted. Was it just to deny her? and was this not one favor, at least, less, which she asked, than she had received ? Af­ ter she had been guilty of so small an offence towards Dr. T., and had promptly begged pardon, was the- spirit of the Gospel here exercised, and the transgressor forgiven until “ seventy times seven,” or even until “ sev­ en times ” ? By no means. Pardon was not granted, even for one time, though it was sought with humility. Let the reader remember that hasty decision, and the penalty awarded, and recollect that the same tribunal, if not the same principles, disposition, and antipathy, survived on Kent’s Hill on the fatal twenty-third day of May, 1866. “ Does the leopard change his spots, or the Ethiopian his skin? ” To L.’s letter I replied on the same day, as follows: — I I 11 August 28, 1864. “ Dear Martha L., — I am sorry to have you leave this school until you finish your course of studies. I never like the idea of change ; but I was not made to be domineered over by any one, and am not willing my chil- �TILE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 25 dreu should be. But you had much better remain on the Hill, as you have just arrived there, than to leave so soon. You will not find everything pleasant at any school. You had better stay, if this difficulty can be ad­ justed ; if not, you will please write me again, and I will advise you fur' ther. Mother will copy what I have written to Dr. Torsey, and send it to you. J. Greene.” On the same day that I wrote to L., I wrote also to Dr. T., as follows : — “ Professor Torset : Dear Sir, —My daughter has written me, as she says, a correct statement of the interview with you; such, as she says, she will read to you in my presence, and appeal to you for its correctness. Whether she had done right or not, when she asked pardon, I think she did not deserve such a rebuff at your house. You tell her to leave your house, and that ‘ she is precluded from the possibility of receiving any more favors at this school.’ How do you think she feels, with these words continually sounding in her mind, ‘ You cannot receive any more favors at this school,’ with nearly two years before she gets through her studies under you, and with the feelings she must now have towards you? Her school-days arc made so unpleasant by your ungentlemanly treatment at your house, that, unless some reconciliation can be had, she will leave your school, and that immediately. As much as she and I regret her loss or disappointment, at not graduating at your college, I will not advise her to remain. “ No man, in this free and enlightened land, can unjustly domineer over my children with impunity. I believe she intended to be governed by the rules of your school. No complaint from the faculty has come to my knowledge but what she stood as well as the average of students, in all re­ spects, as to studies and promptness in duties assigned her. “ I exceedingly regret the necessity of this communication. I have writ­ ten her, that if no reconciliation or adjustment be had, she might leave your institution. Yours respectfully, “Jonas Greene.” When I wrote this letter I was not aware — nor am I now — that his dig­ nity or position forbade or precluded me from speaking, plainly and in ear­ nest, to Dr. T., as I would to any other man ; or that there was anything improper in so doing. Nor will I now say that hidden motives of ven­ geance, after slumbering for months, sprang to life and exercise, to accel­ erate, for this freedom, a joint penalty, at the first favorable opportunity, on her and me. Dr. T. replied to my letter August 29, 18G4, in his smooth 4 �26 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. manner, excusing himself, but not denying anything that L. had written me. He said “ he had given her permission to go to the Corner once, on a visit, and once she went without permission.” Among other things, he said that hoi’ unladylike manner of saying that “ he had done her injustice,” or words to that effect, and “the manner and tone of her asking pardon, was not satisfactory to him.” He also said, “ I suppose she cannot leave the school, and her name stand fair on our record; ” closing his letter with an insinuation against L., but not specifying anything. The reader will no­ tice his attempt or threat, thus early, to disgrace her on their records, if she left the school, probably by putting some mark against her name ; such as “ Left under censure,” or something of the kind. This threat in his letter to me accounts, or explains the cause, for her language in her next letter to me, wherein she says: “I'shall not leave in disgrace. No doubt he would like to, but how can he have me expelled? Where is the act which he can fasten an expulsion upon? But if 1 stay here, that is what I fear.” The misdemeanor of going to the Corner “ without permission,” of which Dr. T. complained, as L. afterwards explained to her mother, was perpe­ trated in the manner following: Louise and another student were going down to the Corner (Readfield Corner) on a brief visit. Being in a hurry, L. said to her school-mate: “ When you get permission to go, get the same for me.” (They could get such permit from Dr. T., oi’ any one of the teachers ; but after being refused by any one of them, they .were not allowed to go to any other one for the same thing.) The other girl forgot, in her haste, to ask permission for either. So both went without a permit. On them return Dr. T. called them to account, they being together at the time of the interview. The other young lady says: “ I forgot to ask permis­ sion.” L., seeing then how the case stood, says : “ If that be so, I am in the same condition. I thought you got permission for us both.” Dr. T. says to the other lady: “ I will overlook it in you; but, Miss Greene, I shall remember it in you.” Louise wrote me again Sept. 5, 1864; from which letter I make the fol­ lowing extracts: — I “ I carried your letter to Torsey. He was non-committal, saying but little either way. But one thing he must do, — take back or modify7 this saying: ‘ Hereafter you need expect no more favors of mo or the school.’ I think he would have granted the request, if May Chapman and her family had been ‘ all right on the goose’ (they were Universalists, as I then understood them), and if I had been one of the Torsey worshippers. I told Miss Robinson, that Dr. Torsey wanted to be to Kent’s Hill, what �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN 27 God is to the universe. No matter how well one tries to do, if he sees the least mental insubordination, he is down on them. I see clearly enough how I could be one of his favorites. Consider his wishes law, his decisions perfect, — let him act for you, think for you, and own you soul and body, and lo! your path up the hill of science is smooth as a gravelled walk. There was a time when I would have striven for Dr. T.’s friendship ; but now, I would not take it as a free gift, — all I ask, is justice at his hand. All I grant him, is those rights, which every teacher is authorized to de­ mand. “ If I go home now, I am sure I shall not leave in disgrace. No doubt he would like to, but how can he have me expelled? What rule have I broken ? What evil influence have I exerted ? Where is the act which he can fasten an expulsion upon ? But if I stay here, that is what I fear. With a desire for revenge, and dislike for me as motive, won’t he find something in the course of two years that will pass for a reason why I shall be sent home, or at least reprimanded publicly ? I leave this question for you to think of. It has been an important one with me.” Reader, say you that she had no foundation for those fears, save delusion or vague imagination? and that she did not “ discern the signs of the times,” and comprehend the disposition, power, and means of those, who measurably held her destiny in their hands ? If so, and she had discovered nothing to arouse apprehension and fear-, was it not singular, that an occurrence so sad, corresponding so nearly with her expressed fears, should have trans­ pired within the time she specified? I have been censured, and I now deeply regret that I did not give more attention to her request to leave the school. May God and her angel forgive me for the unintentional mistake 1 Mine was an act of supposed kindness and affection, not of caprice, preju­ dice, or revenge. Had I then known, as I now know, the many petty annoyances she so quietly endured of the “ pimps and spies ” that were around her, to report every little act, every “dislike” of which she was suspected (“mental subordination” I believe they call it), I certainly should have taken her away. It will be noticed that she says in her letter to me, “ one thing he must do, take back, or modify this saying: “ Hereafter you need expect no favors,” etc. As the matter was dropped, or as I heard no more about it, I supposed he did modify, or take it back. I supposed they fixed it up in some way, but how I never knew. I will now invite attention to some of these annoyances and petty complaints which my daughter endured, and to which I have alluded. The reader will please hear her, and allow her, though dead, to tell her own �k 28 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. story. If she had acted the hypocrite, so far as to have impressed upon the mind of Dr. T. the idea that she “was with them,* I have no doubt it would have saved her the annoyance of the following described lecture, or of being made the subject of so long a string of complaints. On leaves of memoranda in the last part of her 18G5 diary, under date of April 11th, I find the following: — “ Dr. Torsey, in Miss Robinson’s room, said, ‘he came to me, not on account of particular violation of rules, but because it was the general impression among the faculty, that I was not with them, heart and soul. Marks had come to him, chiefly for being out of room, and light burning. It was not so much that; but, so general an impression among so many teachers that I was not with them, must have some foundation.’ Said ‘Mr. Daggett told him my influence in the school was not good.’ Must see Mr. Daggett. I guess he meant that hateful whispering morning. Said, ‘ Some one told Mr. Daggett that I laughed while he was talking.’ (I think the question should be, not ‘ Did I laugh? ’ but, ‘ Did I try to keep from laughing ? ’ if he considers motives so all powerful.) Mentioned class, and said, ‘ A gentleman told him he was provoked, after the remark I made at prayers, — “ darned fool ” — to see me in class.’ He said, ‘ some said, I went to gain the regard of a certain young gentleman.’ I told him, ‘ I thought religious matters concerned me alone.’ I told him, ‘ he would find, by inquiry, that I had made it a rule to attend one class-meeting, at least, every term,’ and I have done so. He said, ‘ the teachers thought I was one who would lead others into mischief, and keep out of it myself. There would be a great hubbub in the chapel, among the girls, and I' would be found looking in at the door.’ I told him, ‘ when I was suspected, they need only ask, and they could know how far I was concerned. I never lied myself out of a scrape yet.’ He asked me if I was willing to apologize for saying ‘ darned fool ? ’ Told him, ‘ Yes.’ He asked ‘ if I would apologize to those to whom I said it?’ I said, ‘Yes, if ho would tell me who thejr were.’ And there I had him; for that would come pretty near telling where he got his information. “Dr. T. said, ‘Student had voluntarily told him these little things. He had asked Mrs. Brownell about me, and she said, she had seen me standing, — did not know how long, but less than fifteen minutes, — talk­ ing with a gentleman on the side-walk; ’ which looked as though I was coming as near to breaking a rule as I could, and not do it. He asked Mr. Daggett, and he said, ‘ I was giving him trouble, more by influencing others, than by actual misdeed.’ He said, ‘lie thought it his duty to tell �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 29 me. if I did anything that looked like a wilful violation of rule, I could expect little forbearance from the faculty.’ I told him, ‘ I had felt that ever since last fall; ’ — (the turning her out of his house, etc., — I suppose she meant), — ‘ and had been careful accordingly.’ In conclusion, he said, ‘ Well, Louise, what can we do about this?’ ‘ What do you wish me to do?’ I said. ‘ I want you to begin anew, and from the very bottom of your heart, say, I will faithfully’ endeavor to obey the rules of the insti­ tution.’ ‘ I did that last fall, and I will continue to do it,’ I said ; ‘ but I do not feel very much encouraged at your opinion of my* efforts,’ I added. He mentioned Professor Perley again, —about what he said I said at West Peru. I said, ‘ If there is anything I can do or say, if you will write your­ self, or want me to write to anybody’ concerning that, you have only to say it, and it shall be done.’ Then he said, ‘ It is not so much these little things ; but the source from which they come must be pure, — the original intention right.’ I said, ‘ I don’t know what you mean by’ that.’ I must ask Professor Eobinson if he feels fully’ satisfied about what I said about going down to the Corner ; as Dr. T. said to-day he did not. I have written fully, and as much as I could verbatim, as I may have occasion to remember what was said.” ■ Perhaps I should here explain, that Mrs. Brownell, here named, was the wife of Mr. Brownell, who was at that time one of the faculty. They were not there at the time L. left; and it would seem as if she was watching to see if any of the young ladies ■violated this fifteen minutes’ rule of talking with gentlemen on the street. Mrs. B. did not say how long, but less than fifteen minutes, she saw her talking. Having seen in this record of Louise what Torsey’ said, that Daggett complained to T. about Louise giving him trouble, I, Nov. 8, 1866,.asked Mr. D. if Louise had been giving him trouble by’ violation of rules, and that he had reported her to T.? He said, “he did not recollect that he had.” Said, “ he had nothing to do with the rules of government of students ; only oversaw the boarding department. He did not know that she gave him any particular trouble, anything more than being a little noisy’ at the table.” Said, “ I spoke to her once or twice at the table.” I said, “ What was she doing? ” “ Talking and laughing,” he said. I said, “ Anything more than having a lively’ talk and laugh? ” He said, “ that was all.” I have in every possible way tried to ascertain if there was any good reason for his complaints against her “little things,” as he said students had told him, and others had reported or complained to him about; and I find that they are small things, mostly’ without foundation, which looks more like bis seeking �i 30 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. ■ (asking Mrs. Brownell, etc.) for some pretence to annoy and find fault with her, because of his prejudice, and their conclusions that she was not “ heart and soul with them.” Several times, to her mother, L. mentioned Dr. T. with a dislike, a fear, and a terrible foreboding of evil. What was the occasion, reason, object, or necessity of this visit or inter­ view, and lecture, at the room of Miss Robinson? Of this telling what Mr. L. had said,—what Prof. Perley had told that L. had said at W. Peru? What Prof. Robinson was not satisfied with, and what some one had said about her going to class-meeting to gain the regard of a certain gentleman? No pretension was made that she had violated any rule. Why, then, this threat, that “ if she did anything that looked like a wilful violation of rules, she could expect little forbearance from the faculty”? The gist of all the complaints appears to be that there was a “ general impression among the faculty” that she “was not with them heart and soul.” In the pursuit of knowledge, in every department of her studies, L. lacked no ambition or diligence to excel. Iler assiduity insured her a laudable proficiency and progress. Her moral character, as Dr. T. himself has said, was “ irreproachable.” She was ever ready to assist and encour­ age, by words and examples, those who were seeking knowledge and trying to do right, as I shall show by the best of testimony hereafter. She was not, at the time of this lecture, amenable for the “ violation of rules,” by Dr. T.’s own statement. In what respect, then, was she not with the fac­ ulty? And what was that “ influence,” rather than “ misdeeds,” of which they complained? Was she not, with fidelity and zeal, attending to those grand purposes for which such literary institutions ought to be established, irrespective of the creeds or tenets of others ? Louise, no doubt, compre­ hended the variance, and why she was not considered “ with them, heart and soul,” when she told Dr. T. she “ thought religious matters concerned her alone; ” meaning, without doubt, that in her own religious acts and duties she claimed freedom, and the exercise of her own opinion. No doubt she understood the drift of such lectures, when she spoke of letting others “ think for you, and own youi’ soul and body.” I charged him, in the faculty meeting, with trying to make a hypocrite of her. He showed temper, and said, “ Do you say we tried to influence her in religious matters?” I told him, in substance, that I could not say, by direct lan guage, he did so, but the old proverb said, “Actions speak louder than words.” I named to him about calling her to account three times for exercising the right of opinion, in the matter of what Prof. Perley said was told him / J �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 31 that L. said at West Peru, when she was home at vacation, — which was merely this: that “ self-boarders were not thought so well of, at the Hill, as ' those who boarded at the college building.” We told him that if she said so she said what was true ; and I asked him what he desired her to do, but hypocritically or falsely to say what she did not believe. He said, “ there was a discrepancy between what Perley said was told him and what L. tola him she said.” In the whole.I considered it a mean, contemptible affair, thus to lend an open and ready ear to tale-bearers, and continue to harass and annoy a student with such lectures. I have evidence to show much about that matter, if I deemed it necessary. Three times, in the course of two years or more (when, as it appears, he had exhausted all other sources of complaints), he would call this up, a mere hearsay from third parties. The offence of saying “ Darned fool,” in a whisper, for which she was asked to apologize, and which she expressed her willingness to do, L. explained to her mother, and in her memoranda, as follows: “ That aftc prayers Dr. T., as he was accustomed to do, began to lecture the students for some offence committed bj’’ some of the boys, telling what had hap­ pened, or what had been told him, and indulging in ridicule in an undigni­ fied maimer, as it seemed to her, and in such a style of clownish buffoonery that she felt disgusted. That, while his favorites would laugh, as that seemed to please him. many of the best of his students looked upon his efforts in that direction with contempt. That, not controlling her own feelings at that moment, she said in a whisper, not addressing any one, ‘ Darned fool.’ Some one interested to keep Dr. T. ‘ well posted ’ over­ heard her, and went and informed him.” It is evident that Louise was not alone in her feelings of dissatisfaction at the overbearing principles mani­ fested in the government of that institution, and the tyranny, as she thought, it exercised towards certain students. I have before me some letters from intelligent students, associates of L., written to her while they were at home during vacation, from which I will make a few extracts. In one I find the following sentiments: “ It is not enough that students obey every rule of the school, — that their recitations are excellent, etc.; but they must bo completely subjected to his will. They must not question his actions ; not even.express their opinion of his silly speeches. O Louise I it makes my teeth grit to think I’ve got to be under his thumb three terms longer. I won’t bow down to the golden calf too much, not if twenty diplomas were at stake.” In another I find the followingr ‘'‘Among other things about the government of the school, I despise the teachings and the teachers, — at least, some of them,—yet love the girls, and always shall be glad to hear from them. But as to �32 tun vuown won mu mu won;/, Professor T. inul MI'iu ('ivio, I ulmll not nitiiinpf. to czpror-s my contempt for thorn. Lnnguiv’o would full. When I think of their contemptible course to student i 1 got winth\,- for they endeavor make every one a mere nothing,— ftlno a hud chnrnc.tei', —iinvo tlicmselve?, whom they liken unto. gods. I am glad you speak freely your opinions. This afternoon 1 attended a prayer-meeting, but, very different from yours at Kent’s Hill. A holy feeling seemed to pervade all. Such mild, sweet expressions’ These are meetings one cares to attend voluntarily. Ao one c’unitbn? my motives! Many of those who were friends of the institution mill not be so now.” In a letter to me, of a later date, this same student says: -The govern­ ment at Kent’s Hill is different from that of any school I ever attended or visited. I understand, from several persons who have been teachers for years, that the government is as was practised years ago. It resembles an absolute monarchy, the president being the sovereign. What respect I had for Dr. Torsey vanished at the cruel treatment of your daughter. Ever.' person to whom I have spoken of the unhappy occnrre-ee considl-rs treatment unjust and inhuman, in not keeping it among the teachers, tut spreading it immediately among the scholars. You h-re all car sym­ pathy in your terrible loss. Even strangers shed, tears f r you. A retfsssor in one of our schools told me he did not believe there was such mt re-count on record. Words fail to tell you how I feel for yen. But remember God has said, ‘-Vengeance is mine.’ ” Several other letters from students to L. are in the sums tone, and express the same opinions as above. From facts and ct-rw—srar. res that ht~e been shown, I leave the public to judge whether there had not existed, between L. and Dr. T.. a prejudice, some years refers, if not cherished up to the time she left. When I charged him with sueh prejudice at the faculty meeting, he did not deny it, but virtually admitted it by say­ ing that '••he and L. had ‘made up’ about a year before.’' Seme of the students cn the Hill knew that such prejudice existed, and ems cf them, -hr was there in May. ISre. said, not long since. “It was unforttmxte, in this anair. for Dr. Torsey that it was known ho was prejudtredk* As to the - making up ” of which he spoke, 1 cun find no intimation, ef it in her —-'-—ys. er anything she has ever told her fr'etuis. The history of the interview at Miss H.’s room, which I have egtoted entire, appears under date of April 11. ISwhich was a little mere than a y ear before the time p-. T. made the statement just alluded t.\ As vreblrg else, in her Letters er writings, appears, relative to any renversatien they be.d with eaeb ether t •.reh't r the ttt.'.tter of variance between there, this i tte..-le- smd lecture �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 33 must, I think, be the “malting up” referred to. I leave for the reader to say how far such insinuations, such opening of old wounds, such renewal of threats as were exhibited at this interview, could be understood to mean reconciliation of differences, dropping old prejudices, and “ making up.” It is evident from what she said and left in writing that she did not so understand it, but rather as a new attack, a fresh display of active hostility. I have given my readers a brief view of some of the occurrences that took place, — a few specimens of the treatment L. received, and the dispo­ sition manifested towards her prior to the distressing events of May, I860, in order that they may better understand the condition of things at that time, and the reason of my views and feelings. I will now pursue the sad rehearsal of what afterwards transpired. On the 23d day of May, at ten o’clock in the forenoon, Louise took the stage for East Readfield ; thence the cars to Lewiston. At twelve o’clock, the same night, my daughter, Chestina, and a young man, Mr. Chandler, arrived at my house, and told us the heart-rending story, — how and why L. left, as told them by Dr. T., Miss Case, and Mrs. Daggett. Miss Case and Mrs. Daggett, the “matron,” or steward’s wife, were the two persons who went into the first investigation ; Mr. Daggett being called in to assist at a later period in the affair. After examination, all was reported to Dr. T. But it is reasonable to presume, he directed the whole movement; or, at least, that he did know, or ought to have knowu, all about it. Now, as to the result of that investigation, what was the report which these pro­ fessed lovers of truth, mercy, and Christianity made such haste to publish to the students, to the whole school and community, against one they had known so long? against one they had never suspected before, and whose character hitherto had been irreproachable, and stood as high and fair as their own ? What was this report against one who had made a profession of religion, — a sister in Christ, or at least a sister in the common family of mankind? Why were what they discovered as faults or misdeeds exaggerated and spread, as it were, broadcast over the Hill, in less than twenty-four hours after the discovery, and she denied the least mercy or forbearance, or the most flimsy mantle of charity? Chestina said to me : “ They say Louise had her trunk and drawers full of marked and unmarked clothing, not her own.” Mr. Chandler, the student who came home with her, said, “ That is the report on the Hill; also, that she had taken five dollars, and had confessed it.” “ It was the general belief on the Hill,” he added, “ that she was deranged.” He also expressed his fears for her safety. Before I close, I ■will give the reader 3 �La r 34 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. some more means of judging whether or not this report was fully true; but, whether true or false, what was the necessity of this haste, and what was the disposition and feeling manifested in making it public property so soon? On receiving notice of these reports, and that L. had so suddenly left the Hill, in her every-day clothing, — not taking her trunk with her, or any clothes, except what she wore; and that she had removed from her person her class ring and all other valuable things, — we felt terribly alarmed as to her fate. Mrs. Greene and I both expressed our fears, and said that the chance was more than even, that she would be dead before I could reach Lewiston. I made all haste to proceed there; and soon Chestina and I were ready to start. She, poor girl, all in tears, solicited .the privi­ lege of accompanying me on this sad and afflicting occasion, and sharing with me the grief and anxiety of this undertaking. She had come by team from Kent’s Hill to her home, a distance of twenty-five miles, after six o’clock in the evening, and had slept none that night. We arrived at Lewiston, by team, a distance of thirty-five miles, before ten o’clock next morning. There I made diligent search and extraordinary exertions to .find or trace my lost daughter, being assisted very kindly by the city marshal of Lewis­ ton, who promptly sent his deputy with his team; who drove hurriedly from one public place to another, to endeavor, if possible, to get some trace of her. Being unsuccessful in Lewiston, we passed over to the Elm House in Auburn, where we found she had been the day before ; and where she had there engaged a private room for two hours, which she occupied alone for about four hours. She said nothing to any one, asked for nothing, and kept her face closely veiled when she a ne in, while coming down from her room, and when she went out. She stopped about ten minutes in the parlor; sitting down, and looking out of the window, keeping her face veiled. The lady of the house, who came into the parlor about the same time, noticed that she bad been weeping, that her eyes were red, and that she appeared to be in great trouble. Not a word was spoken by either, and L. soon went slowly out; and was last seen going towards the Lewis­ ton bridge, a little after four o’clock p. ir. [My informant thinks about twenty minutes past four.] No persons have ever fully satisfied me that they saw her afterwards. As there were two letters written by her, evidently commenced in the ears while coming from Readfield, — one to her Sister Chestina, the other to her class, — I have no doubt that they were ' finished in that private room at the Elm House. Finding she could not write intelligibly in the cars, no doubt she sought this private room in which to write out her last communication to earthly friends. Theso �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 35 letters were postmarked, “ Lewiston, May 2-lth,” as they would have been if put in on the 23d. They would bear the date they left the office. Be­ lieving she did go to that office on Lisbon Street, I thought, if she had not left in the cars, it was very likely she was drowned in the canal or river below that office. When the next trains left, both that day and the next, I stationed Chestina at one depot, while I went to Lewiston depot, and rode over to Auburn at every train, to see if L. took any train from thence. Not finding any further'satisfactory trace of her, after riding and walking in all directions, we started out to Sabattisville factory, making diligent inquiry all the way to Webster, Wales, Monmouth, and Winthrop, arriving at Kent’s Hill on Saturday afternoon, May 25th. We went thither to see if any information respecting L. had reached the Hill; and also for the purpose of getting C.’s trunk of clothing, as she had no change of raiment, all having been left there. We there found the two letters to which I have alluded. As much has been said about these letters, both in private and in public, and as many have manifested a desire to know the exact and whole contents of her class letter, I will now lay before the public an exact transcript of that letter, word for word, and letter for letter. LETTER TO HER CLASS. “ At a Way Station, in the cars. “For the Class.— Schoolmates, — Once my own darlings (for I have no right to claim yon now), I wonld rather die by slow torture than write you this letter. But I feel it a duty. Who wrongs himself, wrongs his friends. God forgive me I but I believe there is no soul on earth that stands nearer the gates of utter despair than mine does at this moment. I have always said, ‘ A. man who will steal will lie, will do anything bad.’ “ Perhaps you will feel-so ; but, oh 1 do hear my story. Do not believe that through all these past years spent with you I have been acting a lie. As I live, I never touched a cent of money that was not my own, except this once. They tried to make mo account for all the little things that have been missed through the term; but I could not. I have not had them. A skeleton key, given me years ago, I had, that looked as though I might have used it wrongfully. God knows my heart! I never did. One other thing I did, — I have been in the habit of doing. When I came to the college I brought many unmarked clothes, some of them new ones. When I missed things from the wash, I took others (unmarked ones) from the table, and used them. They put this with that, and altogether it did look bad. But if my own garments had not come by the close of the term. �36 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. I should have left these where I got them, — in the wash. Now you know all. My distress is bitter enough; but the shame that I bring upon you, — upon home friends, — I cannot express it. 0 my darlings! my dar­ lings 1 I thought the parting would be hard enough two weeks from now; but this — I cannot even call you mine now I The greatest favor I can ask is, drop me from your remembrance, and some time — you cannot do it now, I know; but do, won’t you, some time forgive me? Forgive me ; for­ get me; pray do I I ask it in the name of all who have sinned and suffered, —in the name of my own bitter anguish, — in the name of all that I have been, or hoped to be, to you and with you. I do not know what tempted me. I went out to Miss Church’s room one evening, without any such thought in my heart. She was gone. Her table-drawer was open; her porte-monnaie, open too. Some satan, hidden in my heart, said, Take it; and before I could think, I stood again in 27. When it was done, I would fain have replaced it; but could not without discovery. The only thing I have to be glad of is, that I did not deny when asked. Everything that was asked me I told the truth'about, as near as I could in my distracted state of mind. This storm has only been gathering since yesterday. I tried to read my Bible last night, but could not. I don’t believe I shall ever pray again, except to say, Father, forgive me. And He will not hear. How, then, can I expect your pardon! If I could have had an opportunity to retrieve the past at the Hill, — if this thing had not been made public prop erty and common talk, — maybe there might have been a future for me , but now — I think maybe I am not exactly as I used to be while I write this ; for my head whirls, and I cannot seem to think, — to say what I am trying to say. Did you love me any? Do you love me any now? It seems as though my heart must have some assurance of this, or it will burst; and yet I know it cannot be. I could not go to see you this morn­ ing ; I did not dare ; and yet I could have died for one friendly hand-grasp, and thought it happiness to die. Will some of you call Mary Chapman into your room, and read her this? that is, if you think best. What I write here I put into your hands. I am not capable of saying what should be done with it. Decide for me. Act as you would have others do, if it were possible for you to be in this place. I can hear even now the thousand buzzing rumors flying over the Hill. O my God I what am I that I should have been left to do this thing? Dear girls, it may seem presumptuous in me now to ask a favor; but if you only could find it in your hearts to be kind to my sister, —my poor, poor sister, Ches.;—oh 1 if I could only pre­ vent her from being punished for my sins, I would bear my own bitterness alone. i �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 37 “ I do not know what will become of me. If I get home, do not do anything with this letter; if not, will you please send it to my mother before term closes. O mother I my mother! If it were your mother, girls, what should you say? what would you do? “ Mr. Scbwagerl said to me this morning, one sentence, ‘ Remember your Saviour.’ I have been saying it over all the way here. I thank him for saying that always. Mary Chapman, you tell him so; but I don’t know. The Saviour is an iron door, I think, to me,—shut, bolted. I' never realized before that my life was drifting into this downward current. I cannot think it was. I came to the top of a great precipice, did I not? and because I had been trying to walk alone on Kent’s Hill, I fell. Well if it had destroyed life with character; but it did not. “ I keep writing and writing because I can’t say the last word ; hut I must. “ I have read this over, or tried to, and it is not what I would say. I cannot write more; I cannot write again. I cannot even ask you to write to me. What could you say? I don’t want you to. “ My darlings I my darlings! this good-by is a thousand times more bitter than was the laying away of my dead. “Addies, Lydias, Sarahs, Mary, and Abby, — how good your names look to me I You have all been good to me. “ Good-by. “Louise.” My reader will pause, and reflect. If my daughter had been so wicked a girl as some would have you believe, — had been a thief, one who had by deception worked herself out of such scrapes, — would she have so frankly told the truth, when a denial might have saved her? Would she have said in that class letter, — would she, when she saw her disgrace and fall in the wretched light she did, have said: “ The only thing I have to be glad of is, that I did not deny when asked ” — and further said, “ I had been trying to walk alone on Kent’s Hill; I fell. Well if it had destroyed life with character; but it did not ” ? — preferring death to the disgrace of this small act of taking five dollars. She writes to her sister that this is the only thing that she feels herself guilty of. She further says : “If I could have had an opportunity to retrieve the past at the Hill. If this thing had not been made public property, and common talk, maybe there might have been a future for me ; but now,” — you see her feeling when she says “ but now,” — “ when T. tells me that the school know of it, when it is so public, and I have no chance to retrieve the past at the Hill, death is �■ 38 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. craved.” Do you believe she thought they had done right to thus early publish her confession to the school, and make it “public property, and common talk,” and then advise her to leave in disgrace, and thus prevent the possible chance of her doing one act, or having one day to try to retries e the past at the Hill ? Poor child! She knew of his prejudice, and their dispo­ sition to make the matter look bad, on the Hill, and also to disgrace her, else they would have kept her confession private; she knew they could have done so. I do not believe that I shall ever be able while I live to read this letter without shedding tears. And, when I think how that committee of stu­ dents did so unjustly and unfeelingly quote damaging sentences from this letter, to injure the character of the dead, and wound the feelings of the living, without giving any explanations therein contained, with evident intent to flatter those who were able to defend themselves, without a word in her favor, or a single syllable of regret for the death of an old student, — is more than I can tell, or they will ever be able to satisfactorily explain to me, if selfish motives were not the cause. And if any one will compare the evidence here produced, leaving out all arguments, they will see how little of what they say is a trid/fful account of this sad affair is left. One thing further I believe I ought to say, to show her love for, and determination to speak the truth, let the consequences be what they may. The reader will recollect, that, in her recorded account of T.’s lecture to her, April 11, 1865, in answer to his charge, “that there would be a great hubbub in the chapel, and she would be found looking in at the door,” she says, “ When I am suspected, you only have to ask, to know how far I am concerned. I never have lied myself out of a scrape, yet.” And here you see the truth of that statement verified, when asked about the money, although her character, her all, was at stake. She, knowing his threat, “ if she did anything that looked like a violation of any rule, she could expect but little forbearance from the faculty,” with her great fear that something would happen, for which Dr. T. would refuse to let her graduate ; he, as she believed him to be, her enemy, and a revengeful one, “ or he would not be watching me continually, and finding fault for such little things” (as she told her parent, when speaking of her fear that she should never graduate) ; yet, with all this, and her great desire to succeed at the exhibition, the crowning point of her ambition, it does not deter her in this awfbl trial from telling the truth, and not attempting to lie herself out of this trouble, although disgrace and death was the result. As she says in her class letter, “ Everything that was asked me I told the truth about, as near as I could in my distracted state of mind.” I �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 39 * HER LETTER TO CHESTINA. “ In the cars, Wednesday, A. JI. “ My much loved but deeply wronged Sister, — In leaving you, as I have, I am sensible that there is in store for you mortification and a share of my disgrace. “ Dr. Torsey informed me this morning that I had better leave to-day; ‘ not expulsion,’ he said, ‘ we won’t call it that, but I advise you to go home.’ Practically, it amounts to the same thing, however. How I feel, God only knows ; you never can ; and my bitterest agony is for the dear ones at home, on whom must fall some share in this disgrace. Satan, or some evil spirit, must have led me into this. I f I know myself, it was not the true, real Louise Greene, that did this. She was trying to live an honest, womanly life; or, if she was, indeed, drifting into disgrace, she never realized it. I can feel myself guilty of but one crime, — the taking of five dollars from Miss Church. No other was alleged against me, but the having of those unmarked articles of clothing; and, as I live, I had no intention1 of stealing them. For every article I took, I had lost one in the wash, and put these on in their stead, expecting, before the term was done, to find my own. There was, in some sort, a necessity for this ; for instance: — I came to the college with three orfour good, whole drawers, — two pairs of which were new ones, —aud to-day, as I ride away, I have none. They were lost in the wash because unmarked. Was it so strange that I should put on others, also unmarked, in their stead ? I tell you this, that you may know what I have done, and why I did it. That five dollars is a mystery to me. I went on an errand into Miss Church’s room; in her stand drawer laid a partly open porte-mounaie. What possessed me to take the money I do not know; but I took it out. The moment they asked me about it I con­ fessed it. You know the skeleton key I have long had. That told against me ; but, after all, I do not think they believed I opened rooms with it, for the purpose of taking out things. I certainly never did. Now you know the whole story. It is probably travelling the Hill at this moment with a thou­ sand exaggerations. God pity me 1 I never thought to come to this. Do not tell any one anything in this. It willbe useless to try to stem the tide ; bend beneath it, or it will break you down. Say nothing of excuse or palliation. In my heart I feel that you will not say aught of condemnation. It is a great deal to ask ; perhaps you cannot do it now ; but some time will you not try to forgive me? Live down all this. It is no real disgrace to you, though it may seem so. Make friends with the teachers, and with the �1 'A 40 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. people of God; they will strengthen you. Jlere I think was my fault; I tried to stand on the Hill alone, and I fell. “ Louise.” The reader will notice that near the close of this letter Louise gives her sister this advice: “It will be useless to try to stem the tide ” (to try to stem all this prejudice of Dr. Torsey’s, — the faculty’s whole influence, which is all-powerful on Kent’s Hill, — she doubtless meant). “ Bend be­ neath or it will break you down. Say nothing of excuse or palliation; ” do not attempt to excuse or defend me; for if you do that, by inference if not by your arguments, you will blame the faculty, and their influence will be brought to bear on you, and “ it will break you down.” It will operate against you in a thousand ways, to injure, and finally (if you persist to defend me), it will destroy you. This is seen, and may properly be in­ ferred, from this short and hasty advice to her sister: “ Say nothing of excuse or palliation.” She had tried to walk alone, tried to maintain her right to think and act for herself; but she had found that by so doing she had incurred their displeasure; that her determination so to do, regardless of all his manoeuvring and threats, increased his prejudice, and in many ways injured her. She believed Torsey had become an enemy to her. Being so, he had injured her feelings, and troubled her in many ways (not easily explained), although she was right, and ought to have had her right of opinion to act unmolested. Yet she saw that policy dictated a different course; and her trying to “ stand alone” on her rights was bad for her, and was the cause which brought down their displeasure “ and little for­ bearance ” with her. Then she advises Chestina to avoid that, and make friends with the teachers, — her (Louise’s) enemies, their teachers, — and thus try to make “ your path up the hill of science smooth as a gravelled walk.” “ Make friends with the teachers, and with the people of God; they will strengthen you.”. She does not say she believed her teachers — her accusers and judges — to be such people. She did not mean to say that of Dr. T., I do not believe. “ Here I think was my fault. I'tried to stand on the Hill alone, and I fell.” These letters were heart-rending to me and my distressed family ; and it did ceem to me that they were enough to draw tears from the eyes of any whose heart was not callous to feelings of sympathy and sensibility, and ought to disarm forever that unforgiving spirit that never seems to realize that “ to err is human.” They are a frank and full confession; and by their tone, and succeeding occurrences, it is evident they were intended as her last communication �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 41 with friends. Iler friends l^lieve every word of them was true. The public will judge for themselves whether they were true or false, after read­ ing them carefully, together with such attendant facts, and circumstances as will hereafter be produced; and will also judge whether she did or not take too much blame on herself, and feel too keenly this, her first offence, the cause of which she could not comprehend. As some have referred to these letters to exonerate certain persons in high position from censure, by quoting her confession of guilt, without expressing a word of doubt of her truthfulness ou these points, I submit to the reader whether the whole contents of these letters are not equally entitled to credit, as much so as such parts as the designing’may select and endorse ; and whether those who so quote her confession ought not, in fairness, to give her the benefit of her explanation, and be estopped from denying the truth of such statements as are. in her favor. While at the Hill, picking up Chestina’s things, on the 25th of May, Miss Case sought me, and in her cold, icy manner commenced to console me in my sad and severe affliction. Knowing that Louise disliked her, for what I believed were good reasons, and believing she was prejudiced against L., I thought she might have assisted, under such feelings, in injuring my child, and in producing that wretched state of mind in which she was, and which finally destroyed her. I asked her if Dr. Torsey talked hard to L. She said she did not know what Dr. T. said to her. I then squarely asked her this question : “ Did you talk harshly to her?’’ She said, “I tried to impress upon her the enormity of the crime.” She continued, and said that “ she was surprised that L. did not feel worse, and break down, as she expected her to do; ” said “ L. shed no tears, until they opened a little fancy trunk ; that she then wept.” This is the substance of what was said in that conversation ; and “ I tried to impress upon her the enormity of the crime,” was the exact language used by that cold and unfeeling teacher. Never can I forget, while life lasts, the harsh and cruel course she said she took with my poor bewildered and distracted girl. That sentence, “ I tried to impress,” etc., grates upon my ear in memory, when I think of her we loved so well; and I know I am not mistaken in the words and exact language used on that occasion. She, in my opinion, has a large share of accountability, before God aud man, for the death of our child. A more cool, unfeeling person I never saw. This little fancy trunk alluded -to would hold only about a quart, and was made and given her by her dearly loved cousin, who died at my house a few years before, — one of the dead alluded to in her letter, where she speaks of “the laying away of my dead.” In this little trunk she kept �42 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. some small mementos of him, and no one wjis accustomed to open it but herself. This little “ keepsake,” it seems, could not be exempt from the penetrating search, which was made, while they were trying, as she says, “ to make her account for all the little things that had been missed through the term.” After dark, Saturday evening, May 25th, Chestina and I started for home, and did not arrive there till daylight on Sunday morning. I found my wife and children in a wretched, distressed condition ; for we had neither written, nor brought home any tidings of the dear lost one. Our hearts were nearly broken, being weighed down under the burden of our grief and disappoint­ ment. Although not sleeping any that night, in five hours my almost distracted wife and myself were on our way to Lewiston again. My wife had neither eaten nor drank anything while I had been absent. She looked the picture of anguish and despair. “You do not look as though you were able to go,” I said. “ I cannot stay at home,” she replied. “ I cannot stand this awful suspense. I must go.” We did go, in a severe and drenching storm of rain. We rode about in Auburn, Lewiston, and Webster ; then walked about the river, canals, and streets of Lewiston, inquiring as we went for some trace of our lost child. God only knows our sad and sorrowful walks, our anxiety, our suspense and excitement, until my poor wife was nearly exhausted. I could not prevail on her' to retire from the search, and rest, and leave me to continue it without her. She could eat nor sleep but little in such a state of mental anguish and excitement. When all hope of ever finding our daughter had nearly vanished, we started again towards Kent’s Hill, to get her trunk, see her diary, and to see if she bad not written something and left in her trunk, or clothing, whereby we might get some more light in the matter. We arrived on the Hill at eleven o’clock in the evening, as tired and distressed sufferers, perhaps, as ever visited that Hill. The next morning I called at Dr. Torsey’s, and told his wife that Mi's. Greene was on the Hill, and we wanted Dr. T., Miss Case, Mr. Daggett and wife, and as many of the faculty as he chose, to meet us at as early an hour as possible. He called the whole faculty together at his bouse, and informed us of the place of meeting. We repaired to his sitting-room, and found there present, Dr. Torsey, Professors Robinson, Morse, and Harriman, Miss Robinson, teacher in painting and drawing, Miss Grover, teacher of music, and Miss Case, the preceptress. I will now state the substance of a portion of the conversation that trans­ pired at that meeting. I may not give the precise language, verbatim, in all cages, but will give the ideas correctly. �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. i I i I > ■ 43 I asked Dr. T. why he had not sent for us or let us know about the trouble before L. left. He said “ he did not know she was going away.” I asked him about what she had done. He said “ he knew nothing about the clothing ; ” but he and Professor Robinson both said something about her having a skeleton key. Dr. T. also told us about her taking the five dollars in money. I asked him “ why he had not taken care of her, and sent for us ? ” He said “ she was of age, and he had no authority to do so, or right to control her.” (It brought to my mind a passage I have seen in a Book of ancient date: “ Am I my brother’s keeper?”) I said: “ You have controlled her by your petty rules for five years. She has been of age for a year past. You could control her while you chose, but when trouble came upon her, you abandoned her.” Having convincing evidence, in my own mind, that Dr. T. was strongly prejudiced against L., and believing that thence an unfavorable influence had extended to other members of the faculty in that direction, I charged him with being prejudiced against her, which he did not deny, but virtually admitted it by saying he and L. had made up about a year ago. I said : “ Being prejudiced, you could, perhaps, see little things in her, and call her to account, and annoy her much by your petty rules and your construction of them to her, while you would not notice them in a favorite.” lu the course of the interview Dr. Torsey said that “ L. was all broke down, and wept, and that he himself shed tears ; that she said she could not go home, — could not see us, and did not think we would receive her.” I then said : “ Where, in the name of Heaven, did you think my poor child would go, if she could not go home?” Mrs. Greene said: “ Why did you not send her to one of your rooms in your house, to your wife, and let her comfort her ? ” He replied that she was under censure, and it would not be proper to send her. to his wife. (We understood him to mean that it would disgrace Mrs. T.) Then continued Mrs. Greene : “ I had rather von w’ould have arrested her as a thief, if it was necessary to do so, in order to keep her, until we could have been sent for.” “ You would have had no need of that,” I ad­ ded ; “ if you had only told her she must take a private room with C., and you would look the matter over, and see what was best to be done, she would have done so ; and you might then have sent for us before you dis­ closed to her your intentions.” “ I told her,” said Dr. T., “ if she went to Lewiston, she must make arrangements with Chestina about going.” “ Then you did know,” said Mrs. G., “ that she was going away.” He said that “ L. said she sometimes went home by the way of Lewiston, or that she would go to Lewiston and write home, or send for us to meet her there.” “ You must have known her sensitive nature,” said Mrs. G., “ and �44 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. the effect so great a disappointment must haye upon her. You are an am­ bitious man, and you would not like to have your character, standing, and high hopes blasted for so small a matter as this five dollars; no, not for five thousand dollars. Do you not think our child’s hopes and ambi­ tion were not as great as yours? You could not have had her here these past five' years and not understand her nature. If you were an ignorant man I could' forgive you; but now I cannot forgive you. She had not much money, no trunk nor clothing with her, and she will be looked upon with suspicion at every turn. I do not believe she would be taken in any­ where ; and as she left her jewelry and best clothing, when she went away, I think she is dead.” As Mrs. G. made these remarks she looked the pic­ ture of utter despair. Dr. T. coolly replied : “Mrs. Greene, I think you need have no such fears.” Knowing what an old dress L. had worn away, Mrs. G. said : “ In two weeks she will be in rags. Where can she be?” “ Well,” said he, “ I think she has gone into some country town. Your daughter in rags, with her open and frank countenance, her lady-like man­ ners, would make friends anywhere; anybody would take her in.” “ Then she must find different people than you were here,” replied Mrs. G. “ You thought it would disgrace your wife to take her in foi’ a few hours, until you could send for us.” He made no reply. If he had not meant the mat­ ter as we understood it, I think he would have explained. Yes; this (heartless, shall I say?) man could tell my poor and almost distracted wife, in such an hour, and under such circumstances, that stran­ gers would take her child in, while he, who had known her so long and well, and who, we had a right to expect, would be her guardian and protector, at that “ safe and pleasant home ” promised her, would not take her into his house till we had been notified of the difficulty, which .would have re­ quired but a few hours, — could not keep her a few hours, it seems, until he could return her to the keeping of the safe hands from which he received her. As Mrs. Greene was coming down on him rather closely in questions and argument, in order to nonplus her, as it seemed to us, and break her ar­ gument and close questionings, he suddenly said: “ You have lost a child lately?” Mrs. G. was sitting directly facing him, clad in deep mourning, and he knew all about our losing our youngest child, seven years old, only a few months before, as our two girls were sent for, who were at his school, to go home to the funeral; and he must have known, also, that Mrs. G. took the death of this child extremely hard, and that fears were enter­ tained that her mental powers would give way under the shock. Henoc, I �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 45 probably, this attempt to wound her feelings, and divert her from the im­ mediate question, and stop her argument or confuse her, by calling np a subject on which her mind had been severely exercised. Once, in the course of the conversation, he stamped upon the floor, thus trying to stop us and stamp us down in that way. He seemed very anxious to know what we were going to say outside about this affair. Now, kind readers, judge ye: If he would thus try his arbitrary authority on and over us, what would he do and say to our child, if she tried to defend her case ? In the course of the conversation he said: “ I told her I would hold her diploma, and if she would live a good and honest life for six months or a year, she could then write me, and I would send it to her.” Was it true, then, that.he did not know she was going away? If so, why did he talk about her writing, and his sending her diploma? She did not feel that she could go home, for she had told him so. Well might I ask him “ where, in the name of Heaven, he expected her to go?” Poor child! After five long, tedious years with books and tutors, studying late and early, until her eyes nearly failed her, enduring those hard rides, over rough roads, twentyfive miles, six times every year, in the spring, fall, and winter, and often, too, in cold storms of rain and snow; after putting forth all the energies of her mind to accomplish her studies, stand well in her class, and reach the goal of her ambition, until her physical and mental powers were becoming exhausted by the heavy tax upon them, and knowing how much her parents and friends doted on her, and how anxious they were for her success, — if she could not graduate, which was the crowning point on which her heart was set, but must be sent away, disappointed, heart-broken, and disgraced, — to her distracted mind there was no future for her, and death seemed preferable. It has been asserted by some, who feel interested to exonerate from blame those who have control of that institution, or are engaged in its management, and the public are asked to believe, that Louise “ left the school of her own accord ; ” that “ no intimation was given her that she must leave, and could not graduate; ” and that those under whose charge and care she had been placed, did not know or mistrust that she was not in her right mind, or perfectly sane, when she left. As these propositions arc debatable, and, as I believe sincerely, each and every one of them incorrect and untrue, I will endeavor to show that • they are controverted by the tongue and pen of the party most interested to substantiate their truth, and, also, by attendant circumstances. In a letter to me, dated at Kent’s Hill, May 23, 1866,— being the same day L. left, — Dr. T. says : “ She left of her own accord, without my knowl- �I i 4G THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. edge." In the conversation to which I have alluded, he said that “ L. promised him she would go home, or go to Lewiston and send for me to meet her there.” As Mrs. Greene had before said that L. was always a truthful girl from her childhood, he rather sarcastically said, “ If she promised, should I not have believed her? ” Prof. Robinson says, in a letter dated Nov. 12, 1866 : “ No intimation was given her that she must leave the school; that she could not graduate. Mr. Torsey expressly said to her that if she left, it would not be on account of any action of the faculty, but of her own choice. She, at last, promised Mr. Torsey that she would go home. Mr. T. proposed to procure a carriage for her; but she said she sometimes went by way of Lewiston, and her father would meet her there; but whichever way she went she would let her sister make dll the necessary arrangements. As soon as Mr. T. learned that she had gone, contrary to her promise, he immediately sent a student with the sister to Mr. Greene, to inform him of the circumstances and to urge him to meet L. in Lewiston.” Before closing his letter, he says, “ Such, briefly, are the facts.” As no one was present but Dr. T. and my daughter, at this last interview, when it was said this promise was made, Prof. Robinson must be dependent on Dr. T. for all the knowledge he possessed of these “ facts,” which he announces with such positive and bold assurance. Was this statement, that “ she promised she would go home,” or that she would “go to Lewiston and send for her father,” true? Was it a fact that no intimation was given her that she must leave ? and that her leaving was a matter of her own choice ? As no eye nor ear but God’s witnessed this last interview between Dr. T. and my daughter, I will let their pens answer these questions. In a letter to me, dated May 27, 1866, Dr. T. says : “ I had a long conversation with her the morning she left, and urged upon her two things : First, that she go to Jesus with the whole matter, etc. Second, that she go at once to her father and mother, telling them all.” He does not say that he gave her any intimation that he would overlook or forgive, or that he would do the least thing to help her in her trouble. He further says : “ At our parting she gave me some assurance that she would do both these things.” Again he says : “ She named going by the way of Lewiston, of writing you to meet her there ; but did not insist upon it, any further than merely mentioning it.” From these statements does the reader discover anything like a ■ promise to do any of these things, as asserted by Prof. R. ? Dr. T. also says, in this same letter: “ I wished her to allow me to get a team, and that she and Chestina should go, at once, home.” After this he speaks of �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 47 her “ finally agreeing, as he understood it, to make no arrangements herself, but allow Chestina to make them.” In her last letter to her sister, written on that fatal day, Louise says: “ Dr. Torsey informed me this morning that I had better leave to-day. ‘ Not expulsion,’ he said, ‘ we won’t call it that, but I advise you to go home.’ Practically, it amounts to the same thing, however.” Practically, she thought it amounted to the same thing as expulsion, so she said ; and do not my read­ ers think the same ? Dr. T. wished her to “ go at once home,” he “ urged upon her that she go at once to her parents; ” he “ advised her to go home ; ” these are his own words written to me. And she had been too long uuder his charge to misunderstand what his wishing, urging, and advising practically amounted to. Yet, Dr. T. says, “ she left of her own accord, and without his knowledgeand Prof. Robinson, that “ no intimation was given her that she must leave,” and that her leaving was a matter of her “ own choice.” This play on words to disguise real facts, to evade the force of what, in substance, is the truth; this attempt to hide the true intent, designs, and purposes of actions, by using certain words and forms of expression, may succeed in carrying conviction to the minds of some, but, I apprehend, it will not avail before an intelligent public. It matters not with me what particular words were used, or things said, to give my daughter to understand what the real intentions were respecting her. Per­ haps she was not told in so many words that she must leave the school. She says she was informed that she “ had better leave.” She does not say she was expelled. Dr. T. would not call it that; but she was advised to go home. How could she graduate after leaving the school, as advised and urged to do ? Dr. T. has’ a great faculty to say or write in such a way that he can put any construction he chooses to the same. He well understands the art of intrigue aud double-dealing. “ If I could have had an opportunity to retrieve the past at the Hill,” etc., she says, in her class letter, “ maybe there might have been a future for me.” When Dr. Torsey asked her, in that last conversation, what she proposed to do, she replied: “ I want this kept from the school, and stay and graduate.” In view of the testimony here adduced, I leave the intelligent reader to judge whether it is a “ fact,” that she left the Hill without the “knowl­ edge,” instigation, “ action,” or intimation of any of the faculty. “ I did not tell Louise she could not graduate,” says Dr. T. in a letter to me, dated Oct. 29, 18G6. “ I told her the trustees voted the diplomas, aud I would be her friend in the matter.” In this same letter he also says: “ I spoke only of any time of her leaving when she had decided to go home �48 TIRE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. that day.” If this were so, why did he tell us in the faculty meeting that she said she could not go home? that she could not see or meet us? And why does he say she promised to go to Lewiston, and send for me to meet her there? What means the following, from his letter, May 27, 1866? “ I wished her to allow me to get a team, and that she and Chcstina should go at once home. She thought neither you nor her mother would receive her.” This statement does not appear to carry the idea that she had decided to go home that day; but the reverse might be inferred, namely, that she could not make up her mind to go home and meet her friends then. Is it at all probable that she sought to leave the institution without graduating, and was seeking, voluntarily, to leave it in disgrace? Dr. T. stated, on the day L. left, that she told him that morning, “ If she could not graduate there was no future for her.” And when asked what she proposed to do, she replied: “I want it kept from the school and stay and graduate.” Will he now pretend that when he advised her to go home, he expected her to-return in two weeks and graduate? If so, why was she “urged” and advised to go home? From anything that L. said or wrote, it does not appear — to me at least—that leaving the Hill was of her own seeking, or that she ever said she would go home. Why, her whole ambition, for those five long years of study, was to get through with all that was required of her, graduate, and obtain her diploma, and her whole soul and mind was bent on this achievement. Having accomplished this, it was her intention then to obtain a situation in some large institution as a teacher in painting, or some other department. In the “ Boston Journal,” a paper taken by the Adelphian Society, of which L. had frequently been Secretary and Treasurer (a student has writ­ ten me, that all the funds entrusted to her care for a long time were faith­ fully kept and properly expended by her as an officer of the society), appeared an advertisement for a teacher, at Hartford, Connecticut. L. had -answered that advertisement a short time before she left; and on the second day after she had gone from the Hill, a letter arrived to her address, dated at Hartford, Ct., May 24, 1866, requesting her to meet the Principal of that school, at Hallowell, Me., on the next Saturday, to make the necessary arrangements for her to go there in September following. This was her great desire, to get through her studies and obtain a situ­ ation ; and, as soon as possible, to get situations for her sisters also, as music-teachers, etc. She had often told her mother, that as I had spent so much for her, she intended to repay it, or its equivalent, in doing much for the other girls, her younger sisters, — so that she and they might be of some use in the world. This letter was heart-rending to us. It was pain- X. I » J �THE CROWN WON BITT NOT WORN. 49 ful to think that the long anticipated, and much desired opportunity was just ready to be offered her, and she died without the knowledge of it, and that her opportunity to assist her four sisters, for which her ambition and anxious zeal aspired, was lost forever. It was one reason why we desired to give her a thorough education, that she might help her younger sisters. To say that she did not desire to stay and graduate is advancing an inconsistent idea, at once at variance with reason, facts, circumstances, and good judgment. She had only two weeks longer to toil and strive, and the long-desired goal would be reached. It vanished in a moment, and to her mental vision her future'became a blank forever. It was this bitter disappointment, in my judgment, that veiled the prospects of the future, distracted more completely her mind, severed her ties to earth, and destroyed her life. What scathing words were uttered in the enunciation of the consequence and penalty of this alleged misdemeanor, or what representations of the “ enormity of her crime ” were made to the frenzied brain, to increase delusive ideas, and give a false coloring to life’s prospects, if any, God and the actors only know. On that fatal 23d day of May, she wrote a letter to her sister, and directed it to her, on Kent’s Hill. She must well know, that, under the circumstances, Dr. T. would be very likely to see that letter the next day, and, if untrue, would be likely to detect and expose the falsehood. “ Dr. Torsey informed me this morning,” she says, “ that I had better leave to-day; ‘ not expulsion,’ he said; ‘ we won’t call it that; but I advise you to go home,’ etc. “ How I feel God only knows, you never can; and my bitterest agony is for the dear ones at home.” Did she not understand his language, when she says, “ practically, it amounts to the same as expulsion”? And did not Dr. T. understand the language as she did? Did he not evidently mean she should so under­ stand it ? Had he said, “ It is expulsion, but we will not call it that,” would she have understood it differently from what she did? I have presented many circumstances, extracts from her writings, etc., to show that a prejudice had grown up against her, which appeared to , manifest itself in a disposition to find fault with her for little things, and in threats of “ little forbearance,” etc., if she should be found guilty of any violation of rules. In view of this condition of things, as they evidently existed in her mind, whether the reader is so impressed or not, 4 �4 50 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. what shadow of hope, or expectation of mercy or forbearance had she at his hand ? In her class-letter she says, — “ If I could have had an opportunity to retrieve the past at the Hill, — if this thing had not been made public property, and common talk, — maybe there might have been a future for me.” Who prevented her having “ an opportunity to retrieve the past at the Hill?” Who made this thing “public property ” and “ common talk”? Dr. T. told her, in that conversation in the morning, that “the school knew it; ” which meant and implied, as I understood it, that the school generally knew about the whole matter. He told M. I. Reed, “ that he said this to L. that morning she left; ” and Roscoe Smith told me, in the presence of others, that Dr. T. told him, “ that in answer to her request to have the affair kept from the school, and she stay and graduate, he told her, ‘ The school knew it, or most of them.’ ” Prof. R., in the letter to which I have before alluded, says, “ After as private an investigation as possible, Miss Greene acknowledged that she had taken several articles that did not belong to her,” etc. This very private investigation was made on Tuesday, and on Wednes­ day morning she was told by Dr. T. “ that the school knew it; ”• and about this time, Miss Case told all her class all about it. It was not her confession that revealed the whole matter to the school; for this was not made to the whole school, which she was told knew it, but to Miss Case, her teacher, and Mr. and Mrs. Daggett, the steward and matron. Yet we are told, and it is published from Kent’s Hill, that none of the faculty were responsible for these things being made public property, and common talk so soon. Mr. Daggett, under date of July 2, 1866, writes me as follows : — “Jonas Greene, Esq.: Dear Sir, — Your letter, inquiring who was present when Louise confessed she took $5, is received; and in answer I will say, Miss Case, Mrs. Daggett, and myself were present.” These were the parties who made the investigation into the whole affair; aud Prof. R. says, “ It was as private as possible.” Three only knew her confession of taking the money, “ the only crime she could feel herself guilty of,” as she writes to her sister. It was a wilful misrepresentation, a lie, when he said, or any one says, “ It could not have been kept from the school.” Louise knew it could have been so kept; and, when Torsey told her “ the school knew it,” she knew they did not mean to save her from disgrace; they meant to enforce 5 L > �THE CROWN WON BET NOT WORN. ,1 ► J i I i I a Sk. 51 his threat, “ that if she did anything that looked like a wilful violation of any rule, she could expect little forbearance from the faculty.” This is a point I make against them, and that prejudice caused them so to act. This is what killed her, broke her heart, and sent her to destruc­ tion. Her confession was made Tuesday afternoon, and early next morning, Dr. T. tells her, “ The school knew it.” Was it true that this matter bad been published to the school of some two hundred students in so brief a time? Or, was he seeking to take from her every prop, every possible ray of hope,' that she could stay and graduate ? Whatever might have been the motive or design, it looks very much like the consummation of the threat, that “ if'she did anything that looked like a wilful violation of rule, she could expect but little forbearance from the faculty.” If it were true, that the school did know of the affair in so short a time, in whose power was it to have kept this knowledge from them ? Who was to blame or responsible for making it-“ public property ” and “ common talk” so soon? It may be answered, that no one was to blame ; that no obligation rested on any one to keep the matter from the knowledge of the school, or from the public. Admit this to be so. Do the features of the case bear the impress of moral kindness and Christian forbearance? When one who “had hitherto borne an irreproachable character” had for the first time been guilty of a wrong act, whether rationally conceived and sanely car­ ried out, or otherwise, and who had frankly and promptly confessed the error, without equivocation or falsehood ; ought not her former good char­ acter to plead effectually in stay of judgment, and postponement of sen­ tence, till all the causes and circumstances in the case could have been investigated, and till she could have bad the benefit of a father’s counsel, and a mother’s sympathy ? Had my daughter been morally and really guilty of the “ mysterious ” act of which she was accused, and a thousand times more, I appeal to the public to say, whether I ought not to have been notified before the deter­ mination that she should not graduate was made known to her. “ She made,” says Mr. Daggett, “ an immediate and full confession as to the money, and returned it, not denying a -word.” Had she not reason to expect some mercy, some sympathy and forbearance, some friendly aid from those who should have been her protectors, to help her through this difficulty, and out of this her first offence? Was her conduct much like a sly and guilty thief ? Without the least shado-w or particle of evidence against her, on being asked about that five dollars, by Mr. Daggett, she �52 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. immediately told him where it was, and said she would get it for him, and did so. There was no lying, no equivocation, not the slightest at­ tempt in this affair, on her part, to evade the facts, as is almost invari­ ably the case with thieves. She says to her sister, “ The moment they asked me about it, I con­ fessed it.” In what may well be regarded as her last and dying words, she says to her class, “The only thing I have to be glad of is, that I did not deny when asked. Everything that was asked me I told the truth about, as near as I could in my distracted state of mind.” The truth of these statements made by her is confirmed by Mr. D. In his testimony to me, and I have never yet heard that any attempt has been made to controvert them. Yet neither her former good character and standing, nor her frank confession and penitence, helped her ou this occa­ sion. Her confession became “public property” and “ common talk ” ere the earth had performed its daily revolution; and, knowing the condition of things, and what had been said to her, it is no wonder that she said, only the next day after it was made, “ It is probably travelling the Hill at this moment, with a thousand exaggerations or that she said, “ I can hear, even now, the thousand buzzing rumors flying over the Hill.” She was “ advised to leave that day,” thus being informed,’satisfactorily to her mind, that she could not graduate. Cbestina, after L. had left, asked Dr. T. “if she could not have re­ mained and graduated ? ” “ Well, no,” he said ; “ it would not have been best for her to have gone on the stage; she would be pointed out as the girl that stole.” Thus intimating that everybody would know of her misdeed and her confession; and expressing himself, as to manner and time, as though the exhibition with her had transpired at the time the decision was made in her case, and she was made acquainted with it, and “ informed she had better leave that day.” “ It would not have been best ” etc., he says; evidently referring to the time when this point was settled with her, and she was in prospect excluded from the stage. ' In this condition of my lone child, separated from counsel and friends, what did he expect of her, and what did he intend respecting her? Did he ' intend to turn her out into the wide world, ashamed, disheartened, dis­ graced, and distracted, without money and without fribpds, a.lone wandeer to the solitude of the forest and the leafy couch of death? If not, — and God knows I wish not to judge too severely, — and a fatal mistake was unwittingly made, why was not an acknowledgment of the error as frankly �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. * ■ 53 made as was a confession and acknowledgment by my lost child? And would not such acknowledgment of mistake appear nobler and more Christianlike than seeking to evade censure by attempting to hide behind the invited, self-sought, self-coined and flattered resolutions or public expres­ sions of subservient, diffident, or favor-seeking students, or behind the ex parte report of an ex parte committee of trustees? Why seek to excuse or palliate a wrong, by exaggerating or harping upon the faults of the dead? Prejudice, when suffered to hold too much sway in the heart, is cruel, uncharitable, and unforgiving. It often blunts human feelings when kindness is really deserved, and gives to the actions of those against whom it is indulged a false coloring. Louise, was once expelled from Dr. T.’s house, — ordered out of doors, for telling him a simple truth, even after she had begged his pardon. Do all his acts, before and since she left, agree with the statements now made, that he “ had none but the kindest feeling towards her”? I propose, now, to introduce to the reader the testimony of M. I. Reed, relative to the matter of L.’s leaving the Hill. I will here state, without fear of contradiction, that Miss Reed is a young lady whose standing in society, morally, intellectually, and religiously, entitles her to confidence and respect. She is a teacher of much practice, and, as a scholar and teacher, takes rank before the public when known, among the first order. Being a lady of great energy of character, she interestecl herself in behalf of Louise as soon as she left, and thereby became acquainted with some important facts in her case. AFFIDAVIT OF M. I. REED. “ I, Mira I. Reed, of Roxbury, being of the age of twenty-three years, do depose and say, that I and Chestina S. Greene, who is sister of M. L. Greene, were keeping house, boarding ourselves together in a room in the L part of Dr. Torsey’s house, and attending his school on Kent’s Hill at the time Louise left, — May 23, 1866. I was well acquainted with her, and have been for a number of years. She was generous, kind-hearted, strictly honest and truthful in all things, so far as I knew her. I never knew ot heard a word against her character in any way, until after she left the Hill, May 23. I knew nothing about any trouble until about a quarter past ten, A. M., the day she left, when Eliza Bowers and Sarah Dow, two of Louise’s class-mates, came to my room in the college, where I was practising, and said L. had gone home, or to Lewiston. They told me she was accused of stealing; said she had gone in her every-day dress. They were greatly alarmed about her; were crying. I said: 11., would feel so bad she would �k bi THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. kill herself.’ Miss Bowers says: ‘ I fear so. Won’t you go and see Dr. T.? 1 think you will do best with him.’ I said I would. On my way up to Dr. Torsey’s I met Chestina on the street, and in answer to my inquiries she said she had just found a note saying that she (L.) had gone to Lewiston. She also went to see Miss Case, to ascertain how L. had gone. When she came back, feeling terribly, finding she had taken nothing with her, and had gone in her poorest clothing, she went down and out to find Dr. T. She found him in his stable. She came back in a few moments, and said: ‘ What can I do? What can I do? ’ and all in tears, threw herself on the bed. I went on the street, and met Mr. Harriman the stage-driver, who had just returned from the depot, where he bad just left L. He said she had bought a ticket for Lewiston. I told him I thought she would kill herself before night. He said ‘ he thought so.’ He shed tears. I asked him ‘ if he would go to Lewiston after her.’ He said, ‘ I will. • I think I can do better than any one else, as I am so well acquainted .with her.’ I said, ‘ You and Chestina had better go immediately after her.’ lie left, as I supposed, to get his team. I said, ‘ I would get Chestina ready in fif­ teen minutes.’ On returning to our room, I found Chestina still on the . bed; told her to get up. She should not lie there; she must get ready to go with Harriman. I got her clothing ready. About this time Dr. T. came to our door, and said ‘ he wanted to see Ches, alone.’ I went out into the adjoining'room. He went in. When he came out of our room, I met him at the head of the stairs. I told him I feared she would kill her­ self before night. He said, ‘ he had no fears of that.’ I cited her going in her poorest clothing. (He stepped back into our room, sat down, and talked a long while.) He said ‘ that looked like going into the factory to work.’ We still arguing the improbability of that, he seemed to think she was running away. We said we did not know how much money she had with her. He said, ‘ he understood she had fifty dollars sent lately: said something about her having a large letter from home lately. His talk and cool argument did quiet Ches.’s fears considerably; but still she, all the time, wanted to pursue her to Lewiston. This conversation with T. was at, or about, or just before twelve o’clock noon. He left, and then there was a long delay, a terrible suspense, — Ches., again taking on as before. No Harriman came with a team, as I expected at first he would. But, between two and three o’clock, p. ji., Torsey came up to our room again, and said that the arrangement was for Chestina to go home and let her father manage it, or do as he thought best; or words to that effect. He says to Chestina, ‘ You will have no objections to going home with Mr. Chandler, I suppose?’ I do not recollect that Ches, made any reply. u �55 THE CROWN WON BET NOT WORN. She did not object; but I knew she was greatly disappointed that she could not go to Lewiston after her. She said so as soon as he was gone ; but, as she had appealed to Dr. T. to know what she. had better do, she felt that she must submit to his arrangement.o Dr. T., in the first conversa­ tion at our room, told us, ‘ that he had never suspected her, Louise, of any, dishonesty in that direction;’ said ‘ he had a long conversation with her that morning. Louise said, “ if she could not graduate, there was no future for her.” I asked her what she proposed to do. She said, “ I want this kept from the school, and stay and graduate.” I said “ the school know it; ” that she then broke down, crying, and feeling terribly.’ I was told that Miss Case told May Chapman, ‘ she had better not go to Louise that night (May 22d), but leave her alone.’ As I understand, she was left alone, and her bed was not tumbledand it is believed she did not sleep any that night. When Dr. T. told us the arrangement was for her to go home, and that Mr. Chandler would go with her, I or we spoke of going immediately. Dr. T. seemed to be in no hurry, but remarked, ‘ It would be a pleasant evening to ride in; or they could go up in the evening.’ Then there was another long delay, a horrible suspense. I did not study or recite any that day. It was so with Louise’s class-mates, and with the school generally, so far as I know or discovered. Why, a terrible commo­ tion was on the Hill: an old, and valuable student — one just ready to graduate — had so suddenly been accused, for the first time in her life, and had so suddenly left, in the way and manner she had, there was a terrible excitement and feeling about the matter; so^much so that all who knew her, could, or did not attempt to, do much that day, after it was known she had left. All looked pale, and appear ed fearful of the result. The report was, that she had taken a large amount of clothing from the teachers’ and students’ rooms, — valuable marked and unmarked articles. “ I got all out of patience waiting for the team to come. It did seem as if they never would get started to take Chestina home ; but after supper, at, or about six o’clock, they got started with her for home, which is twenty-five miles. Dr. T. was informed that she had taken off her gold sleeve-buttons’and class ring soon after she had gone. “Mira I. Reed.” “STATE OF MAINE. “ Kennebec, ss., January 2Gth, 1867. “ Then the above-named Mira I. Reed personal!}’ appeared, and made ■ �56 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. oath that the foregoing statement by her subscribed is true, according to her best knowledge and belief. “ Before me, “Emery O. Bean, Jus. Peace.” Asking my readers to bear in mind the special points in this statement of Miss Reed, and for the present make their own deductions therefrom I pass to the AFFIDAVIT OF CHESTINA S. GREENE. “ I, Chestina S. Greene, aged seventeen years, hereby certify that I am sister of M. Louise Greene, and was keeping house with Mira I. Reed, on Kent’s Hill, at the time L. left, May 23, 1866. Before noon, on Tuesday, May 22, Miss Case and Mrs. Daggett came up, and went into Dr. Torsey’s part of the house first, and then came into our room. Said, ‘ There have been lately several articles, of clothing lost at the college, and we have discovered that your sister has been putting into the wash articles that belong to other persons ; and in searching her room and drawers, we found articles marked.’ Said ‘ she had confessed she had taken unmarked articles of clothing, and five dollars in money ; and we have come to look to your things. We did not know but what Louise had brought things here.’ I showed them all my things, and opened my trunk, boxes, closet, and all; and then they wanted to know if there was not another trunk, — if Louise did not keep a trunk there. I said, ‘ No.’ They seemed to think, or give me to understand, that she had committed a terrible crime in wearing the clothing, as well as taking the money. Gave me to understand that she had in her room, trunk, and drawers a large amount of marked and unmarked clothing, not her own. Louise came up while they •were there, and seemed to want them to look into everything, to satisfy them. She asked them if they had told me. L. says to Miss Case, ‘ I feel so strange ! I wish I could think; but I can’t.’ They found nothing there. Making apologies, they left. She, L., looked very pale. I said, ‘ What does this mean ? ’ She says, ‘ They have been losing lots of things at the college this term ; and as I put unmarked clothing into the -wash last week, they lay all to me. They have searched our room, — all my things. This is what comes of having tilings unmarked. What shall I do? If this thing gets out into the school, there will be alb manner of stories going. What will they not accuse me of ? ’ She repeated, ‘ What shall I do?’ I told her ‘ I guessed it would not get out any further; the teachers would not say anything about it, and it would pass off.’ She said ‘ she hoped it would.’ . ■> �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 57 She looked sad. She went back to the college, and I heard nothing more until I came home the next day, Wednesday 23d, before noon, from practising music, and found in my room, in Dr. T.’s house, a note on the table, saying, — “ ‘Ches., tell May I have gone to Lewiston, and if she wants to know, ask Miss Case why. Signed, Louise.’ “ I soon saw Mira I. Reed. She asked me ‘ if I knew L. had gone.’ I was on my way to the college to see Miss Case, to know how she had gone ; and when I found out, I hardly knew what to say or do. Came up to our room, and laid down on the bed in tears. I soon went down, and out to the barn, and found Dr. T. in the upper part of his stable. I asked him if he knew where L. had gone? He said, ‘ I have just learned that she had gone, and supposed she had gone to Lewiston, as she spoke of going there.’ Said he had advised and urged her to go home. Said his talk with her was chiefly about asking forgiveness of God and her parents. He said that Louise said, she had always had all the money she had asked for. I asked him if she could not have stayed and graduated. ‘ Well, no,’ he said. ‘It would not have been best for her to have gone on the stage. She would have been pointed out to everybody as the girl that stole. I said, ‘ What is to be done? What can I do?’ I told him I was afraid she would go off, and make away with herself. I had been to the college to see Miss Case, with the note in my hand, and asked her if she knew Louise had gone. She said she bad just heard so. ShS grabbed the note from my hand, and read it. She seemed to think it very strange, perfectly incom­ prehensible. She took me to her room, and talked some time. She sbemed to be very cool. She could not understand it all, etc. When I got back, Mira came in, and I went to see T., as before stated. And when I came in again, after I saw Torsey, I threw myself on the bed again. By and by T. came to our room, and said he had been to thb college, and found L. had gone in her poorest clothing. She had taken off her gold sleeve-but­ tons and class ring. Had taken nothing with her but her reticule. I was then frightened about her. Said she would make way with herself. He said, ‘ Oh, no ! I do not fear that.’ I said, ‘What can I do? I cannot stay here, and do nothing. Hadn’t I better go to Lewiston after her?’ ‘ Well, he didn’t know.’ Said he could, or would get me a team to go to Lewis­ ton, or to go home, if I thought best. I did not know what to do. I went again to the college, to find out more how she went, and what she said, and what she wore; and when I returned I saw B. Harriman, the stage-driver. I asked him what I had better do. He says, ‘I do not �58 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. know what to advise you to do. It will cost some ten. or twelve dollars for a team to go to Lewiston, and you might be blamed if you should find her there; or, if she has gone home, your father might blame you; and then if she destroys her life, or goes off, he will blame you. I saw Dr. T. again, and asked his advice. He said, ‘ It is arranged for you to go home, and have your father see to it, or take charge of the matter, and do as he thinks best. Yes, I think you better do that.* He went to see about . a team; and, after a long delay, a team and Mr. Chandler came ; and we started at six o’clock at night for home, which was twenty-five miles. Mr. Torsey sent a letter to father by Mr. Chandler; but sent no special word, information, or request by me to any one at home. “Chestina S. Greene.” “ City of Petersburg and State of Va., to wit: “ The above certificate was sworn and subscribed to before me this 16th February, 1867. “ B. I. A. Butterworth, J. P.” We were told at Lewiston, in less than a week after L. had left, by Mr. Frost, a former student at the Hill, “ that he received a letter from a student then attending school on the Hill, the next day after L. left, saying, that when she left, it was the opinion of students there that she was not in her right mind, and that she would commit suicide.” He further said, “ that with his previous knowledge of the management on the Hill, it was his opinion that the time and manner of her leaving, and the fears of students must have reached Dr. Torsey immediately.” All who are acquainted on the Hill are well aware how hard it is for the slightest trans­ action to transpire on that Hill without his knowledge. His Argus eye is ready to discover the slightest move of every student. I could not take a student away two miles, for only a short time, without his knowledge, and a questioning of that student relative to her whereabouts while she was absent. It will be obseryed that both Miss Reed and Chestina became alarmed for the safety of Louise, as soon as they heard she had left. The quick perception of Miss Reed told her in a moment that there was danger in her case ; while even Chestina, in her youthful'thoughtlessness, perceived’ the true state of the case at the first glance. The disinterested stage-driver, Mr. Harriman, also came to the same conclusion, as appears from expres­ sions then made, whatever he may now say to the contrary, without waiting for arguments and full explanations. Miss Bowers and Miss Dow were s �THE CROWN WON BITT NOT WORN. ►- k 59 alarmed, wept, and proposed that action should be taken in the matter forthwith, and proposed an appeal to him who from his position should be the one to organize action. Yet the acute acumen of the principal of that institution saw no danger, discovered nothing but an intention to go to the factory, or run away. “ Had no fears,” but readily adopted the pre­ posterous idea, that she would divest herself of her jewelry, leave all her best clothing behind, and “ ran away,” or go to the factory in her poorest, every-day, soiled apparel! It is true, having “advised” her to leave, knowing her state of mind, to pursue or bring her back might seem incon­ sistent, and be at variance with the feelings of the natural-minded man; but in the light of Christianity and the spirit of the gospel, it is better by far to retract a wrong than to persist in it. I appeal to the candid reader to say whether, in this case, there does not appear to be either a lack in discernment, a careless indifference, or wilful neglect, as to what the result might be. I do not mean to say that Air. Harriman, the stage-driver, was prevented from going to Lewiston with Chestina by the advice or directions of any one directly to that point; he might have voluntarily changed his mind in that matter; that he advised with Dr. T. on the subject is evident, from his statement subsequently made to me. There can be no doubt, had he been advised to that course by Dr. Torsey, he would have done as was first suggested by Miss Reed, and agreed to by him. It is clear, to my mind, that it was the management of Dr. T. that prevented his going. Miss Reed, and others, understood that L. was not in a condition of mind to be safely trusted off alone. Were their facilities greater, and their opportunity better, for judging of her state of mind than were Dr. Torsey’s ? He had bad a “ long conversation with her ” that morning, whereas it does not appear that the others had. He must have discovered the despair and despondency that seized upon her mind when she declared “ there was no future for her;” that it was sealed up. ■ Fi om passages which I have quoted from both Dr. T.’s and Professor R.’s letters, it appears plainly that L. was not considered sound in mind, or, at least, was under such mental excitement that she was<4iot accounted com­ petent to make arrangements for, and take care of, herself. “ Finally agreeing,” says Dr. T., “ as I understood it, to make no arrangements her­ self, but allow Chestina to make them.” What did this mean? What is the inference? “ But she said," says Professor R. in his letter, “ she some­ times went by the nay of Lewiston, and her father would meet her there; but wtuchever way she went, she woidd let her sister make all necessary arrange­ ments for it. As soon as Dr. Torsey learned that she had gone, contrary �60 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. to her promise, without the knowledge of her sister, he immediately sent a student, with the sister, to Mr. Greene,” etc. Louise was twenty-two years of age, while Chestina was but seventeen. L. had been on the Hill, through the terms, for five years, — was well ac­ quainted, and at home there; while Chestina, comparatively, was but a stranger there. Why was it insisted that this young sister should make all the arrangements? Why did L. make such an agreement or promise, if she did make such as they say, unless it was suggested and urged upon her? Why was she, who “ teas of age" as Dr. T. once told us, and who had formerly acted the matronly part towards that sister, to be placed un­ der her youthful guardianship on this occasion, unless she was considered by him in such a state of mind as to be incompetent to make arrangements for herself? Circumstances show very plainly that it was on account of her “ bewildered ” and excited state of mind, as manifested by her appearance, and the result shows that in that matter, at least, the conclusion and judg­ ment were correct. Having shown my readers a portion of the circumstances, and a part of what was said and done to influence or cause the exit of my daughter from the Hill, I will now ask them to go with me farther into an examination of her guilt and crime, in the matters of which she has been accused. I be­ lieve, in all well-ordered courts, before any just tribunal, whatever may have been the crime, the culprit is held to be entitled to all the benefit of a previously good character, which, before a humane tribunal, pleads in miti­ gation of penalties incurred. I have shown, by certificates, the character L. sustained in her own town and in the towns where she had been employed as a teacher. I will now show how her character was understood on Kent’s Hill, by those who had the best opportunity to form correct opinions re­ specting her, and where she had been a sojourner, during the terms, for1 five years. For this purpose, I will call some of her class-mates, and other students who ■were school-mates of hers, and let their written statements answer. I will here say that, in quoting and making extracts from letters, I copy from none except from persons who are, or have been, in some way connected with Kent’s Hill institution. My motive in withholding signa­ tures for the present will be appreciated and understood, when I state that the position and relation of many of the’writers, at present in connection with that institution, might render the publicity of their names unpleasant to them, aud make them subject to such annoyances as have sometimes fall­ en to others. I have now before me a letter, handed me by the clerk of Peru, who says there is no impropriety in my publishing it entire. It is as fol­ lows : r i I �L THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 61 “Winslow, December IGtli, 18CG. “ Mr. S. B. Newell : Sir, —Your letter came to hand yesterday, and I was very glad to receive it; for I have long wished for some avenue through which to express my esteem and love for Louise, and inexpressible sorrow for her untimely death. Louise was not only my class-mate, but my very dear and personal friend, for three years. Being such, I could, perhaps, form a better estimate of her character than many others. “ During all the close intimacy of school-girl life, up to the time she left us, her life was not only one of morality, but of unselfish and careful con­ sideration of the happiness of others. Through all our friendship, I never heard her speak evil of any one, except a few times, when her sensitive spirit had been stung to the quick by a careless word let fall by those whe considered her destitute of feeling. For the sake of making others happy, she seemed to lay aside all those likes and dislikes so common to school life, and yet so strong while they last. “ She was literally-a peace-maker. Many a one can testify to difficulties smoothed and hours made happy by her. ' Many a one has gone to her ii trouble, and, laying aside her own pursuits, she would cheerfully give their her aid, until the trouble, was removed. “ She had the rare talent of adapting herself to the company around her, and endeavoring to make the time pass as pleasantly as she could. How often, during some of the ‘ dark days ’ which come to all, have I been com­ forted by our dear Louise ! How many happy hours do I owe to her who has gone from us forever! Of her literary acquirements, perhaps I need not speak; they are well known to many students who have attended school with her. Besides the knowledge acquired by study, Louise was naturally very taleiited; in my estimation as much so as anyone who ever went from Kent’s Hill during my stay there. Of her death, and the sad cause of it, I can say nothing that would throw new light upon it. Only, in my sorrow, I remember that the Father of all judges not as man judges. I could fill page after page with expressions of the worth and acquirements of our departed Louise; but perhaps I have said enough for every pur­ pose. Accept these few lines as an earnest and sincere tribute to the mem­ ory of Louise, from one who knew her intimately, and loved her dearly. “ Yours, etc., Adelaide Webb, * “ Class-mate of Miss Louise Greene.” I have also before me a few other letters from her class-mates, handed to me by the same friend. I shall not weary the reader with the perusal of all these letters entire, but shall make such extracts as may seem directly �G2 TUT. CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. to touch the point now Tinder consideration. In one of these, under date of December 28, 18G6, I find the following: — u I scarcely know what to say to you after my former letter. I was un­ able to consult the class, we were so far separated, so we might act to­ gether. “ I then thought I could as easily speak to the public of Miss Greene, as to you, or any one, in private. But when trying to write for publication, I could not do it, and, for several reasons, think it best not to publish any­ thing. I regarded her character as above reproach, until this last act. This ! could say, but it has been said continually, to the public. We all know she ought to have been saved ; but we, as it were, were paralyzed with grief.^ and did not act as we now regret so much.” From another of these letters, dated Dec. 26, 1866, 1 make the follow­ ing extract: — s “ No one could have admired or appreciated, more fully than myself, the truly superior talents of our lamented class-mate. No one is more pleased than myself to speak of her beautiful traits of character, or to dwell upon the perfect kindly feeling that ever existed between us, as friends, as class-mates, as sisters, in class and in society. “ Of these things I think much; of them I am ever happy to speak to others. “ I feel that anything from my pen for the purpose of publication is uncalled for. “ I feel that in this case public opinion has ever been and now is very charitable and sympathetic, and seems to demand no further proof of the many talents and virtues of our beloved friend.” I will now give a few extracts froni other letters, written by L.’s school­ mates and class-mates to different persons. I copy from a letter dated Nov. 4th, 1866 : — “ I think it a fact, that no student has ever been more universally be­ loved than was Louise. Indeed, I do not know of a single person who bore any feeling of dislike to her; and as long as I have been here at school (five terms), I have never heard a word against her moral character either from teachers or students. “ A year ago last spring she sat next to me in one section in the collego dining-hall. I used to like her lively conversation; and as I got better acquainted with her, and learned what a kind, womanly, heart she had, I learned to love her, and I used to think she had some love for me.” �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 63 Another student, writing under date of March 24, 1867, when speaking of being acquainted with L., says: — “ And I knew her but to love and respect; and think I am but express­ ing the sentiment of her numerous circle of friends and acquaintances when I say, she was universally respected and beloved. Her standing in the school was of the highest rank, and her scholarship and ability unquestioned. I know of none in my whole circle of acquaintance on the Hill, who occupied, in the affections of their school-mates, a position so enviable. » “ If others seek to do her injustice, God forgive them ! “ Unfortunate as is the past, I cannot censure. “ As a class-mate and personal friend, our acquaintance, though, perhaps, not intimate, was yet sufficient for me to say, in all truth, I believe her to be as free from any intentional wrong as is possible for weak humanity to be. I would write whatever of wrong in sand.” * i I have before me another letter, written by one of her class-mates, and hs it was the young lady to whom her “ class letter” was directed, and as confining myself to extracts would in a measure destroy the beauty and pathos of the sentiments therein contained, I will give the letter entire,— a splendid endorsement of her character by one who knew her well, as follows: — “ Unity, Maine, Sunday, Oct. 21, 1866. “ Mrs. Greene : Afflicted Parent of ‘ our Sister,’ — As your family assemble to-day, in agonizing grief, to lay away the sacred remains of ‘ dear Louise ’ in its last resting-place, near by her own loved home, you cannot know the many mourning hearts that sympathize with you in this your deepest affliction. You cannot see the bitter tears that fall with yours to-day over 1 our dear sister’s ’ fate. As I sit alone in my own little room to-day, my thoughts are all with you, my stranger friends, and oh, I fain would fly to you and tell you of my sympathy, and beg you never to forget that we, her ‘ sisters,’ mourn with you this great bereave­ ment, — yours first, ours next. Although I am but one, I know I speak the hearts of all the class. Oh 1 could you have known the agony that rent our hearts, when first we knew ‘ our sister,’ had left us ; could you have seen the sorrow-stricken group that assembled in my room as that pre­ cious letter, her last message to us, was received; could you have looked into our hearts, and seen, through these long months, the restless watching for some trace, some knowledge, some message from ‘ our poor Louise, — �64 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. and when at last it came, how did the dreadful bolt strike home to every sister heart I — could you but know all this, as I do know it, you could never doubt our grief, but would feel, if sympathy can lessen grief, or soothe the mourner, that your own heart-crushing agony had lesser grown, .and that a soothing balm were falling on your overburdened spirit. Would that I could say some word of consolation ; but well I know how vain are words to express what the heart would dictate at silch a time. One little1 thing I wish to mention, my dear stranger friend, and may the simple instance im­ press you as beautifully as it did myself. Yesterday, my mother and I had keen speaking of Louise all the afternoon, — of her brilliant powers of mind; her uncommon talent for writing; her kindness and self-sacrific­ ing regard for her friends; her charity for the faults of others; her en­ couragement to those who were striving to do right; of our sorrow at her • fate so sad, so awful; and our deep sympathy for you in your heart­ breaking agony, — of all these things we were speaking, when, as I passed into another room, I picked up a piece of a torn paper that had been acci­ dentally dropped by some one, and my eye fell upon a piece of poetry, entitled, ‘ Lines to a Skeleton,’ that seemed so very beautifully appro­ priate to the occasion, that I really thought it strange. My mother was equally impressed with its beauty; and I cannot refrain from sending it to you, hoping that it may bring to you the same soothing influence that fell upon my heart, as I read it. “ Dear Mrs. Greene, — I have a great favor to ask of you, the granting of which would render me very thankful. That letter that dear Louise sent to us — her class—was directed to myself. I remailed it to you, after having reserved' a copy for each of us ; and also the envelope in which it came, which bears my name (Eliza J. Perley). If ’tis preserved, and you have not the slightest objection, I would prize that simple envelope very highly, as a last token to myself from one I loved so dearly ; and oh I if you could send me, too, one’ of her pictures^ I would be very thankful. She had mine, but had none of her own to exchange at the time. I desire one very much. Pardon these requests from one who is a stranger to you ; but be this my plea, — your dear Louise was dear to me. Your daughter was my sister. But now, stranger friend, good-by; and may a God of love and mercy strengthen your heai-t in your affliction, is the prayer of “ Eliza Perley.” I think I have produced sufficient testimony to establish the good char­ acter of my daughter up to the time when she was first accused of any serious wrong. As no one.ever assailed her reputation up to that time, it > r �M THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 65 may seem to some quite needless that I have said so much. But when it is .considered that it is contrary to the common course of vice, for any one to plunge at once from the height of seeming virtue to deep infamy and disgrace at the first step, I wish to show my stranger render, who may infer, from the fact that the act was committed, that her character was pre­ viously bad, that there is a mystery here ; and if my daughter was ration­ ally and intentionally guilty of the wrong with which she was charged, it is a case at variance with precedent, and the usual progress of iniquity. • I have endeavored to show that the last statement of Louise respecting being advised to leave that day, was true. I propose now to show that her . statement concerning the clothing was true, also. After leaving the faculty meeting, on the 30th day of May, which I have before mentioned, not obtaining much information, from that quarter, rela­ tive to the charges brought against L., of taking clothing not her own, and being told by Miss Case that Mrs. Daggett knew best about that matter, we repaired to the college, to have an interview with Mr. and Mrs. D. Dr. Torsey had preceded us thither, probably to report, “progress,” and look after his own side and interest in the affair. Mr. and Mrs. Daggett did not meet us in the faculty meeting, as was requested by me, perhaps for the reason that it might seem a little beneath their dignity to have their steward and his wife present in .their dignified faculty meeting. We told Mr. Daggett that we had come to learn about the charges against Louise, of taking clothing, etc. He told us he knew but very little about the clothing, as he was not present at that investigation; but referred us to his wife. Dr. Torsey then showed us into Mrs. Daggett’s room, where we had a conversation with her relative to the clothing said to have been taken or stolen. The substance and material parts of that conversation will appear in the following CERTIFICATE OF JONAS GREENE. “ I, Jonas Greene, do hereby testify and declare, that on the 30th day of May, 18G6, myself and wife called at the room of Mrs. Daggett, in the college building on Kent’s Hill, and said to Mrs. Daggett, ‘We have come to know about the charges against our daughter.’ Mrs. Daggett said, ‘ Do you want to know all?’ I replied, ‘Yes ; that is what we have conn? for.’ She said, ‘If it will not hurt your feelings, I will tell you all’ (speaking as though our feelings could be worse hurt than they already were at the treatment our child had received, when we had then searched a week for her in vain, and believed her dead). 5. �66 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. “ She then said, ‘ The first we thought or had any suspicion was, that Louise had been putting cotton drawers, not herown, into the wash, Cor five or six weeks.’ “ ‘ Were they marked?’ we asked. “ She answered, ‘ No.’ “ Mrs. Greene and I had agreed, before entering the college building, , that if they said any of the things were marked, we would request them to produce the articles, that we might see if they were plainly marked, or if there was not some mistake in the mark, or some chance for a wrong con- » » struction to be put upon the real fact. “Mrs. Daggett continued, and said, ‘We entered and searched her room and things while she was at meals, down at the table. We found in her room, trunk, and drawers, some articles that did not belong to her.’ “ We asked, ‘ Were they marked? ’ “She answered, ‘No.’ “ 1 Do you take the liberty,’ we inquired, ‘to unlock, enter, and search students’ rooms when you please ? ’ “ ‘ Oh, yes,’ she replied ; ‘ we could not get along here with so many stu­ dents without that right, or without doing so.’ “We asked her how she knew that these articles did not belong to Louise. In substance, she replied, that they belonged to some other per­ sons ; that ‘ two collars belonged to Miss Case; that they were new style, tucked linen ; and that none in the college, except three teachers, had such collars'.’ “ ‘ Were they marked?’ we asked. “ She answered, ‘ No.’ “ She then said, that ‘ Louise told her they were lately brought to her by her mother.’ She said, ‘ Miss Case took them.’ She said, ‘ Something was said to Louise about the clothing on Monday night; but they did not go into investigation until Tuesday, May 22d.’ She said, that ‘ she and Miss Case went to Louise, and questioned her, she not knowing that they had been into her room, and searched all her things ; that they asked her if she had any articles of clothing in her room, not her own ; ’ that L. replied, ‘ I think likely there may be.’ ‘ That they then asked her if she had such and such an article,’—naming two. She’replied ‘Yes; I think so.’ ‘That they then asked her if she had such an article,’ — naming a third in her room. She answered, ‘ No.’ That they then told her the article was in her room, and that she had denied a knowledge of it. That they then showed her the article, and inquired of her whether it was hers. That she r i �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. ■ 67 said, ‘ it was not.’ We then again asked. ‘Was this marked?’ Mrs. D. answered, ‘ No.’ '* Mrs. D. represented this to us as L.’s denying a knowledge of the article, and then owning she .had stolen it, with other articles, which she owned were in her room. “ She told us about L.’s having an unbleached chemise, which Miss A. Harriman claimed. ‘ Was that marked?’ we asked. She answered, ‘ No.’ She said, 1 It was put into the wash the Monday before L. left.’ She told us about another chemise, which Miss Case claimed, which was in L.’s room, and which L. said did not belong to her. ‘Was this marked?’ was* our inquiry. ‘ No.’ was her reply. “A linen handkerchief, which belonged to Carrie Straw, and which L. said was not hers, Mrs. Daggett told us was found in L.’s room. ‘ Was it marked?’ we asked. ‘ No,’ was the answer. “ She then told us about one or two towels being found in L.’s room, one of which L. said was not hers. “ ‘Were they marked?’ was the inquiry; and ‘No,’ was the answer. “ She also said something about some under-sleeves ; but said they were not marked. She said L. put into the wash on Monday, the 21st of May, two days before she left, two weeks’ washing, with a written list of the • articles to be washed, and returned to her and her chum’s box. (L. was absent with her mother, at Lewiston, on the Monday previous, on the 14th, and could not put in her week’s washing.) “ In this bundle, Mrs. D. said, was the unmarked chemise which Miss Harriman claimed ; also, one ruffled chemise’, which was taken to Miss J. Sherburn’s room, on Monday, to see if she would claim it. She did so. We asked if that was marked. She said, ‘No.’ She said there was one pair of cotton drawers in the bundle that belonged to Miss Lucy Belcher. ‘ Were these marked?’ we asked. She answered, ‘No.’ “ By this time we were getting out of all patience, in view of the current reports that had reached us at every turn, that L. had in her room, trunk, and drawers, a large lot of marked, as well as unmarked articles, and we asked if there was anything marked. Mrs. D. said, ‘Yes, a linen hand­ kerchief.’ Mrs. Greene said, ‘ Was it a nice one?’ ‘ No,’ was her reply. “ ‘Was it new?’ said Mrs. Greene. “ ‘ No,’ was the answer. “ ‘ Was it an old one?” continued Mrs. Greene. “ ‘ Yes,’ said Mrs. D., ‘ with holes in it.’ “ ‘ Was this all that was marked?’ said Mrs. G. �* 68 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. “ Mrs. D. said, ‘ There was a pair of stockings that looked as though a mark had been pulled out.’ “ Mrs. Daggett stopped here. “ Mrs. Greene then said, ‘ How did Miss Case and others know that these articles were theirs ? ’ “ ‘ Oh, by the sewing,’ said Mrs. D.; ‘ and by the quality of the cloth. Could you not tell your girl’s clothing ? ’ “ ‘ No,’ said Mrs. Greene ; ‘ I could not tell with certainty in that way. Many of her clothes were made out of our house, by others; and I do not ’believe those who claimed and took those articles, could tell, with any cer­ tainty, whether they were theirs or not. No doubt they had lost articlfes enough,'and were glad to get what they could. They might be perfectly honest, and really believe they were theirs.’ “ This conversation was just one week after Louise left the Hill, when all the circumstances must have been fresh in the mind of Mrs. Daggett. 6 “Jonas Greene.” “ Oxford, sst, August 24th, A.D. 1867. “ Personally appeared, Jonas Greene, and made oath that the above cer- • tificatc and statement by him subscribed, is true, as being the substance of the conversation touching the subject therein named. “ Before me, “Roscoe H. Thompson, “Justice of the Peace.’ . i S * T “ I, Louisa M. Greene, hereby testify that I was present in the room of Mrs. Daggett, on Kent’s Hill, on the 30th day of May, 1866, during the conversation alluded to in the certificate of my husband, Jonas Greene, and do know, assert, and declare-that the same is true. “Louisa M. Greene.” “ Oxford, ss., August 24th3 18G7. “Personally appeared the above-named Louisa M. Greene, and made oath that the above statement by her subscribed, is true. “ Before me, “Roscoe I-I. Thompson, “Justice of the Peace.” I appeal to the public, to any profound lawyer or jurist, to say whether they had any evidence on which they could rely, to hold these common - �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 69 white under-garments, when it is a known fact that in nearly all the dry­ goods stores in the State maybe found the same style and quality of cloth, manufactured at the same mills, and that the manner of making such arcles is about the same all over the State. I appeal to them, also, to say whether it was dealing fairly with my daughter to enter her room and take such unmarked articles, passing them through the rooms of the college, to see if they could find any student to claim them, in order to implicate her in taking them ; and thus making the matter public in the onset. Does it not look as though having detected L. in a misdemeanor, which she prompt­ ly confessed, they desired to make it tell as hard against her as possible, and were willing to arouse suspicion against her, and magnify her faults rather than palliate, —to wound, rather than console, her already distressed and “ distracted” mind? Does it not appear, from the manifestation of this disposition, that the last statement of L. was true when she said: “ They tried to make me account for all the little things that had been missed through the term”? I had another interview with Mrs. Daggett, in her room, on the 8th of November, when, at my request, she went over the whole account of accu­ sations against Louise, adding many new statements, and materially alter­ ing others. At this time, as well as at the first time we .talked with her, she showed evident signs of prejudice, and a willingness to make the whole matter appear as bad as possible against Louise. Whether these variations in her statements were made on account of her recollections of the affair being more vivid after the expiration of nearly eight months’, than in one week after the transaction, or for the purpose of excusing or shielding the faculty, or any one of them, from censure, I leave the reader to judge. And whether her seeming prejudice was real and self­ conceived, or instigated by others, and in their interest, is more than-1 can tell. Dr. T., in a letter to me, dated June 30th, 18G6, makes his charges against L. in the following language: — “ The facts, I believe, are these: Louise sent, at different times, bun­ dles of clothing to the wash, from which were taken, by the wash-girl, five articles of clothing not hers. In her room were found nine or ten articles, some of them marked, some of them not, having been sent to the wash, — some of them belonging out of the building. Before they were shown her, she denied she had such articles in her room. The money she took, and put out of her hands at once. For three years she had kept a skeleton key, opening all of the students’ rooms.” Mark what he says: “ The facts, I believe, are these.” He does not know the facts are so. He told us he did not know what the facts were, in the faculty meeting. Miss Case told us �70 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. the same in that meeting, and Mr. Daggett told me the same May 30th, and November 8th, 18GG. Nobody pretended to know but Mrs. D., and nobody’ does know what the facts were, except Mrs. D. Mrs. D. had told us, or endeavored to tell us, all about this matter of stealing clothing, as they represented it, on the 30th day of May. Time rolled on. Louise was lost, and could not be found? The public began to understand more about this sad affair, and seriously to censure some of the faculty. Public excite­ ment was increasing, and the necessity seethed to exist of making L.’s case as bad, and look as dark, as possible. New discoveries were made of arti­ cles in her room, which had evaded the scrutinizing search of Mrs. D. and Miss Case, when they searched everything in her room, even the body of the doomed girl, to her very under-garments on her, as Mrs. D. told me. I will here say, that it might be a misdemeanor in L. not marking her clothes. If so, she was not alone in the fault, as other students, and even the teachers, were guilty of the same. If it had not been so, Miss Case and others could not have claimed the unmarked articles found with Louise, some of which, no doubt, belonged to her, as I shall hereafter endeavor to show. As Dr. T., Mrs. Daggett, and others, in their charges against Louise, and in their letters, use the term “ her room,” it is proper for me to inform the reader that L. did not occupy the room alone, but had a room-mate, who occupied the same bed with her, each furnishing one-half the sheets and pil­ low-cases. They occupied the room and clothes-closet in common. Their clothes, when washed and ironed, were put in the same box; sometimes one, and sometimes the other, and sometimes both together,' going after them. Was there anything mysterious in the matter, that an article was found in the room thus Occupied, of which she had no.knowledge? And would such finding, and her denial of a knowledge, of such articles furnish sufficient evidence, in the opinion of any sound-minded man, to convict her of stealing, or of any intention to steal? I have used the term “ stealing," not because I do not know, nor because I suppose that every well-informed reader does not know, that this act of “ taking clothing,” of which they accuse her, is not stealing in the light of the law; but because I have reason to believe, from circumstances, and her last letter to her sister, that they did “ impress upon her mind the idea and conviction that they considered her guilty in this matter of stealing the unmarked articles found in her room which were not her own.” She says in her letter: “ As I live I had no intention of stealing them ; ” which shows plainly that the same accusation had been made to her which has been reported to the public, — that she stole these articles. �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 71 Taking these unmarked articles in lien of her own, which, wcic gone, which had been taken, perhaps, by others in like manner, might be contra­ ry to the rules, if not the practice, at the institution, and a misdemeanor or trespass before the law ; but to take articles in such a manner, to use and not to keep, in open day, to wear and expose them without concealment, returning them to the wash openly, with a list of the same, and her own signature or name affixed, as she did, in this case, no jurist would pronounce it larceny. F. A. Robinson, one of the faculty, under date of November 12, 18GG, writes as follows : — “ The facts in the case are these: After as private an investigation as possible, Miss Greene acknowledged that she had taken several articles that did not belong to her. Also, that she had taken money from one of the young ladies. Also, that she had had in her possession, for two years, a false key, which would open most all the students’ rooms in the college.” He does not say what these airk-.es were, nor how they were taken, but uses the word “ taken,” evidently intending to be understood “ stolen.” Neither does he say, as did Dr. T.: “ The facts, I believe, are these.” It was xthen November. L.’s remains had been found, and her tongue and pen must be silent forever. From what has already been shown, and the fact that Dr. T. told L. the next morning after the investigation that the students knew of the affair, will the reader call it anything like a “ private investigation”? I know that many of the students did not know of the matter the next morning after she confessed; they have-told me so. But did he not mean she should understand that the school knew it when he told her so? Since writing the statement of a conversation with Mrs. Daggett on the 30th.day of May, 1866, a copy of a written statement made by her, as also one made by Mr. D., has fallen into my hands. Presuming that these statements were intended to correct the opinion and relieve the mind of the person to whom they were addressed of the impression that injustice had been done to Louise, by placing before him, over their own signatures, the extent and magnitude of her offences, I will give them the benefit of these productions by laying them entire before the public. COPY OF MRS. DAGGETT’S STATEMENT. “ The first thing that led us to suspect Miss Greene of taking things was that one of the help missed a pair of drawers. In two weeks they tame into the wash with Miss G.’s clothes, her name marked on them with . �72 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. blue ink. The Monday before she left she brought down a fortnight’s wash (having been absent part of the week before), in which was a chemise belonging to Miss Sherburn, another to Miss Harriman, a pair of drawers to Miss Belcher, and a handkerchief to Miss Fuller; we found in her drawers a chemise belonging to Miss Case, another to one of her class­ mates, Miss Fuller, which she admitted she knew whose it was. I asked her why she had not returned it. She said, she supposed she should, if she had known this jvould have come up. There -was also fojind a towel belonging to Miss Robinson, and another unmarked, which she said did not belong to her; two collars of Miss Case’s, one of which she said at first was her own, but afterwards owned it was not; a handkerchief of Miss Straw’s ; a pair of under-sleeves of Miss Hunton’s.” “ The above-named articles — some of them were marked, but mostly unmarked — were identified and claimed by the owners herein named. “ Mrs. Daggett, Matron.” Before I proceed to make any comment on this statement of Mrs. Dag­ gett, I will give THE STATEMENT OE MRS. L. M. GREENE. • “ I, Louisa M. Greene, mother of M. L. Greene, hereby testify and assert, that on the thirteenth day of March, 18G6, my daughters, Louise and Estelle, picked up all their, articles of clothing, at the Packard house on Kent’s Hill, — Estelle coming home with her father and Louise going to the college building to board. From the articles of wearing apparel, which she carried to the college at'tbat time, and those which I carried to her on the 27th of March, and on the 11th and 14th of May, there were lost and missing (not including the towels handed, to me by Mrs. Daggett, May 30th, and the articles obtained by Miss Reed in October afterwards, nor those found on the remains of Louise), which did not come home with her things after she had gone, the following articles, namely : — 5 pairs of cotton drawers, 4 pairs of them good and nearly new; . 7 chemises, some of them bleached, some unbleached. One of the bleacnedwas ruffled, two were trimmed with tape trimming, one a plain yoke; 5 pairs of under-sleeves, one pair of them ribbed; 2 long linen towels with a blotted mark (‘ L. HL Willard’') my maiden name, on them; 1 long night-dress marked; 1 nice new handkerchief, plainly marked with her name, and cost $1.00 ; ; I !? ■ = �THE CROWN WON BET NOT WORN. 73 8 napkins, two of them marked, — 6 of them new ones, not cut,—put in the bottom of her trunk by me May 14th, 1866 ; 1 pair cloth boots ; 1 tucked linen collar, which I carried her from home, May \\.th, 1866 ; 3 new collars, late style; bought them myself in May; have the impress on they tcere “ tucked 1 box of paper collars; bought them myself May 14th, 1866 ; . 1 pair of new cotton hose, bought May 14th, and several pairs which had been worn some; . 6 skeins of black sewing-silk, which I sent her four days before she left; 7 sticks of embroidering braid Mrs. Kent had her charged with when she left, cost §1.26 ; . All her belts, buckles, bosom-pins and cuffs, — I know she had several of each, — together with many trinkets and little fancy articles. *In addition to these there were missing several valuable school-books, and four large sheets music copy paper ; 1 stone flower pot. In all 60 articles or more lost or missing at this term only. “ Louisa M. Greene.” “ Oxford; ss., Aug. 2ith, 1867. “ Personally appeared Louisa M. Greene, and made oath that the above et -tement by her subscribed is true according to her best knowledge and belief, before me. “ Roscoe H. Thompson, Justice of the Peace.” In 1864 Louise lost at the Hill two books, — one was “ Golden Grains,” the other “ Ten Nights in a Bar-Room,”—written by T. S. Arthur. I should not have named these small missing articles, had not sucli arti­ cles been named in their charges against Louise. It must be apparent to every one, from the testimony of those connected with the institution, that the practice of putting unmarked clothing into the wash prevailed, and was indulged extensively, if not generally, at the time Louise was accused of taking clothing. Mrs. Daggett says: “ The first thing that led us to suspect Miss Greene of taking things was that one of the help missed a pair of drawers. In two weeks they came into the wash with Miss Greene’s clothes, with her name marked bu them, with blue ink.” It is evident then, that these were unmarked till L. marked them. The “ help,” as well as teachers and students, were allowed to put unmarked clothes into the wash, while she, as well as others had nothing I �74 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. whereby she could recognize her own except the “ hems and stitches,” or something of the kind. “ Every like is not the same.” The help might be mistaken in the drawers and claim L.’s as her own ; or L. might make the same mistake with respect to those of the help. By means of ex­ changing, by mistakes or something of a less harmless name, L. had been the loser in the operation; and had all rooms been searched with the same relentless scrutiny as was hers, whose stubborn will to think for herself had doomed her to “ walk on the Hill alone,” no doubt the result of such exchanges would have been found in other rooms beside hers. I know not how it was managed, to get from L. her last pair of drawers ; but it is plain this was done. “ I came to the college,” she says, in her letter to her sister, “ with three or four good whole drawers, — two pairs which were new ones, — and to-day, as I ride away, I have none ; they were lost in the wash, because unmarked.” This was true. No drawers were found on her remains, and none re­ turned home with her clothing. Could the “help” who claimed those marked with blue ink tell anything about what became of L.’s drawers ? Perhaps not; yet, somebody must know what became of them ; and it was haixl that, from the ample stock of clothing which she had, and all she had been accused of “ taking,” she could not have been allowed a pair of drawers in which to travel to her leafy couch of death. As Louise had plenty of drawers of her own, if they were not lost, would she have returned those to the wash that the help claimed, if she had intended to steal them? Does it not look more reasonable that she supposed she had found a pair of her own missing drawers, and took a pen and marked them, in hopes she should not lose them again ? An extract from a letter, dated April 14th, 1867, from a lady who had • worked in the college building, will show how loose was the management in the laundry, and what other “ help ” were allowed to do. She says : — “ There used to be some grumbling among the students about their clothes getting mixed up. Never knew of the steward furnishing money or clothes for anything that was missing. As we were short for help to do our. wash­ ing, the steward’s wife told me to put my clothes in with students’. My clothes were not all marked. Towards the last of the term I missed one article of clothing, and could not find it anywhere ; but on the table I found an article of the same kind, that looked very much like mine, only it was marked L. A. Jones, I think. At any rate it belonged to a young lady. She had left that week, and taken her clothes out of.the wash. I made up my mind that she took her clothes in a hurry ; ami took, as she thought, her own, but by mistake took one article that belonged to me, and left hers. > * 1 I �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 1> * 75 I went to the steward’s wife, and told her about it. She said, most likely that was the case. ‘ Any way,’ said she, ‘ take what you have found, and keep it until you find your own.’ I wore that one out, with the mark on it, and did not consider it stealing, either. I cannot think that it is anything very strange that she, or any other girl among so many, should sometimes get on clothes that do not belong to them.” “ The Monday before she left,” says Mrs. Daggett, “ she brought down a fortnight’s wash, in which was a chemise belonging to Miss Sherburne, another to Miss Harriman, a pair of drawers to Miss Belcher, aud a hand­ kerchief to Miss Fuller.” Here were four stolen or “ taken ” articles, it seems, returned fearlessly' to the wash, openly, with her own hand, without covert or concealment, to be washed, and, if unmarked, to be put upon the common pile ; if marked, of course, to be there for the claimer, or put in the owner’s box. At such evidence of larceny a jury of good or common sense would smile. But none of these articles were distinctly' marked, except the old handkerchief “ with holes in it,” which Mrs. D. told us about. That was marked with Miss Fuller’s name. To this Louise tacked another handkerchief, and said in her list, “ Two handkerchiefs marked ‘Miss Fuller;’” intending the mark on one to answer for both in tho description, making no attempt at concealment. Mrs. Daggett has given what she may' think are facts, which will answer the purpose for which they are written, without explanations or comments. I will allow Miss Sherbr me to express her own views respecting the first article named as being in the bundle ” brought to the wash. In a letter, dated at “ Phillips, Jan. 29, 1867,” Miss Sherburne says: — “ Even if Louise did take some clothes from the wash, I should think nothing at all of that; for it is no more than others have done, if they could not find their own, to take what there was left. ULy chemise had been marked with • ink, but had nearly faded out. It was not found in Louise's room, but she brought it into the icash with the rest of her clothes. Although.I was but very little acquainted with your daughter, I always thought very highly of her, and I never can think that the teachers, as well as Hrs. Daggett, did just right.” Neither the chemise “belonging” to Miss Harriman, nor the drawers claimed by Miss Belcher, were marked. Miss Hamman writes, under date of “Feb. 1, 1867,” and says: “The chemise that I lost was a new un­ bleached one,—not large, but rather small; had been missing some two or three weeks. I first ‘saw it afterwards on the ironing-room table,” etc. “ The article was not marked, but it was made unlike any other that I saw at the school.” She further says: “ There were frequent complaints that articles were lost in the wash. In regard to losing other things, I �16 ■S. i* THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN lost a new nice chemise in the fall term." r. uv una '• latten” this? Not Louise, surely ; for she was no longer there, to be urged “ to account for all the little things missing.” Miss Belcher, in a letter dated “ Fob. 28,1867,” says: “ The facts about the articles found in Miss Chapman’s and your daughter’s room I am unable to give, except as I heard them from the other teachers ; as I did not myself enter the room, or look at any of the things. It will- therefore be much better for you to ask Miss Case, Mrs. Daggett, or Miss Robinson.” (An oasis in the desert.) The reader will notice that while others are continually usipg the term “ her room, her room,” Miss Belcher recognizes the fact that she bad a room-mate ; and that she did not enter that room to search, implicate, and claim unmarked articles. She continues: “ About my things I will tell you in -as few words as possible. I had missed several articles of clothing; and on Mon­ day morning of that unhappy week, went to Mrs. Daggett, and told her I could not put my clothes in the wash again, until I could be sure of having them all returned to me. She asked me what I had lost. I told her, among other things, was a pair of new drawers, which I had put into the wash two weeks before. I knew them by certain marks which I described to her.” What these “ certain marks ” were she does not say; perhaps peculiar stitches or hpms, or something of the kind. She does not say they were marked With her name. It will be seen that they had been missing two weeks; and if they were Miss B.’s, Louise had worn them a week, and returned them into the wash. But Miss Belcher liad “ missed several articles.” Who had taken them ? They do not say they found them in the room, or pretend that L. returned to the wash any other article belonging to Miss Belcher. “ She (Mrs. Daggett) next morning, I think (Tuesday), brought them to me, and asked me if those were the ones. I at once replied that they were. In the course of the forenoon I was told it was suspected that one of the girls had been taking what did not belong to her; and, later, that it was your daughter. I was very much surprised and shocked, and told the teacher who gave me the information that I would rather give her all my under-clothes than have it made public.” It will here be seen that this exchange of clothing was represented to Miss B. as stealing, —a great crime. “It would be such a. blow. I admired her always for her talents, which were of the highest order; and felt sure that there was something more to bo explained. I know that words are powerless to comfort you ; but if an assurance of my heart-felt sorrow and pity for you, when I heard of the death of one of the njost talented girls I ever knew, can be of any comfort, you have this assurance.” In my judgment, had the same spirit and consideration that �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 77 breathes through this whole letter, from which.I have macle the. foregoing extracts, been manifested by all concerned in this heart-rending affair, we might have been still blest with the society of our darling child, and saved the painful duty of this defence. Having shown that this article, returned ’ to the wash in the bundle of which Mrs. Daggett speaks, was unmarked, and such as students and help had been allowed to take and wear when their own were gone, Mrs. Daggett continues : “ We found in her drawer a chemise belonging to Miss Case, and another to one of her class-mates, Miss Fuller.” The most I can say, in regard to the chemise claimed by Miss Case is,*that L. had one just like that, which did not come home with her clothing; and the collars which she claimed and took from Louise, I believe were the same ones that Mrs. Greene carried to her, May 11, 1866. Mrs. D. told us that L. said so at first, but afterwards said they were not the ones. We shall never know in full what she did tell them about the clothing. It has been told me that they-said L. at first told them that she took the articles of clothing because she was obliged to ; that she had frequently lost many things there, and had borne it in silence; but now, when hers were gone, she intended to make her own number good from the pile . of unmarked articles, until her own were returned. This, I believe, was the case ; and, further, that they followed in accusing, arguing, pursuing, until they got her so mortified and confused that she.hardly knew what she did say. She saw they meant to make it look bad as they could, and that they meant to disgrace her ; but as I could not trace such admission to any reliable source, I give the above as my opinion of what Louise did say to them about the clothing. If that chemise and collars were Miss’ Case’s, then L. bad certainly lost hers ; and it would not be strange if L. had taken these, thinking they were her own, she having articles like them; or any­ thing criminal, if she took them instead of her own. As to the article of . Miss Fuller, Mrs. D. says: “ She (B.) admitted that she knew whose it was.” Mrs. D. has tried to represent this as an article known to L. as being marked ; as she did to me, Nov. 8. Had it been marked, this expression would not have occurred. They would have known that she knew whose it was, without asking. It is immaterial whether she had this through mistake, or in lieu of a lost one. She and Miss Fuller were class-mates, social and friendly as sisters. She had found out, if Mrs. D.’s statement is correct, ■whose chemise it was. This, it seems, gave her no particular con­ cern or anxiety. It was going back to the wash at the usual time. She was asked “ why she had not returned it.” That is, I suppose, why she had not forthwith returned it, when she found out whose it was. She answers (according to D.’s recollection eight mouths after), “she supposed she �78 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. should, if she had known this would have come up.” She might have said, if she had known that, contrary to the practice with others, they would have got up this fuss. Miss Fuller writes Mrs. Greene, Feh. 1,1867, from 9 which I make the following extract: — “ I have hesitated to open anew the terrible wound I had no power to heal; but it cannot be unpleasant for you to hear repeated how much we loved our dear lost sister, although you know it so well already. If she had been less dear to us, or if we had been less proud of her talents and acquirements, that last blow would not have fallen upon us with such crushing weight; and although it is such a bitter thing for us, yet I feel that we cannot know the depth of your anguish when all your fears proved true, and you knew that our dear Louise could never speak again to you. Oh, it did seem almost too hard, and hardest of all to believe that' a word in season to the prayer of her letter to us might have saved her L But then it was too late; and when that word might have been spoken, everybody seemed powerless to act. We were paralyzed, it seems. I can explain it to myself in no other way. The garment that Mr. Greene wished me to describe to you, was a chemise with a straight yoke, trimmed with crotchet braid, and insertion of the same trimming bad been put in the band after it was made and marked. So that when each edge had been turned in to put in the trimming, the mark­ ing was turned in with it, so that nobody but myself would have dis­ covered it.” » This ch’emise, of course, must have, after being washed, gone into the unmarked pile, where L. found it. This class-mate told me that Louise was kind-hearted and strictly honest; safely kept, and properly accounted for, all the funds that came into her hands while she was treasurer of the Adelphian Society. She never knew aught against her until this affair; and that at the time these charges and • reports came out against her, they looked so large to us all then ; but now, it looks so small; it does seem bard to think she lost her life for it. The reader will see how this was made to appear at that time before the school. This class-mate does not think that they did all that might have been done to have saved her, as this bigoted faculty do, whose duty it was to have acted promptly to have tried to save her. Blind and self-willed are they who do not try to see. • “ There were also found,” says Mrs. D., “ a towel belonging to Miss Robinson, and another, unmarked,” which Mrs. D. says, “L. said did not belong to her.” One of these no one had claimed, the last we inquired about her things there. If they were not hers, then somebody bad taken them. These were the numbers which we knew she had lost, although wo �THE CROWN IVON BUT NOT WORN. 79 believe that she had several others which were not returned with her things. Mrs. Daggett gave as a reason how Miss Case knew the collars . she took from L. were hers was, “because none in the college but three teachers had such a new-style collar.” How did they know whose parents or friends of the sixty or more females there had not sent to them, or some one of them, in the last two weeks, or twenty-four hours, such collars as L.’s mother bad done nine days before? “A handkerchief of Miss Straw’s ; a pair of under-sleeves of Miss Hunton’s.” Mrs. D. does not say that this handkerchief was marked, or whether it was like the old one, full of holes, she told us about; or whether it was like the nice new one which is missing from L.’s things, I do not know. From the pen of the claimer, I have something definite concerning these under-sleeves. From her letter to me, dated Feb. 6, 1867, 1 extract the following: — “ I was very much surprised, as well as grieved, when, on the day after your daughter’s departure, I was in the room with Mrs. Daggett and Mary Chapman, and Mrs. D., from L.’s drawer, held up a pair of undei;-slceve3 and said, “These I suppose belong to some of the girls.” I immediately recognized them as mine. The above-mentioned articles were of my own make, and consequently the stitches were somewhat peculiar.” These were unmarked, or she would not have been under the necessity of appealing to the “ peculiar stitches” in order to recognize them. It is remarkable, that, with the loose practice allowed there, for the five pairs of under-sleeves which L. had lost, she had not taken in their stead but one pair ; and there is a doubt in my mind whether Miss II. was not mistaken in these, and that any of the numerous visitors to the room she had lately left could be induced to recognize, when such care was taken to exhibit articles, and “ suppose they belonged to other girls.” I have adduced before the public the statement of Mrs. Greene, respecting the lost and missing articles, to show that circumstances strongly sustain the statement which L. made in her letter, when she spoke of those unmarked articles of clothing, and said, “ As I live, I had no intention of stealing them. For every article I took I had lost one in the wash, and put those on in their stead, expecting before the term was done to find my own.” This asser­ tion must stand good and true unless proved to the contrary. Mrs. Greene purchased and provided almost all L.’s clothing, and had the best possible means of knowing what she had, and the description of each article; al­ though L. or her mother did not make all of these articles of clothing, and neither could tell about the “ peculiar stitches ” or hems of her garments, �80 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. as L.’s whole mind and soul seemed to be absorbed in her school dutiesI think it is measurably pardonable iu her if she was, as one student ex­ pressed it, “ careless about her clothing.” She was not so careful as some about small things or peculiar stitches. I appeal to mothers who have children away from home to school, to say whether they do or not know about every article their children have of clothing. The fact that L. had articles just like the ones claimed and taken by others does not prove that these were wrongfully claimed; but it does show the probable truth of her statement, .that for every article taken, she had lost one; and that others, as well as she, might make mistakes as to the identity of such under-garments. Through mistake or otherwise, she had lost numerous articles. If, through mistake, they were in the hands of other students, after the search, censure, and the representation of the “ enormity of the crime,” it would be no wonder or surprise, if the holders •should hesitate to bring them forward, and subject themselves to a like suspicion and .reproach. From a letter, dated Jan. 6, 1867, from a student who was at the Hill at the time L. left, I take the following: — “ While at school, I did lose a number of things in the wash. I never knew what became of them. Mrs. Daggett used to tell me that probably some one. else used to get them, and I could take other unmarked clothes in the place of them.” To show that not only Mrs. D. tolerated this loose practice, but that Mr. Daggett was also cognizant of and allowed it in the gentlemen’s depart­ ment, I will introduce the statement of Mr. Houghton. “ For the benefit of those whom it may concern,-1 would here state, that in the winter and spring of 1864 and 1865, I attended school at the Maine Wesleyan Seminary, Kent’s Hill, Me.; that I boarded in the college building, and was personally acquainted with Miss M. Louise Greene, then a mgmber of that school, and can testify to her good womanly conduct, and great ability as a scholar. I would further state, that while there, in the wash I lost two articles of clothing, which were marked with the initials of my name in large capitals, which I never again received. Go­ ing to the steward in regard to the matter, he told me he would watch the wash, and if possible find them for me. Making the fact known to one of my fellow-students a few days after, he told me he had taken from the table, on which our clothes were laid after being washed, an article of the same kind, if not the same that I had lost, and that I might have it if I chose. I told him it was not mine, and I would not take it. But after some hesi- ■ 3 I S I : �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 81 tation I took it and went to the steward, and told him the circumstances ; asked him if I should keep them until I found mine. lie told me I might, and, if I did not find what I had lost, or an owner to what I had, I might keep it; which I did, and wore the same away. This is an impartial and truthful statement. “ D. F. Houghton.” Louise says, “ When I missed things from the wash, I took other un­ marked ones from the table and used them.” She does not speak, in either of her two letters, as though she had been there educated to consider this tv crime or a heinous' offence. The same is true with respect to the ex­ pressions of other students. “ It is no more than others have done,”' says one, “ if they could not find their own, to take what was left.” I would not be understood as justifying this practice. No person living: ■ has stronger reason or more bitter cause to condemn and execrate theexistence of this state of things than I. When clothing of all description was allowed in the wash, promiscuously and unmarked, from the teacher (down or up, as you please) to the kitchen girls or help; when no one was responsible for unmarked articles, and when no one looked after, to sec who took the clothing, or what amount any student carried away; and when exchanges of articles were winked at, or openly tolerated; it seems hard, it seems cruel to us, that our daughter, after being drawn in by the existing state of affairs, should be made the scape-goat, to>bear off the sins or errors of this whole institution. “ They tried,” she says, “ to make me account for all the little things that have been missing through the term ; but I could not. I have not had them.” Then there were other articles, which they did not find with her. • I will now call the attention of the reader to that act, that mysterious “ crime,” as she calls it, which was beyond her comprehension, and the only thing which Louise felt that she was really censurable for. I mean the taking of that five dollars, and which she, on being asked, immediately confessed and restored. It is useless for me to repeat what I think and know about this strange act, this abrupt and hasty descent from her ever high moral standing down to an act of petty larceny. Concerning the money she says : “ Some Satan hidden in my heart said, take it, and, before I could think, I stood again in 27. When I went in to Miss Church’s room, I had no such intention in my heart.” This was the firit and only act of the kind she had ever done. She did not need the money. She says, in answer to the question, “Had your father been close about furnish­ ing you with funds?” “I have always had all the money I have 6 �82 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. asked for.” She made no excuse or denial, as is almost universally the course of those who commit crime, from the petty thief to the highest criminal. On being accused or arrested, they deny, prevaricate, and make all sorts of excuses. Look at the tenor of her letters, and the opinions of class-mates and fellow-students; look at her daily walk, her acts or conver­ sation from a child ; does the least appearance of a wicked heart, or a per­ verse mind appear, that she should conceive and commit this act on the spur of the moment, unless there was some hidden cause operating on her, ' and beyond her control at the time, and beyond her comprehension after­ wards? Those who are conversant with passing events, and with the history of the past, know there are cases where persons, seemingly harmless and sane, have been, as they have afterwards expressed it, irresistibly tempted to reek their hands in the blood of their best friends, and those they loved most dearly. Some are tempted to destroy their own lives, and, ’ if prevented, and the nervous excitement passes off, they will relate their experiences as an awful temptation which the enlightened mind of modern days ascribes to natural cause. One of L.’s class-mates says, in a letter dated Dec. 28, 1866 : “ I know, from her letter, that Louise took that money; but I believe that, for a moment, she was under an influence she could not resist; therefore not , guilty of an intentional error. The cold eyes of indifferent people cannot see this. Her letter I prize highly. I believe every word of it, and have not the slightest feelings but love and kindness for her memory.” It will be noticed that, at intervals, about that time, as the term neared its close, Louise complained of her head to her mother; complained of the lack of the power of thought: “Before I could think, I stood in 27.” In her ’ affidavit Chestina says, “ L. said to Miss Case, ‘ I feel so strange. I wish I could think, but I can’t. ’ ” Again she says in her- letter: “ I think, maybe^ I am not-exactly as I used to be-while I write this, for my head whirls, and I cannot seem to think to say what I am trying to say.” It is evident that Louise was aware that there was something unnatural and mysterious in the exercise, of her mind. It does appear, by her last letters, that she might be conscious at times, or have some suspicion of the true state of her case, and true condition of her mind. “ If I know myself, it was not the true, real Louise Greene that did this. She was trying to live an honest, womanly life ; or if she was, indeed, drifting into disgrace, she never realized it. That five dollars is a mystery to me. What pos­ sessed me to take the money I do not know; but I took it. The moment they asked me about it, I confessed it.” In her class letter she says : “ I do not know what tempted me. Everything that was asked me, I told the t �uns crown •won wct not worn. o 83 truth about, as near as I could, in my distracted state of mind.” Mr. Orrin Daggett, the steward, writing from Kent’s Hill, Jan. 29, 1867, says: “ Miss M. Louise Greene confessed to me and others that she went into Miss Florence Church’s room, a few days before she (Miss Greene) left the school, and took, in the absence of Miss C., a five-dollar bill from her portc-monnaie, which she restored before she left.” On the 8th day of No­ vember, 18G6, I was in the college office. He (Daggett) told me that some time in the day, on the 22d of May, he was called to the room where Mrs. D., Miss C., and Louise were to assist in the examination ; and, after questioning her about the clothing, — especially about two handkerchiefs' she had put in the wash, — (they were, I suppose, the same ones before named : the old one with holes in it, with Miss Fuller’s name faintly seen on it; the other unmarked, attached to it, and put into the wash with her written list), — he questioned her about them all he desired, then’asks her about the missing five dollars. He says: “The first word she spoke, she told him where it was, not denying a word. He asked her if she would get it. She said yes, and gave it to him soon after.” It will now be seen that, in this matter also, her statement in her letter was perfectly true. It will also be seen that this whole affair was all the work of a few days. Mr. Daggett, in answer to my questions, said they had not the least proof, whatever, against her, — Miss Church accusing no one of taking it; but they, finding she had a slight suspicion of some one, pressed her to know who that one was. She did not want to say, as she had no proof, — mere suspicion; said it would be of no use to say; but they drew it from her; hence his questioning L. If she had been a'bad or wicked girl, an intentional thief, she would have squarely denied all knowledge of the money ; that would have been an end to it; and those who knew her best, would never have believed she took the same. From a letter by a school­ mate of L.’s to her sister C., dated Oct. 24, 1866,1 take the following: “ Poor, girl 1 how she must have suffered 1 She must have been insane, or she never would have done as she did. I loved her dearly. I presume you will never attend school at Kent’s Hill again, and not to blame cither. I blame the teachers very much in regard to Louise going away.” Miss Harriman, who has been brought before the public as one of the claimants of one of the articles which L. took in lieu of her own, while, in the charitableness of her heart, she. no doubt, would be glad to relieve all from blame, seems to be willing that censure should fall anywhere rather than on her unfortunate and fallen school-mate. In a letter, to which I have before referred, she writes: “ Louise was a favorite with all. She was talented, and, as a thorough scholar, enjoyed an enviable reputation. �84 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. All were friendly to her, both Leacners ana students, as far as I can judge*, and that fact, perhaps, more than any other, made her wretched, and over­ turned the balance of her active but sensitive mind. She saw her own position in a worse light than others did.” Miss H. did not consider or know who impressed upon her mind the “ enormity of her crime,” the hopelessness of her position, and the void and-darkness of her “ future; ” her great object to graduate successfully, the bitter disappointment of self and friends. “ The faculty of the school were also deeply engaged , with care of government, and the preparatory measures for the close of term, and this very unfortunate affair took them entirely by surprise, and they may very likely have misjudged as to their duty. I know that when a fate so very sad occurs, with so many varying circumstances about it, it is usual for persons, in their deep affliction, to see faults in the management of the affair; and it would be strange if some of the per­ sons, actors in this scene, were not blameworthy. I have sometimes felt to blame her parents, even, for keeping her so long at school, and thought • that her mind had been overtaxed with study, and had become weak and ill-balanced in some direction.” Writing to us from Kent’s Hill, Oct. 7,1866, Miss M. I. Reed says : “ The blow was so great that it stunned her. Poor girl I She did not have con­ trol over her own mind when she left.” From one of her classmates’ communications, dated Oct. 19,1866,1 ex tract the following: “ I am very glad to say that none of the class, to my knowledge, said they, would not graduate with Louise. I cannot realize • that it is our own Louise, that we loved so much, that I am writing of. It is too dreadful to think of. If I had only spoken to Louise of this, that morning! but how could we? We would believe nothing of it till she was gone. When we knew its truth we believed her good and true, but only suddenly tempted. No one of the class but feels so, and would have then received her with open arms if we could, only have had the opportunity.” In another letter of Miss Reed of Oct. 28,1866, speaking of conversing with people concerning the guilt of L., she says : “ All the time I was trying to make people see it in the light that I saw it. I have told this story to many strangers as well as acquaintances,,and think all have said she could have been restored. Her crime was not a crime in their eyes.” By the closing sentence of the certificate of the leading citizens of Peru, it will be seen that their opinion coincides with that of the students at Kent’s Hill, relative to what was imputed to L. as a crime. They say: “ While we freely and unhesitatingly bear testimony to the virtue and good con­ duct of this lamented young lady, justice to her memory impels us to say, �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 85 that, in our opinion, whatever unfortunate circumstance or occurrence might have operated, directly or indirectly, as the primary cause of her untimely end, it was not her fault or crime., but her misfortune.” I am authorized by the friend who originated this certificate,' and obtained the signatures thereto (the town-clerk of Peru), to say, that he circulated that certificate, and, with two or three exceptions, obtained, in person, the names thereto ; and that the idea contained in this last sentence was the voluntary expression of nearly all, before their attention was called to that point;. that special care was taken that this point should be fully understood, and that all gave it as their opinion that, mentally, through the whole affair till her death, she was not fully herself. Dr. Torsey, in that faculty meeting, told us that L. told him that her parents were hard, proud, and-uuforgiving; that she cited a case as to her mother as evidence of the truth of her statement, which I know never had existence, except in her excited and bewildered brain. If she did this, we know she was mentally deranged; for no child was ever more attached to, and tender of the feelings of, her mother. She had all confidence in whatever she said. The same could be said of her mother’s feelings and respect for her; and no person on earth can make us believe that she said aught against her mother, if in her right mind. She has entri.es in her diaries, letters, and other writings, all through those five years, speaking of and referring to her mother in the most tender, affectionate, and respectful manner. Her conversation with students, and letters to them, and at places where she has taught school, when speaking of home and friends, all tell of the unvarying confidence, regard, and affection for her mother. She devoutly loved’and respected her mother. Her mother iu turn had the same love and respect for her. There existed between them an unva­ rying confidence and attachment. We all looked up to her as one whose counsel and advice were worthy of consideration and respect. “ O mother! my mother 1 ” were almost the last words she ever wrote. Her appearance, writings, and actions, after Torsey's talk with, and her leaving the Hill, the place and manner of her death, are all indications of the condition of her mind. Believing that a poem, written by her whei hei' mother was sick, would better illustrate her feelings, and would interest some readers, I will give it iu full. “LINES “WRITTEN WHEN OUR MOTHER WAS DANGEROUSLY ILL. “ Nay, Father, spare her longer yet, and let mo go; I am not needed hero; and she, our darling mother, When the is gone, who then shall guide �86 > THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. , Tho little feet, and teach them how too walk tho path, Tho long, rough way, which Icadcth on Through briars and thorns, and over giant hills, to ond In life immortal ? When tho wandering one, Footsore, and weary of tho world’s rough strife, Tho careless crowd, whoso cold indifference Or callous selfishness fulls heavily upon tho sinking heart, With faltering footsteps homoward comes, —to whoso breast Save mother’s can ho turn for sympathy, and fool Sure of a welcome ? ■> What can ease tho aching brow, And calm tho throbbing nerves, like tho soft touch Of moMwVgentle hand? Who, with patient, novor-ccasing care, Prepare tho soothing draught, or smooth tho pillow soft, Anticipating every want, and never thinking onco of self, Do everything that mortal can to ease tho tired And poevish sufferer ? A thousand tender offices Which strangers think not of, a mother’s heart remembers, And her willing hands perform. Tho erring ohild Whoso foot, unhappily, have wandered from tho straight And narrow lino of duty and of right, — who like a mother Can touch tho hidden springs of fooling, and from forbidden fields Bring tho stray lamb back to tho fold again ? Nay, death; wo cannot'spare Our mother ! Ours is a loving family, and each is dear Unto tho other’s heart; in joy and caro wo’vo over dwelt together; But mother’s Z<n>e,‘and mother’s care, is tho koystono to tho aroh Of our homo comfort. Sister, brother, friend, wo love them all, Yet, when God calls them homo, and wo awako To a full sense of all tho cares and sufferings they’ve loft Behind, and all tho peace and joy and glory of This heavenly homo, ’tis not so hard to say, ‘ 0 God, Thy will bo done! ’ But of our gentle mother Our selfish heart cries out, ‘ Wo need her most; Euro God hath other angels who can sing his praiso In heaven; others can bo bettor spared to rest within tho grave. Without her watchful caro, her loving kindness, and Her charming presence, we all should be naught. We cannot spare her yot. True, wo know that Ho Who died that wo might live eternally, is able To supply our wants, and grant us needful strength In tho hour of trial; but on all the earth There’s naught that's equal to a mother’s love, And wo are weak and feeble; so our hearts Shrink from tho trial hour, and so our prayer is, And shall bo, 1 Spare pur mother ! ’ «M L. G.” Who believes that a female in her right mind would wander far into the i ! I ■ �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 87 lonely forest and. there, all alone, stay and starve, or, in any way, put an end to existence? But in her last days, hours, or moments (for none can tell how long she remained there before death ensued), no eye but God saw her; no human hand was present to administer comfort; no human tongue to soothe or speak words of comfort or sympathy; no heart to share with her the anguish of that awful hour. There is no human testimony to show what her condition mentally was in those last hours, or in what manner, or from what immediate cause she died. If she died by her own hands, then no further proof of her mental derangement is wanting. Several years ago, under the pressure of poor health, with the loss of friends, she showed partial insanity or aberration of mind, which, no doubt, led her mind in a mysterious direction, not comprehended by herself after the shadow had passed off. I have referred to her condition of mind, or the signs of temporary mental derangement, the probable result of severe mental labor, combined with physical and nervous debility. I have not referred to this, her mental condition of mind, to heap censure upon those who dealt with her in her trouble on the Hill, making them appear more culpable in this matter. Gladly I would have avoided this, but duty to the character of the innoceut dead forbids that I should pass over it in silence. As far as the responsibility of the actors in this cruel affair is concerned, I would willingly admit that she was rationally guilty of all she had been charged with, in as aggravated a form as those who have been interested to exculpate the actors from blame, by magnifying her misdeeds, have attempted to fix it, and there leave it with the sound judg­ ment and intelligence of every lover of justice, mercy, aud forbearance, to say whether, after the proof of her good character aud standing through twenty-two years, spent in virtue’s path, aud after a prompt confession of 'the wrong, aud full restoration, those who had a knowledge of the state of mind to which their rigid examination and the consciousness of the act had reduced her, were not responsible and censurable for the lack of feel­ ing and fatal indifference 'that were manifested. I bad almost forgotten to take notice of the charge brought agaiust Louise of having in her possession a skeletou key. Dr. T. says: “ For three years she had kept a skeleton key, opening all of the students’ rooms.” I have no knowledge that eitherhe or any one connected with the institution ever stated that she ever used this key for any purpose whatever. . Still, ftoin this fact being made so prominent, the public might infer that she had done so ; and it seems that it was so intended that the public should so under­ stand it. Professor Kobinson does not say,‘as T. does, “ opening all the students’ rooms,” but “ that she had in her possession, for two years, �88 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. a false key, which would open most of the students’ room in the college.” Louise, jn her last testimony, says: “A skeleton key, given me years ago, I had, that looked as though I might have used it wrongfully. God knows my heart, I never did.” To her sister she writes: “ You know the skeleton key I have long had, — that told against me ; but after all I do not think they believed I opened rooms with it, for the purpose of taking out things. I certainly never did.’’ It appears evident that, while they were accusing her of taking everything that had been lost through the term (as she writes), they accused her of opening students’ rooms with it, for the purpose of taking out things. Or what does she mean by saying, “But after all,” etc.? (after they did ac­ cuse her of using it for the purpose of taking things, and tried to impress upon her mind that they believed it.) But she still thought that they did not really believe their own accusation true. I have before me what the receiver certifies to be a true copy of a letter from Professor Robinson, of the date, and from which I have made some extracts. I will now quote further from this letter, and let the reader judge of the truth and the logic therein expressed : “ With reference to the sad case of Miss Greene, and the reports circulated about Mr. Torsey, let me say, first, that Mr. T. is no more implicated in the matter than the other members of the faculty, and if there were any blame, it ought to fall equally on us all.” (Well, if R. wishes to say to the public that brother-in-law Torsey’s standing and influence is worth more than all the rest of this fac■ ulty, and they wish to shoulder equal shares of his load, so be it.) I can only say, it may look rather- hard for Mrs. Grover, one of the faculty, who said at the close.of that faculty meeting: “ That was the first time that she had heard the particulars. I would have been glad to have befriended her if I had known it.” Was this fair or just to Mrs. Grover, who had nothing to do in the matter, and did not a week after know the particulars? Was it fair to say that she was equally and, as much to blame as Miss Case, who did all she could to accuse, convict, and impress -the crime on my poor child, and left her alone the night before she left? R. further says: “But on reviewing the matter, even in the light of the sad result, I can find noth­ ing worthy of blame. Had we Imown that she would have taken her own life, we might, although we had no lawful right to do so without a warrant from a justice, have put her in close confinement; but even then, if she had determined to commit suicide, she could have found some way to accom­ plish her purpose.” Is this sound logic — rational argument—or is it sophistry ? It seems to me the learned professor must have presumed much on the simple credulity of the person addressed to advance such ideas to I 1 * �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN.. J. 89 make his case appear justifiable. It is an argument Letter adapted to im­ pose on female credulity than to meet the gaze of a reasoning public. Where is the school-boy, so dull and void of the power of invention, that could not devise some means to provide for the safety of a feeble, distract­ ed woman, only for a few hours, without resorting to a justice warrant? But even that course would have merit, rather than suffer her to stray away to wandering or to death. And who would think of quibbling on “ lairful rights” in such an emergency? “In the light of the sad result” we are told that had they known she would have taken her own life, they could not have done differently, could not have prevented it. Is this faculty willing to proclaim that to the world, to the fathers and mothers of this State, to those who send their children there? Is that what you mean when, in your catalogue, you say, “ Parents may feel assured that their sons and daugh­ ters will find here a safe and pleasant home”? I put this question square to you, Mr. Robinson: Were this your child, and our.situations reversed, would you, sir, be satisfied, after I bad known and’ taught your child for five years, as you have mine, to have me proclaim to you that had I known your child would have wandered far away and died, and her remains have wasted away before you had found her; and when you had gathered up her bones, and, in great sorrow and anguish, bad laid them in the grave, and life had become dreaiy and tiresome on account of the loss of your dear one, would you be satisfied for me to proclaim : “ Had I known all before, I could not have done anything differently,’done anything to have prevent­ ed so awful a result ” ? You would then see your miserable, contemptible logic in its true light, and would be ashamed of it. Are this faculty, who publicly announce the ability and talent, the intellectual capacity, to edu­ cate and give moral tone to the character of the youth of our State, pre­ pared to acknowledge to the public .that they did not possess the power of mind, the intellectual energy, the means sufficient, to have invented, organ­ ized, and put in operation some plan to have saved my child, if they had known the sad result of their neglect? — that they could not have listened to the proposition and advice of Miss Reed and the desire of Chestilia to follow her ? That, in all probability, would have saved her. Professor R.’s argument is this to the parents who send their children to that school: “ If they get into trouble, and are driven to despair by their own acts or ours, and we know they intend to commit suicide, we can invent no means 'to prevent them.” The extract I have quoted was doubtless meant for the private ear, to be breathed from private to private, till the circle partbok of a public nature. I place this acknowledgment before the public. If it bo true, the faculty have the benefit of it; if false, I am not responsible for it. �90 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. But it shows my position well taken and sustained, that my daughter could and ought to have been saved. The idea is preposterous that she could not have been safely detained on the Hill till I 'could have been sent for. Or, if Mr. Hamman had been advised, or, perhaps I ought to say, permit­ ted, to follow her at the time he said he would, I think she would have been saved. From the fact that R. says they could not have detained her with­ out a warrant, it is evident they had withdrawn all control over her, and “ practically ” expelled her from the school. Only nine days before this she asked leave, to go up to Chestina’s room in the evening, to see her mother and do some necessary copying, and it was refused her by Miss Case, when she knew her mother was there. The poor girl came running up the next morning, before she left, to explain why she did not come up the evening before, as her mother wished. This was the last time her mother ever saw her, and that writing she wanted her to copy will remain undone forever, as it was so faded that no one could make it out but her. They then could and did control her. But nine days after Torsey makes his miserable excuse. Robinson, in that letter, continues : “ She said that she could not remain on the Hill. She knew that it was impossible to keep the matter from the students. No intimation was given her that she must leave the school, that she could not graduate; but, on the contrary, Mr. Torsey expressly said to her that if she left, it would not be on account of any action of the faculty, but of her own choice.” Mr. Robinson was present in that faculty meeting and knows that Mr. T., in giving us an account of hei’ leaving, did not state it as he has here. He heard Torsey tell us thp.t he advised hey to go home. Will he, R. or T., say, that if L. had complied with this advice, and gone home, they expected her to come back and graduate? Robinson also heard Dr. T. distinctly tell us that L. said she could not go home ; that she could not meet her folks. Why was she saying this to Torsey if he had given her no inti­ mation about leaving, and T.’s telling us, that he told L. if she did go away he would hold her diploma and at the end of a certain time she could write him, and, if she did satisfy him that she had lived a good honest life, he would send her diploma to her? He, R., knows that he has misrepresented what Torsey told us; also he has misrepresented what L. says about the clothing, in those letters R. had seen. Hear her: “ If I could have had an opportunity to retrieve the past on the Hill; ” which shows that she desired an opportunity that was denied her. “ ‘ Dr. Torsey informed me* this morning that I had better leave to-day, ‘ not expulsion,’ he said ; ‘ we won’t call it that, but I advise you to go home.’ ” And when Chestina asked him if she could not have stayed and graduated, hear’ his answer’: �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. M 91 “ Well, no; it would not have been best for her to have gone on to the stage.” It was all fixed in his mind that she should not graduate; and he speaks of it as a thing that had passed; “ have been,” in the past tense, is his answer to her sister. He had determined the case in his mind, but smooths it down a little to C., and says, “ It would not have been best; ” his determination is clearly seen in this answer to Chestina. Miss Reed says Dr. T., told me that when he asked L. what she proposed to do, she replied, “ I want it kept from the school; stay, and graduate.” Robinson overlooks all those statements, and in the early part of this letter says, “ Miss Greene acknowledged that she had taken several articles that did not belong to her; also that she had taken money.” He has evidently con­ nected the clothing and money together, so as to give the person addressed to understand, that she confessed that she had stolen several articles as well as the money. If he intended to state facts, why did he not say she had lost many things in the wash, and said she took those in their stead? In her letter, she says, “ When I came to the college I brought many un­ marked articles of clothing, some new ones, and when I missed things from the wash I took others, unmarked, from the table, and used them. But if my own had not come by the close of the term, I should have left those where I found them, in the wash.” This letter R. heard read in that faculty meeting. She further says, in the letter’ to her sister, “For every garment I had.taken, I had lost one in the wash, and put those on in their stead. I had no intention of stealing them.” The reader can but see the gross injustice done her in this professor’s statement. I have already sufficiently shown that, “ her own choice,” of which R. speaks, was similar to the choice she had years before of remaining in Dr. T.’s house, after he had said, “ Miss Greene, you will please leave the house 1 ” Prof. R. further says, “ As soon as Dr. T. learned that she had gone contrary to her promise without the knowl­ edge of her sister, he immediately sent a student with the sister to Mr. Greene to inform him of the circumstances and to urge him to meet Louise at Lewiston. He had no idea, nor any one of the faculty, that she would take her life.” I have already shown, by Dr. T.’s own letter to me, that L. never made the promise here stated. How “ immediately ” a student with the sister was sent to mo may be seen by reference to the sworn statement of that sister. Louise left in the morning stage and reached Lewiston by noon, and it was six at night before this team started to notify me, although Miss Reed and Chestina urged immediate action, and stated plainly to Torsey that it was their belief that she would destroy herself be­ fore night. A wilful misrepresentation by R. Would he have called, fl’om ten in the morning until six at night, or from noon until six, immediately, if �92 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. this was his child, and then sent twenty-five miles to me, which is thirtyfive miles from Lewiston, making sixty to be travelled by private team be­ fore I could get to where they knew she had gone, when twenty-fire miles by team would have taken them to Lewiston ? A more miserable arrange. ment could not have been thought of. Mr. Robinson, wofully misrepre­ sents “ facts,” when he says, Torsey immediately sent a student with the sister to Mr. Greene to inform him of the circumstances, and to urge him to meet Louise at Lewiston. I hold the letter (sent by Mr. Chandler the student, who came home with Chestina) in my hand. There is not a word of information contained in that letter as to where Louise had gone, or a word of advice as to what I could or had better do to try to save, or re­ cover her; the word Lewiston is not written in that letter, neither did Mr. Chandler or Chestina bring or deliver any word from Dr. Torsey as to when or what we had better do, or that we had better do anything to try to save or recover her. The whole gist of that letter was this, — I in that long talk with L. urged her to go to Jesus, to you, and to her mother, and tell you all, and that you would forgive her; and that Chestina will make explanations and give information concerning Louise. Had Chestina and Hamman, or some other persons been immediately sent to Lewiston, she very likely would have been found at the Elm House, and been saved. Or, had a team been sent forthwith to me, I might have arrived in the vicinity of Lewiston in season to have discovered and saved her. This matter of accusation commenced on Monday the 21st; and through to the close my daughter was in the deepest trouble and excitement; and . not until Wednesday, in the middle hours of that night, was I notified. She was accused on Monday, tried on Tuesday, sentenced on Wednesday morning, and advised to leave (expelled, they so understood it) and go home ; and before I was notified of any trouble, on the third day, perhaps, her troubled spirit was in eternity. Is there any wonder that I feel aggrieved? — that tears flow thick and fast as I write ? Is there not a cause ? I have had. four daughters for a longer or shorter period at that institution, at about fifteen hundred dollars’ expense. Setting aside all claims, and feelings, and rights, even of hu­ manity (religion should not be named here, for it would be a disgrace to speak of it in connection with this whole transaction), would not common civility, the honor and respect due from man to man, lead me to expect, had it been my dog, instead of my child, that I should be notified before he was unceremoniously kicked from that institution ? , I placed her there under their promise that she should there find a “ safe and pleasant home.” I had a right to expect that those under whose com JI I j 1 ii �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 93 trol I had placed er, would be her guardians, protectors, and friends; and although “ of age,” that their protecting care would not be withdrawn until they bad returned her, or notified me, and I had time to have reached her. I was responsible, and they looked to me for her expenses. What­ ever might have been her crime, their responsibility and obligations would have been increased. She should have had time to have consulted her friends, and a full investigation had, before any intimation was given her as to what the result would be about graduating. They were bound by every consideration to extend to her paternal care and protection. Where, among my readers, is the parent or guardian, whose ward or off­ spring should leave his premises, as my daughter left Kent’s Hill, self­ disrobed of everything of seeming value in life, — self-disrobed, as it were, for the shrine of death, — who would wait inidlc unconcern and indifference for eight long hours before moving in any direction for the safety of the wanderer, and then move in such direction that sixty miles should lie between the loved one in peril and him who might seek to be the pre­ server ? What parent would not have immediately followed in the shortest direction, to save from so terrible a fate, if possible ? Would doubts of any parent, in such a case, influence indecision and delay? Should a child of any parent fall into the hands of a stranger for only a few days, in such a case, and he should not look after her safety, should you not consider him recreant to duty, and false to the principles of humanity? Can you think of any sect of people anywhere, civil or otherwise, where she would have fared any worse than she did at this religious institution ? It does seem remarkable and strange, while students were so forcibly impressed with the idea that L. would destroy herself, that ’Dr. T., or as R. says, an}' of the faculty, should have no such idea! Appearances were convincing to students, and their logic was correct. A portion of the faculty, with the best of opportunities of judging and forming a correct opinion, discovered nothing convincing, to excite suspicion; no idea, no fears of such a result. Before Prof. R. closes this letter, he says: “ I know a great many false reports have been circulated about Dr. Torsey, but those who know Dr. T. will not believe them. I am glad that you still feel an interest in the reputation of the school, and of your old teachers, and that you wish to correct, as far as you may, these false reports.” Then this is the object of your long string of statements, Mr. R., that you fear for the reputation of the school, and Dr. Torsey’s, that you put forth such wretched misrepresentations and call them facts I How many important facts have you suppressed to damage my daugh­ ter’s side of the case, and to clear the faculty? He says, “ Miss Greene �94 ■ THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. acknowledged that she had taken several articles that did not belong to her." But he does not give her the benefit of the simple explanation, that they were taken from the wash, or that she had lost four times as many articles. Others quote from her letters to show her guilt and crime, with­ out a word of explanation. Is this fair or just? They adopt these quotations as truth, to throw the blame all on her, and to exonerate the faculty, without giving her the benefit of her own dying explanation. And here I would say, that both law and sound reason will forbid those who quote from her confession, in those letters, and adopt as true such portions as they choose ; they are estopped in denying the truth of the whole. Prof. R. closes his epistle to his correspondent as follows, — “ God, who knows our hearts, knows that we have no feeling of harsh­ ness or severity towards Louise, nor of vindictiveness towards her friends. Our feelings were all pity and sympathy for her, and only pity for her unhappy friends.” Thus attempting to give force to those remarkable • “facts” which he had stated, by clinching them in the name of religion and Almighty God. The reader will judge of the pity and sympathy that were manifested, from the stern facts which transpired at the time. Was there much pity and sympathy manifested, after every means, seemingly, had been em­ ployed, to bring her mind to believe she had sunk to rise no more, — that she had committed a heinous offence, that could never be forgiven by God or man, — to leave her in her own room alone, through that solitary night, to pace it in lonely wakefulness till morn, forsaken, as it seemed to her, by God and man? “I tried to read my Bible last night,” she says, “but I couldn’t. I don’t believe I shall ever pray again, except to say ‘ Father, forgive me ; ’ and he will not hear. The Saviour is an iron door, I think, to me ; shut, bolted.” Was it strange, in her bewildered and excited state of mind, if the logical powers of those in whose opinion she had been taught to confide had been exerted to impress on her mind the enormity of her crime, that this idea should take possession of her deranged mind? While she was thus walking her room alone, could those who, the day previous, had investigated, even to the linen on ‘her body, to find the mark, and must know the deplorable state of her mind, rest in quiet slumber, and call this sympathy and pity ? Who would crave such ? “ Mi-. Schwaglerl said to me this morning, ‘ Remember your Saviour.’ I have been saying it over all the way here.” The only thing, it would appear, that had been said to her, which she A u 1 il r fl �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 95 could “ say over,” remember, or repeat, It was the only thing said to her for which she desired to return thanks. “ I thank him for that, always. Mary Chapman, you tell him so.” With all the pity and sympathy in their hearts, of which R. speaks, 57010 there no kind words spoken by any of the faculty to soothe and comfort her, which in her mind she could say over in her desponding moments while on this solitary travel ? No kind words spoken by them in their pity and deep sympathy worthy of her last thanks? Would she have forgotten them, and remembered Mr. Schwaglerl’s only, had such been spoken-? Yet she complains not, nor speaks ill of any one. She was not in the habit of so doing. Her disposition was not to rail, or find fault with others. As a school-mate of hers writes, under date of Oct. 25, 18GG : — “ It seems as though words were a mockery, when speaking of our sister Louise, and the wrongs done her. I never heard her speak ill of any one but Dr. Torsey. Oh! if she could have known what a wrong he would have done her, how much more she would have disliked him! ” It is possible Prof. R. might be right, asserting as a “ fact,” that he had no feelings but pity and sympathy for Louise; but how he could assert understandingly, and have the assurance to call his Maker to witness the truth of assertions respecting the feelings of others, is not so easy to understand. He was not present at that very “ private investigation,” or at that long conversation T. had with Louise the morning she left. Had he been present at those conversations and investigations, he could better have judged their feelings and treatment of her; but then it would have been presumptive to have asserted positively, with an appeal to God for the truth of his statement. If their feelings were all pity and sympathy, then I must say, they had a strange way of showing it. I cannot believe his assertions, neither do others. A correspondent, writing from Kent’s Hill under date of Dec. 31, 1866, among other things, writes as follows: — “ I have buried those that were dear as life, and it was hard to give them up, and consign them to the silent grave ; but God took them in his own time, and I have no right to murmur. When we have affliction come upon us in an aggravated form., it is hard to reconcile our minds to it. How could I? ‘ Woe unto them by whom offence cometh.’ “ My mind is the same now that it ever has been, with regard to your daughter; that is, she was shamefully wronged by those that should have been her friends in the hour of trial. If her friends had all been as truo as Miss Reed, there would have been no trouble, I think. Although I was �96 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. not personally acquainted with your daughter, I have ever heard her spoken of in the highest terms, until she left the Hill.” This was not an isolated expression of opinion among those who were conversant witli affairs on Kent’s Hill at that time. In a letter, dated Jan. G, 1867, I find the following expressions ; — “ I don’t care what Mrs. Daggett says, I know the students all loved Louise, — all that knew her; and the old students that were at the Hill last Exhibition, did not enjoy themselves one bit, they felt so bad about her; and many of them only stayed one night at the Hill. I don’t wonder that you think so hard of the teachers. If it were me, I should be more bitter than you are. I am not afraid to tell any one that I blame them ; not even Dr. Torsey himself.” In no communication that I had seen, either from students, or from any person living on Kent’s Hill, or from any of the faculty, directed to me or to any other person during those five years, was one word written against the character of Louise previous to that sad affair. On the 20th of March, 18G7, Torsey wrote to another person, in which he puts in an insinuating slur about a report he says was in circulation about L. I, or the person written to, have not, from that day to the present, heard a sound from any other person about the report he named. This is the only solitary ease where a word even of insinuation against her character, up to the present time, have I seen written; or heard a word spoken against her character previous to the last fatal affair. This foreshadows what Torsey may yet attempt to do. As fear or favoritism is I think the ruling passion on Kent’s Hill, it will be readily perceived, that while surrounded by this influence, and the sub­ ordinate position, and the danger of giving offence, many would naturally hesitate, before voluntarily giving expression to their real, convictions. Yet, I find all the expressions of opinions that have been ventured, as far as I know, coming from students, with one or two exceptions, blame Torsey and the others that had to do with her in that affair; meaning also to except that committee of students’ actions, and those who really did indorse them. And here I ought to say, that a large portion of the old students who knew L. so well, had left the school, and many new and young students had taken their places. And, als.o, I do know, that some of the old students did not attend chapel exercises on May 7th, the night that those resolutions were adopted. This may have been one of the causes of Dr. Torsey’s “ pimps and 0 ( 4 j ! L = = �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. * spies ” attack on Miss Reed, and his close watch after, and to see the com­ munications she received from me. In answer to a request of the town clerk of Peru, for a statement of Louise’s character, as she understood it to be at that school, previous to this last affair, for publication, one of her class writes as follows, under ,te of Dec. 21, 1866 : ” — “ I would gladly comply with your request, if it would in any tray benefit our departed class-mate; and I am willing to do much to alleviate the sorrows which oppress her bereaved parents. Such a statement as yon propose may accomplish the latter, and it may seem a trivial act compara­ tively in behalf of her I loved; yet I must refuse, at the risk of being misunderstood by so doing. Such a publicity cannot benefit poor Louise, and may reflect upon the officers and institution at Kent’s Hill.” She was not requested to give a statement of good or bad character, but such as she understood it to be. If that statement had been bad, it would not have alleviated our sorrow, and would it have reflected upon the officers and institution? We have here by inference that it must have been a statement of her good character. I would remind this class-mate of that sentiment, “ Truth crushed to earth will rise again.” I will now notice how that “ pity for her unhappy friends,” of which Robinson writes, was manifested. While I was searching for our lost / child, overwhelmed with trouble, anguish of mind, and awful -suspense, absent from my family most of the time, which on account of this terrible shock were in a condition to need all my care and attention, all sorts of reports were in circulation, and continually reaching my ears, of what Louise had done, and what had been said about her at Kent’s Hill, — all tending to disturb, distress, and harass my almost distracted mind, and that of my family. To know the truth of one of the reports in circulation, I wrote to Dr. T. as follows: — “ Peru, June 27, 18GG. “ Dr. Torset : Sir, — Nearly five weeks spent in the search,—I can find no reliable trace of her, our dear lost one. Is it a fact that Louise has all the way along, ever since she first came to your school, been thieving? Tell us all, I beg of you. It conics to us that you have said so. “ Yours respectfully, Jonas Greene.” The reader will notice that I did not ask him what he had said, but begged of him to tell us all the facts relative to her thieving. To this letter I received the following answer: — 7 �98 • f*" THE CROWN WON’ BUT NOT WORN. “ Kents Hill, June 30, 186G. Mr. Greene, — I have not made the statement you name in your letter. Have you directly or indirectly said we expelled Louise from the school ? Have you in substance said, our reason for expelling her was because she would not join the church? Have you said that her taking clothing, etc., was named to the school at prayers, or at the,table? Have you ever denied ' she took money? Have you said she took but two or three articles of clothing in exchange for what she had lost? Have you said that any of the officers of the institution have sanctioned the,exchange of clothing in lhe way you say Louise exchanged? Such reports as these may oblige us to state the facts publicly.” [After stating the charges against L., which appear in an extract in the first part of this work, he closes as follows “She was not expelled, and no intimation was given to her that she would be. The matter was never alluded to before the school. “Yours truly, • “H. P. Torsey.” He does not answer my one simple question, but catechises me in a string of half a dozen interrogatories, clinching them with a threat to make the matter public, in order (as I believed) to frighten me into silence. He did not answer my question (as it is seen by the mass of evidence herein pre­ sented),, as he should and could have done in four words, ‘ No, she has not." But here can plainly be seen, this sly, low, cunning, wiry, wicked man, in his true light. He takes this opportunity (in my greatest trial, weighed down almost in despair, tired and weak in body and mind) to make the most he could of this_ circumstance, and leaves it open for me to infer that he could say so (that she had been thieving all along), if I pro­ voked him. I commenced to answer this very pitying and sympathizing letter; but some new information caused me to leave home again, in a hurry, to continue my search, and I did not finish it. When I returned home, I found another of those missives, directed by that feeling of pity of which Prof. R. speaks, which reads as follows : — “ Kent's Hill, July 11, 18G6. “Mr. Greene,— Is it true that you told Mr. White, of Buckfield, that Louise simply exchanged clothes, — her case brought before the school,— she charged with falsehood, and expelled at once ? And what story did your wife report at Mr. Perly’s, at Livermore? If you are circulating such reports, it seems to me unfortunate to Louise and yourself. You know she . stole money, and can find no one that will tell you I ever brought the ' �TITE CROWN WON BUT KOT WOBN. ■ / 99 matter before the school. If you do not think any of these things against L. are true, you can have all these and other matters pertaining to her character, or your relation to this affair, legally established or refuted, by bringing a case of libel or slander, followed on our part by a prosecution for malicious prosecution and for slander. “ Yours, “ H. P. Torset.” In former times, when my purse was open to the claims of that institu­ tion, letters came from him to my address with some title, as is the custom of the day ; but these came simply to “Jonas Greene,” — pity having dis­ robed my name of even Mr. prefixed. At that time the accusations against L. had been made as public as was the fact of her disappearance ; and they were exaggerated as they floated from car to ear, or were magnified when first set afloat. To-these were added in their circulation base scandal, vile insinuations, at which the very dust of my injured daughter might blush. This being the case, I could not conceive how the circulation of such re" ports as T. named, whether true or false, could be any more unfortunate to L., unless it was meant that I should understand that there was something worse to bring to the public ear than had been put in circulation by private tongues. This hinting at, advising, or threatening a double lawsuit, this talk about libels, prosecutions, and slander, while with aching head and heart I was hunting day and night for our loved child, whose remains lay decom­ posing in the lonely forest, did not sound to me at that time much like the sympatliizing voice of 4 pitying friend. Such friends you, kind reader, under like circumstances, would desire to be few and far between. The second and last letter which I have written to Dr. T., was in answer to the two which I have noticed, and is as follows : — “ Peru, August 29, 1866. “Dr. Torset: Sir,—Your refusal to answer the one question I asked you, in my letter of June 27, puts me under no obligation to answer your various questions of the 30th of June. My whole time having been spent, from Maj- 2-1 to the 1st of July, in search of our dear lost one, I had no time to properly answer 'it until I received yours of July 11. The spirit and address of those letters were such, coming to me in such an awful state of mind, and under such terrible trouble. — the terribly distresseel state of my whole family, the pressing care of my family after being absent from them so long, — under such circumstances, I did not feel disposed to an­ swer them then. �100 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. “ I have not said you expelled her because she would not join the church; never have said that the taking of clothing was named to her at prayers or • at the table; have never denied her taking money; have never named the number of articles she took in exchange. I know nothing about the officers of your school sanctioning the exchange of clothing, except what a student told me. I have said what he told me. I never told Mr. White, of Buckfield,'what you asked me if I did. You say she was not expelled. What did you say to her about leaving the school? Did you, or did you not tell Louise that she had better leave that day (May 23), and go home? An answer is requested. “ Yours respectfully, “ Jonas Greene.” r* He (T.) has never answered this question ; its truth he wishes to evade. I have taken copies of every letter I have written him, at the time, and since he turned her out of his house, and the reader can see how much cause, if any, I have given him, that he should write me those insulting letters, before named. They can judge as well as I, for I have laid before’ the public all and eveiy word I have written him ; and you can but bear witness that I have held my temper well, and written him respectfully. I desired to give him no cause, but to see how far he, with his malignity, would go. I received but one piore letter from him, which was dated Oc­ tober 29, 18G6, after .her remains were found, — his logic false, that she was • going into the factory, running away, or going to other bad places, as has been insinuated. “Mr. Greene,—You'and I are to face each other at the judgment-day. It will then be known who is responsible for Louise’s awful death. It will then be known who'is wrong and who has been wronged. In view of that day I again say, I in no way referred to the matter before the school in her presence or absence, nor named it to individuals. When Miss Case named the matter to me, I requested her to say nothing of it. I did not tell L. she could not graduate. I told her the trustees voted the diplomas, and I would be her friend in the matter. I spoke only of any time of her leav­ ing when she had decided to go home that day. 'She was not willing to see you here. I had no unkind -feeling towards'her; nothing but deep sorrow at what had occurred) “ Yours, “H. P. Torsey.” ■ �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 101 Whether this was intended as his letter of condolence to me, I am un nle to say; but it does look more like an attempt to acquit himself from ■ zlame, by hasp insinuations, and his denials of what all the circumstances and surroundings, with her written declarations, and other evidences, sus­ tain, than sympathy for the sad and final result. This is his third written denial to me that he had not referred to the matter before the school, when I had never accused him of so doing, and had written him so. “ I did not tell L. she could not graduate.” What difference did it make to her whether he told her she was expelled, or that he said, “We won’t call it expulsion; but I advise you to go home to-day.” (A slimsy dodge, in­ deed.) He here says, “I told her the trustees voted the diplomas, and I would be her friend.” As much as to say, I will be her friend to try to obtain from the trustees her diploma. When he distinctly told us, in that faculty meeting, that “ if she did go away, I would hold her diploma. She could write me in six months, or a year, and if she did then satisfy me of her good behavior, or good conduct, he would send her diploma to her.” There was no trouble then but what he could do as he pleased with her diploma (which she knew was about made out before she left), which no doubt he holds to this day. Again he says, “ I spoke only of any time of her leaving when she had decided to go home that day.” If this be true, why did he tell and repeat over again and again in that faculty meeting, that she, all in tears, told him (at his request or advice to go home) she could not go home. She could not meet her parents. As to his assertion that he had no unkind feelings towards her, nothing but deep sorrow, with all the evidence of his prejudice and conduct towards her for the last two years which she remained on the Hill, herein produced, I will leave an intelligent reading public to judge of the correctness of his assertions. HER PIETY DOUBTED. Dr. T. says that he had lost confidence in her religious character. If that is so, I can only say that it appears by the memorandum in her diary, her letters, and what she had told us, that she long since came to a worse conclusion as to his Christian character. She had long believed him de­ ceptive and void of true Christian piety. His opinion might be founded on prejudice, as I have already shown that it existed. A school-mate writes to-Louise, April 29, 1865, and among other things says: “ The gist of the whole matter is, Dr. Torsey has found out that you are shrewder than he ; therefore you can expect but little forbearance from the teachers. The whole course of reasoning, when sifted down, resolves �102 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. itself into that.” In speaking of the matter of religion, another school­ mate writes: “ I am glad you spoke freely with the venerable doctor. How much did he hear from others? I read that part of your letter to my dear friend, Miss G. She said she thought interfering with religion most too much for him to attend to, especially on hearing her say she has taught fifteen years, and had never heard of such school discipline.” None but God knows the depth of piety in the heart of Dr. T. or my daughter. We can judge of the tree only by its fruit. The first evidence we have of her religious tendency, and Christian faith and hope, is a letter dated at Kent’s Hill, May 4, 1862, addressed to her “ dear mother,” in which she speaks of the death of her teacher, Prof. Scott, in the most touching terms, as an excellent man, a kind teacher, who had suddenly passed away. She there unfolds to her mother, that she had for a long time tried to love and serve God ; had not had strength to publicly proclaim the fact; but that she then had resolved to bear the cross. “I love God” (she says), “and know that he will give me strength to do my duty, aud lean on Jesus, and pray God to deliver me from temptation, and keep me from evil; and may I spend my days in his service.” She afterward wrote her mother, asking her if she should join the class or speak in meeting, when she did not feel it a duty to do so. She said the}' tell her there that she could not be a Christian without she did so. Her mother wrote her that she alone was accountable to her God for the performance of such duties; and it was uot for her, or auy of the teachers, or Dr. Torsey, to dictate to her what these duties should be. The hard things which I ha^e heretofore stated that some of the faculty had said to her, had so wounded her feelings that she could not consistently go to social meetings and take a part in them on the Hill. She said she had no freedom in them. At the first of the term, in December, 1865, hei' sisteiEstelle went to the school, and was boarding with Louise in the Packard house. This was soon after Estelle had made a profession of religion. As Estelle was getting ready to go to the first class-meeting for the term, she said to Louise, “ Are you not going to meeting?” L. said, “ I cannot go,” and began to weep. She afterward told Estelle that the reason -was that it was said by some of the faculty, she went to gain the regards of a certain gentleman; and that one of them had said it made him mad to see her at class-meeting after she had said “ darned fool; ” or at least she had been told that it was so. But still they were finding fault with her because she did not go to their meetings more. On the 23d of December, 1866, Louise and Estelle were sent for in the night to come home, which they did on the 2 'th, in season to witness the death of their youngest brother, seven & * �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. f 103 years old. He was buried on the 27th; he died the 25th. In Louise’s memoranda I find, December 25, 1865, this entry: “At a piiirter past three, A. M., God let him go, our dear mother’s Christmas gift, to God. Mother has quite given up, and seems unlike her own brave self. 27th. We all went to prayer-meeting, and God there took away my cross. I had always dreaded speaking in meeting. To-night, for the first time, I .could not wait till it came my turn, till the minister was done. A new and joy­ ful state of mind for me, truly ! I stayed with Abby to-night, and for the first time found strength to pray aloud. How I dread going back to K. IL, where now I cannot consistently go to social meetings and be an actor therein! I’m resolved to be an active Christian, out of meetings, with God’s help.” Why she speaks of God’s letting him go, was because he in his last hours suffered greatly, breathing so he could be heard all over the house, and it was relief to us when his suffering was over. That this record is true, as far as Mrs. Newton is mentioned, I will let her testify. “Peru, J/arc7i 15, 1867. “ I, Abby G. Newton, wife of W. S. Newton, who live close to Mr. Greene, hereby certify that Miss M. Louise Greene stopped ovei' night with me on the 27th or 28th of December, 1865, my husband being absent. She (L.) read in the Bible, and then prayed with me, and talked about a Christian life and the future state. Iler talk was of a high order, coming from a gifted mind. It made a lasting impression on my mind. This was the last time that I saw' her. . “ Abby G. Newton.” December 28th she has this entry: “ To-morrow we go; and then from morning till night mother will be all alone.” I did go with her and Estelle, on the 29th, to the Hill, and poor Louise never returned. December 30th she has the record : “ Father went home this morning, but not until he knelt down and prayed with me. The first prayer I ever heard him make; the first prayer he ever heard me make. We shall not forget them.” This was all true ; she prayed when I was done. “ December 31, Sunday. Sermon, P. M., on recognition of friends in heaven, Matthew’ viii. 11, by Rev. John Caldwell, of Hallowell. Every word seemed meant for me. I could not re­ frain from tears. It stirred up nobler thoughts than I believed myself capable of thinking.” As all her writings of which we have any knowledge or means of know­ ing the facts therein written we know to be true, we have good reason to believe that all her other writings are equally true. As there seems to bo �104 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. a disposition manifested by her accusers at the Hill to attack her at every point, I have felt compelled to make it clear and plain that her memoran­ da and her other writings were reliable, and that she possessed the power of memory to quote verbatim the language which she had recently heard. In a lengthy letter of several sheets, written to her mother, we have the substance of that beautiful sermon, referred to before, of December 31. In quotations written out from memory, in her copy-book, she has almost en­ tire lectures written from memory after she had returned from the place where they were delivered. In her other writings she often speaks of things ' as they transpired at Kent’s Hill. She there tells of a long interview and lecture from Dr. T., which I have laid before my readers, and we believe every word of it correct and true in substance. I believe the same of her last letter. I have before alluded to Dr. T.’s telling us that L. said we were hard, proud, and unforgiving, especially her mother. I have no means of knowing the truth of this statement of the doctor, but must repeat, if true, it shows conclusively to me that her mind was in a bewildered state. No mother and daughter ever exercised towards each other more intimate confi­ dence, love, and kindness than did they. I will give a letter, written by L. to her mother, to show, in a measure, her feelings. It was written at Kent’s Hill, December 23, 1865, the evening before the messenger arrived to bring them home on account of the dangerous illness of her brother: — o “ Saturday Evening, December 23. “ Mr darling Mother, —We had a letter from Chestina to-night, and after reading it I felt like, writing to you. No mail can go till Mon­ day. How I wish it could reach you to-night! Estelle has just gone to class-meeting. I warrant you she won’t forget the home friends. Wilma wrote us she had become interested in religious matters. She is young, but I think -will be decided. Don’t it rejoice your heart, mother, to see them all coming into the fold, to the tender arms of the Good Shepherd? If ours could become a united religious family I think it would help, in a measure, to do away with the difference so common among lots of children of nearly the same age. When I spoke just now about the children’s com­ ing into the fold, I could not help thinking that maybe the Good Shepherd would be wanting some of them up yonder, — would be taking them indeed and in truth to his fold. Ours has been an unbroken family, but it cannot be always so ; and if one must go, who better than the little one, the sin­ less, for ‘ Of such is the kingdom of Heaven ’ ? Dear mother; you would not be unreconciled, unconsolable, if what we all fear shall happen? I have thought much about George Henry lately, and it seems to me he is I J * f I �THE CROW’K WOK BUT KOT WORK. /- 105 going. I seem to have him constantly in mind, and more especially, with­ in a few days, him and you. •! don’t know but I worry about you more than I do about him. Are not you tiring yourself all out, mother, and pre­ paring another sick-bed ? Are there none to whose care you can trust him, at least, a part of the timb? Remember, mother, you cannot endure all that you once could. You must see yourself that you are by no means as strong now as y<Ju used to be. Your day of hard work is done; you have had more than your share of it always. Now let the rest take their turn. Of course you cannot lay aside anxiety, but the work, the actual care of the child, should fall partly into other hands. Are not the people ready and willing? Won’t they feel — or, rather, how will they feel if you won’t let any of them do anything? Couldn’t you feel willing, any way, to let at least Sabrina stay with George II. some, nights ? I don’t suppose you realize bow much you are doing, and bow tired you are getting; but by and by, when the uncertainty is ended, if not before, you will be the one needing care and medicine, if you are not careful of yourself. Do try and not do too much, mother; and don’t wear yourself out with worrying, for is he not in God’s hands, to do with him as he sees best? It seems to me that I can have perfect faith in the result; that somehow or other it will be for the best. Now, mother, won’t you try and 1 be a good girl,’ as you used to write it in your letters to me ? I hardly expect you to answer this, but wish you could write. We are getting on quite well, and mean to make things last, so we need not trouble you for things during this sickness. So don’t once think of that., I wish I could do something for you, but it seems now that the most we can do is to keep from making trouble. Now, goodby, dear, with much love from your affectionate daughter, • “• L. M. Greene.” After she had returned to college, subsequent to the death and burial of her little brother, she wrote her mother as follows: — “ Kent's Hill, Me., January 8,186^. “ Mr dear Mother, — I ought to have written home before this, and should if I had consulted my own inclinations; but work seemed to call in another direction. Though it is only a week, we are quite well settled back into our old way of life. Only study seems tenfold harder than it ever was before. I find rayself away off, thinking such strange, wild thoughts as only those who have just buried their dead can think. It seems providential that for this and the past term my studies are so few; for with the full number I could never in the world have got through. This past experience I �I 106 Illi THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. has made me fearful. I cannot help wondering what will come next. But I tiy to ‘ let the future take care of itself.* O mother, you should have been here last Sunday, and heard a real live sermon, that would have filled your whole soul with faith, and made you believe, what every, one wants to believe, in the recognition of friends in heaven. Wasn’t it strange that a sermon, especially suited to us, should have been preached to us just after our return ? I wish father had stayed over Sunday just to hear- that. It was worth coming here on purpose for. The text was from Matthew viii. 11.' [She goes on to give the substance of that sermon from recollection ; but it is too lengthy for my limits. She closes with these words:] “ I can’t help thinking of two weeks ago to-night, and it unfits me for work. Goodby, mother.. Write all who can to Louise.” I have copied these letters to show the religious tendency of her mind, and the love, confidence, and affection manifested towards her mother, and her tender solicitude for her welfare. The feelings here exhibited were ever reciprocal between her and her mother; and it is with me incredible that, in her right mind, she could drop so suddenly from her high moral standing, social and religious, so low as not only to commit a petty crime, but also to speak of that dear mother in terms of disrespect, to the very man in -whose friendship she had no confidence, and whose threats she had so long dreaded! She told her mother, in October, 1865, that she did not believe she should ever graduate. Her mother asked hei’ why she thought so. She said, “ I can’t walk straight enough to suit Dr. Torsey. He notices little things in me that he does not in other students,” and mentioned sev­ eral instances. “ They seem to be watching me all the time, and I am afraid that Torsey’s prejudice has influenced the other teachers against me.” The loss of our little son was the first inroad made by death in our fam­ ily, and it was to us all, seemingly, a sad affliction, till experience taught us that burying our friends under ordinary circumstances was compara­ tively a pleasure. This stroke of affliction hung heavily upon the mind of Louise, producing those “ strange, wild thoughts ” of which she speaks. While away from home, friends, and in combination with other circumstances and matters, the presentiment that she should never graduate, operated to bring her mind into the condition and state which I have before mentioned. It was the loss of this brother, no doubt, to which she alluded, when she said to her class, “ This good-by is a thousand times more bitter than was the laying away of my dead.” We, the surviving friends, can take up the expression and say truly that parting with her, under' the circumstances, �THE CROWN AVON BUT NOT WORN. 107 was a thousand times more bitter than was th? laying away of all our pre­ vious dead. Suppose, kind reader (if a parent), this war* your child, your daughter, your first-born, whom from infancy you had watched over; one on whom you bad bestowed your tenderest care in sickness and in health; you had watched the expansion of her mind and the development of intellect; and, with much anxiety and toil, had sought to store that mind, at home and at school, with useful knowledge. As time advanced and intellect expanded, you saw evidence of brilliant talents, and an aptness to learn ; you looked on her with pride and satisfaction, doted on her as an affectionate parent only can, and looked forward with hope to the pleasing prospect when that intellect, that active mind should become matured and shine forth in the full development of womanhood. In due time you send that daughter to a literary institution, under fair promises of safety, for the purpose of acquiring a literary education. Term after term passes, years roll round, and you find your daughter making all the advancement reasonably re­ quired or expected. As a scholar, her reputation rises as she advances, and not only keeps pace with her opportunities, but keeps in advance of them. As a scholar', the most envious dares not deny the meed of praise; as a teacher, you see her successful at every trial, loved by her pupils, loved and respected by her employers and those in superior stand­ ing ; you hear her character spoken of in the highest terms; you hear her abilities extolled, and her disposition spoken of with admiration; you see her, after years of anxiety and toil with books and problems, grappling with all the vexation and trials that lay between her and the goal of her ambition, with a zeal and earnest resolution which deserve success ; you see her diligent by day, and frequently through tho lonely night till the still hours of morning, pursuing those studies, the consummation of which is to be her final triumph; you see her progressing prosperou-ly till within twelve days of her final triumph, for which she had so long tpiled and for which you had looked with anxious mind and high hopes. All at once the curtain falls, — the dark future lies before her, all her high hopes are blasted, — her character gone, — accused ofcrime, — a close search made, and the search pursued to her sister’s room, and even to her own body; attempts are made to hold her accountable for all the petty plunder' or mistakes of the whole institution, and to impress the enormity of the crime upon her already distracted mind. No friend is notified of her situation, no friendly advice or counsel called to help her in her bewilder­ ment to explain the dark “ mystery” that shrouded her mind. Some arti­ cles of common wearing apparel are found in their room, or in her posses- < �108 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. sion, while four times the number of hers are gone. No explanation is seemingly heeded. She is adjudged guilty, and the verdict goes out to her companions, the school, and to the world. No friendly teachers call to comfort or advise her; no room-mate enters for the night her apartment. Alone in her sorrow she walks her room through the dark hours of night, her brain on fire, while her mental thoughts, her very soul seems oozing from her eyes in floods of tears. The morning dawns ; and your sorrowstricken child is visited by her tutor,—by him to whose safe-keeping you had consigned her. In a long conversation she is given to understand the pen­ alty of the acts with which she is charged, and the reality of which she had long feared. As an opiate to her troubled and distracted mind, she is told and urged to go to God, and her parents, and make great and humble confession, thus making it appear as though she had committed a great crime. She is advised to go to God for that consolation, comfort, and pardon that was denied her by man. He, Torsey, has nowhere written or said, to my knowledge, that he told her he or the faculty would forgive her. She leaves the scene of this long conversation, in which she had been advised to leave that institution, divests herself of everything valuable, writes that her heart was breaking, and wanders off alone. This is known, yet no one who has the charge of your child seems to care for, or moves to look after her safety. She is seen in her soiled Clothing, the same day,' wandering and weeping among strangers. During the three days in which these cruel acts are transpiring, you are only twenty-five miles away, yet no means are taken to notify you that your daughter was in trouble. No notice reaches you until fourteen hours after the fatal journey is taken. You make all haste to pursue her, but it is too late. No more is seen or heard ' of her till nearly five months after, when her wasted form is found in a solitary forest. Kind parent, were this your daughter, could you feel to say that “ in the light of the sad result you could find nothing worthy of blame?” If so, then I would say that in my opinion, if you had to take our place, suffer (only for one month) as much as I and my poor wife did, no person would ever after hear you trying to excuse Dr. Torsey and that faculty from all blame. I care not what your religious sentiments are, if it were your, case, — your child, —you would see and feel that a great wrong had been done her, and that those whose duty it was to care for and protect her until you were notified and bad time to reaeh her, had wofully neglected their plain duty. Will Torsey say they were under no obligation to notify us? Suppose she had suddenly been taken with brain fever, her reason gone, — would he have had no duty to perform? Again, if she had fallen and nearly destroyed life, would he or his friends say he had no duty to per- 5 i h’ I �I TILE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 109 form? Would behave abandoned her? In such cases, he would be held in law for damages; but when her character was at stake, which to her was dearer than life, he could see no danger, had no fears, no immediate duty to perform. You would feel that morally, if not legally, they were responsible for her death. You would care not how high or low were their standing, — they should stand or fall by the justice of their acts. There is no religion in profession. By their acts they should be judged. By the fruit the tree is known. To do C7znst-like is Christianity. Does the reader see anything like his example and precepts in all their dealings with Lou­ ise? Tell me what single act of kindness have those Kent’s Hill professed Christians done in pursuing to recover, or to assist us to find our child, their old student of five years. No, not one single act or one dollar can they show that they have expended in the search, or in any way to assist us in the discovery of the one for whose board, tuition, and books I had paid them so much. They never have offered to do the first thing in that • direction, or, to my knowledge, have they ever asked or requested any stu­ dent to assist us, except the one who came home with Chestina; while many a stranger has turned out to assist us in the search, and many were the acts of generosity and kindness done and offered me in my long, lonely, and wearisome search, which cheered and sustained me on my sad journey. They will long be remembered; while from those managers on Kent’s Hill where I have paid my money, and have so sadly lost my child, I receive only insult and injustice at every turn. What is the cause of all this? What have I done to deserve such treatment? * “ I have but little faith in man. God is our only refbge in this great trial. He is merciful and good. ‘ His mercy endureth forever.’ ” On reading the following letter of L. to her mother, — which was over­ looked, — I am tempted to put it in here, although out of place : — “ Kent’s Hill, Sunday, Feb. 4, 18GG. “Dear Mother, — We received your letter last night, and will to-day commence an answer, which I shall probably mail about the middle of the week. I was both sorry and glad when your letter came; glad that this revival of religion was getting deeper iuto the hearts of the people, and spreading from neighborhood to neighborhood. No one can help rejoicing at this; sorry that for you, mother dear, there does not come peace, — ‘ peace like a river.* I believe it is waiting for you, — and not on the other shore, but here, right here. For those who are gone you can but feel thankftil. I shall always think of our little one as a bright spirit, waiting just beyond the river, and rejoicing when he sees us doing bravely �110 Q THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. our liie-work here, and saddened (perhaps), if we grow too weary of the way, too impatient for the journey’s end. You ask a strange question, mother,— ‘ What does one like me have to live for?’ I should answer, ‘ Everything.’ For your children. Do you want them obliged to walk the hard path your childhood’s feet once trod ? Can you think of a sadder word for them than this one, — motherless ? “ For your husband. Needs he not you, temporally and spiritually, mentally and morally? For community. You have means; you have influence. Wherein they are weak, strengthen them, and, by so doing, you will gain strength yourself. Wherein they are wrong, make yourself able, by reading and thought and word, to right them. “ When they have trouble, comfort and help them, and comfort will come into your own heart. Look not mournfully back upon the past, but hopefully into the future. “ Oh, it’s very easy to say these things, but hard to begin to do them ! Once begun, however, they bring their own reward, like every other good thing. Won’t you try, mother mine, to turn your mind away from these sad thoughts ?•— to come out of self? For it is your loss you mourn, not his, for his is gain. Not so much your loss, but losses, I should have said. I think I understand how this bereavement has brought all the others fresh to your mind, — from the mother who left you in childhood, down through the long line to your boy. They are calling you, and it seems as though you could not wait. But think who hold you here. By the memory of your own motherless girlhood, and the need you have, even now, of a mother, I entreat you to find room in your heart for your other children, — and a willingness to stay. “You are anxious to go, you say; anxious to leave us to—what? Do you realize what? Can you imagine our home as a home, and you gone ? Do you want your* children to grow up as Aunt Martha’s would have grown without your care? You are willing, ‘ nay, more, anxious for this ’ ? Take it back, mother, unsay it; you cannot mean it, mother. You might be willing for us all to die and you be left, but must not be willing for the opposite. “You used to be strong and brave. It is twice as heroic to be willing to live sometimes, as it would be to die as the martyrs did, — at the stake. “ Don’t pray for death, — but patience, faith, and strength. May you have them always and abundantly, is the earnest wish of “ Your affectionate daughter, . “Louise.” The denomination in the interest in which this school is conducted, with i I ! I i �I THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 111 here and there an exception, — especially their minister, so far as I have known,—have shown a willing disposition to clear Dr. Torsey and the faculty from all blame, and repeat the various charges and reports against my child. My wife has belonged to that denomination about thirty years ; and as the interest of that denomination is now to sustain their leading man at that institution, she sees that all her hard labor in taking care of their ministers and members at her home, and the funds given in that direction, are but of little account, when the reputation of one of their leading men is at stake. They have nothing to do to alleviate her sorrows, to heal the. awful wound, to console her grief, to defend the character of her child, up to the time she was accused ; no excuse to make for this one act of her life. They can repeat the charges against her, and insinuate that she had not been all right before ; while they abound in excuses for those who managed this sad affair. I will say to such, as Peter said, “ God is no respecter of persons.” To err is human; to forgive, divine. “ By their fruit ye shall know them.” And now let me say to all, that, as you have the evidence, such as would be sustained in any court, as proof that Louise had lost at the college in the eleven weeks which she had boarded there this term, up to the time I took her trunk and other articles away, over sixty articles, — four to one of all they have ever accused her of having; and from the day when you shall come into possession of these facts, oue and all, for the sake of truth and justice, when you hear repeated the charges against her whose tongue is silent in death, just- say somebody had taken four articles of hers, to one of which they accuse her; and that embraces five pairs of cotton drawers, . the last wearable pair she had; and that she rode away, and walked to the couch of death with none on, as she said, and which was proved by the discovery of her remains. And was there not some necessity for putting on others unmarked in their stead? “ I had no intention of stealing them; if mine had not come before the term was done, I should have left them in the wash.” O my God ! where is the conscience of those who took, and now have, her last pair of common drawers, when they know she must have suffered intensely from cold for the want of them, as she lay dying on the cold earth through, those chilly nights in May 1 God may forgive them and those who so wickedly pursue to disgrace her memory; I cannot, unless they show a different disposition than they have done. There are many other articles lost, which we believe she had with her at the college ; they are not named in Mrs. Green’s sworn statement; not �112 THE CROWN WORN BUT NOT WON. having positive personal knowledge, they are not mentioned; such us books, stockings, handkerchiefs, and various small articles; with a bank book, showing a deposit of eighteen dollars to her credit in a Boston Savings’ Bank. Some of the lost and sworn-to articles were plainly marked, — and some­ body knows where they are. Where are all those sixty or more articles? Echo answers, — Where ? They at that college should forever be silent as to stealing, until they render some account of these lost articles belonging to my daughter. Why did they pursue L. to such extent to prove that she had, and to hunt up owners to claim, unmarked articles, when they will tell all, that they are not responsible for unmarked articles ? And why did Miss Case, in violation of rule, put into the wash unmarked articles, and so readily claim and take from L. the same ? And why did Mrs. Daggett, the next day after L. left, go into L.’s and Mary Chapman’s room with Miss Hunton and others, and take up an unmarked article and suppose it belonged to others, who knew that article was there before Louise left? There are dark spots all the way along. “ Is there not a hole somewhere in that building where things disappear and are seen no more there ” ? as my wife told Mrs. Daggett, Nov. 8, 1866. Had we not lost enough there to be allowed to say that? We had borne and forborne the losses there in 1861, ’62, ’63, ’64, and ’65, in silence, for her sake, for fear of appearing small, and getting up a feeling against her. When weohave borne all this without saying a word to them, it does seem too hard that no leniency should have been extended to our child 1 , As soon as we reached home with L.’s things, May 30, and found lots of her clothing and other articles missing, Mrs. Greene (as I was obliged to leave immediately to continue the search), wrote Mr. Daggett, and notified him of the things she had then missed, so that he could look them up before / = that term closed, when all the students were there. He made no reply; / never answered her letter. At a later date she wrote Mr. Torsey that many/ of L.’s things were lost. Neither he nor Daggett, from that day to the. present time, has written us a word of explanation about the same. In October, wanting some of L.’s books to send to Chestina, who was away to school, we wrote Miss Reed (as we could not get a word from those who Prof. Robinson says, “ have nothing but pity for L.’s friends,” that any­ thing was there, or that they would ever try to look them up), and asked her if she would go to the college and see if she could find the two valu­ able books, and ask them if any other articles were there. Mrs. Daggett, brought forward two books,—but not the ones we wrote for,—L.’s Adelphia i �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 113 pin, with her name plainly marked on the same, with some other articles, to the amount of, perhaps, in all, five dollars. These are none of the articles sworn to, by Mrs. Greene, as now lost. Why did Mrs. D. keep those articles from the last of May, until October, with L.’s name marked on some of them, when Mrs. Daggett admitted to Miss Reed, nt this time, that she knew my wife had written for them, and asked them to look them up ? Any mother would be very desirous to know all about the lost one’s things, under such circumstances. I repeat, why did she keep them, and withhold all information? What means all this in my daughter’s first, fore­ most, and fast accuser, — one who ..could call L., to her mother, an'habitual thief, because, as she said, L. said she had been in the habit of taking un­ marked articles, when hers were lost, to wear until hers came again ? Mrs. Greene says to her, Nov. 8, when Mrs. D. said that L. had been putting drawers in the wash several weeks before, “ Why did you not tell me when I was here nine days before she left?” Mrs. D. then distinctly said, in my presence, “ We never mistrusted any kind of a thing until Monday night before she left Wednesday .morning; ” and as Mrs. G. was blaming them there for the way they treated L., and about the large amount of articles lost there, she said, “ I know somebody is to blame; somebody knows where they are.” Mrs. Daggett whined out, “ I had rather bear the blame myself than have Dr. Torsey,” and continued to say, “I have done noth­ ing that I am sorry for, nothing but what I would do again.” Dr. Torsey tells Miss Reed, that he had no regrets when he went to Lew­ iston, and to the place where her remains were found. S. R. Bearce, who went with him, tells the same; that Torsey said, his conscience was clear ; that be had done all he could to save her, or words to that effect; when he (Torsey) was the last person on earth who talked with her about her trouble, he leaving her alose, sending no one to her to comfort or assist her. As soon as he leaves, she takes off her jewelry, and some other valuables, hastily writes these words on a little scrap of paper, — ‘‘Heart breaking, dearly beloved, adieu,” — then leaves the room and building, without saying a word to any one, hastily tries to see her sister, then takes the stage, flees from this man as from a tiger, and from the Hill; flees from class-mates, teachers, room-mate, and all her friends on earth, — alone, shunning every­ body she knew, — goes to Lewiston and walks to the solitary forest, and to the couch of death, and there, with a broken heart, far from home and friends, in that lonely forest, with no hand to administer to her, with none to speak words of comfort, with no eye to pity, save the all-seeing eye of God, she lays herself down and dies. In four months and twenty days, her decayed form is discovered. Who on earth could have believed that 8 I �Ill . TIIE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. Torsey, who had been at the head of that school so long, had her under his control and care for five years, could have been so self-righteous, and so self-conceited, or hard-hearted, as to believe that it was not possible that he had made some mistake, neglected some duty, or in some way, when the sad result was known, had failed to do all he could then have wished he had done, or that if he had done differently, this awful result could have been avoided? Who, under all the circumstances, could feel that his conscience Was clear, — that they could or would not have done differ­ ently if they had known the sad result ? Do the public believe their bold assertions ? If so, God pity them ! and parents should be cautious how they trust their children in their hands. I do not know that I should doubt their assertions, after the manner they received us in that faculty meeting, and the letters I have received from Torsey, and what he said to Mrs. G., the cool way and manner of their arguments and appearances; when Prof. Morse read her class-letter so coolly, not the slightest emotions perceptible by any except one or two lady teachers. I do not know about such persons having anjT conscience. I scarcely ever saw a stranger .read that letter without shedding tears.' The very recital of the circumstances of her leaving to strangers, when I was looking for her, would often cause sympathetic tear, while the lead­ ing members of that faculty could so coolly treat us in our greatest distress. Torsey tried, in that meeting, to find out what we were going to say about her loss.; and when we were accusing him of prejudice and in­ justice, he stamped his foot on the floor, and tried to stop us with this show of authority, or to stamp us down. If he would thus attempt to ex­ ercise his authority over us, we may well judge how he would be likely to treat our child if she made any attempt to defend*herself. Torsey will not admit that she was not just herself, but tells Roscoe Smith, as he (Smith) says two weeks after L. had gone, that if dither was crazy, ' it was her mother. I can only say to those self-righteous people, who have no regrets, and would do the same again under like circumstances, that they very much resemble a certain sect whom, in the days of Christ, he called Pharisees. Where is the evidence that he was kind to her, or tried to make this trouble look favorable to her? He says he was kind to her. I have no evidence of that; but there is evidence clear to my mind that he knew she was not fully in her right mind, when he says he told her if she did go, to let her sister make all the arrangements. What does this mean? Why attempt to put her under that much younger sister, who was a stranger x 4 < f �I THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 115 there compare! to this old student, if he believed her fully sane? Facts will creep out. If Torscy should say the school knew it before he did, would that help the case? Should the next in authority—Miss Case, the preceptress, and Mrs. Daggett — proceed in the examination, without his knowledge, when he was there, and then let all be known to the school, before he knew it? No one would believe that, after we have proved that Miss Case and Mrs. D. went into his part of the house before entering Miss Reed and Chestina’s room the day before L. left. One more point. Who believes, if this had been Prof. Perley’s daughter, or a favorite of Torsey, that he could and would not have found some way to have kept the matter private, and from the school, — saved her character and life? I have not a shadow of doubt that nothing but the will was wanting to have done that in poor Louise’s case. A student writes me, under date of March 21, 18G7. With other things, he says, “I cannot state facts, that is, positive evidence; but yet, I am assured in my own mind that favoritism and partiality did exist, arising not only from sectarian motives, but other more trivial, but not less culpa­ ble considerations. I say this in no spirit of animosity or fancied injustice done me, for I have none, but as an unprejudiced observer; was a member of the school five terms, and think I have drawn my conclusions rightly.” Another student writes Mrs. Greene, under date March 1,18G7. ‘Among other things, she says: “ I lost a pair of good stockings. I think T lost those the last week of the spring term. Mrs. Daggett did not know where they went to, and I am sure I don’t. Nearly all the girls lost more or less that they put into the wash. I never could understand why there need to be so many things lost. Poor Louise! how much she must have suffered? I have often thought what my feelings must have been under similar circum­ stances. God only knows her feelings, for I think no one else can. It was very hard that she remained n’gne the night before she left. The girls felt badly about it, but did not know it till the next morning.” God and those who hold the skeleton keys only know — I do not — how much their skeleton keys had to do about their finding out her real senti­ ments or feelings towards them, by examining her private correspond­ ence, in her room, in her absence I From one of her class I have a letter under date of December, 1866, from which I make the following extract: “ I dare not judge the teachers of intentional wrong, though that some great wrong has been done I think hone will deny. “ It is very strange where so many of Louise’s things arc. There are things I - 1 �116 THE CROWN' WON BUT NOT WORN. taken as supposed every term by the help, and was last term at the close. Louise was very much loved by the students, with but very few exceptions. I think no one will deny that. I always loved her even before I knew her well, and since I’ve known her intimately I’ve counted her. among my dearest friends. Louise was a true friend, and had the kindest, most sympathizing heart of any girl I knew. We always sought her in trouble or sorrow. Iler life was full of sympathy and care for those around her.” In another letter from an old student, she says, writing to Mrs. Greene from Kent’s Hill, October 7, 18GG: “ I talked with Mary Chapman : she says it makes her mad to hear a word said against Louise, and she did not think she had any evil intentions, only was careless about looking after her own clothing.” (This writer continues :) “ I cannot see why any one should try to hurt Louise’s character, for she was very particular in regard to her gentleman associates. She always selected those who had the best standing in school. I have heard that repeated time and again, by those that were well acquainted with her. She is wronged when it is said of her* she had not au unspotted character. Do not think I say these things because I am writing to you ; it is what I say to all, and what I sincerely believe.” Mary Chapman writes me, from which I make the following extract. Speaking of Louise before her body was found: “ I pity her from the bottom of my heart, and gladly, oh, so gladly! would I again take her into my confidence and love her as before. I always treated her as a , sister; in fact, she took the place of one to me, and a kind and good one she was.” Do students go, or are they sent, to Kent’s Hill to build up that religious denomination ? This may be the object for which some are sent there, but it is no part of the purpose for which many students go there. To get an education is the great object; this is what the State has endowed colleges and academies for. This institution ba» received large amounts in land and money from the State. In 1827, it received one half township of land, and subsequently, at seven different times, it has received from the State eighteen thousand six hundred dollars. Who gets the benefits of.this more than twenty thousand dollars from the people of the State? Do the students get the benefit of it? Nothing but the chance to attend that school by paying well for all they get there. Does not this twenty thousand dol• lars put them under some obligations to the public to guard, protect, and take good care of all the students who are entrusted to their care? and no artifice or dodge of Dr. T. will excuse him by saying a student is of age. That faculty is under every obligation, legal, moral, and religious, to im- 7 5- �1 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. ■ 117 partially teach, protect, and defend the rights of every student, of whatever name age, sect, or color, whom they have or shall receive into their, school; and he who for any cause, holding such a responsible position, allows his prejudice to prevent an impartial performance of all his duties, has for­ feited all claim to public confidence, or the respect of individuals. Will Dr. T. yet say that he left it to her about leaving? It looks as though he means to say that by and by, by what he wrote me in October 18GG : “I spoke only at any time of her leaving, when she had decided to go home.” All who know that man and the authority he exercises on the Hill (and L. knew it well), know he is not in the habit of leaving much to the student to decide; no, not he, by no means; he is one whose actions show that he believes he was born to command, and all the right students have is to obey. In proof of this I will here let some students speak for themselves, .and here I would call the attention of that wise and knowing committee of students, to see how much they knew .what their Bev. II. P. Torsey, LL. D., the President, had or had not done. They seem to think, as it looks to me in their article of about two-thirds of a column in the Farmer, that the repeating of the title President, which they have done ten times in that communication, with Rev. and LL. D. sometimes attached, would be a clincher, and the public must take all they have resolved and said to clear Torsey, as true, as they would believe him to be a mighty big and powerful man. From a letter to me from a student dated May 7, 18G7, I make the fol- . lowing extracts: — “ Your daughter was a kind friend of mine during my stay at Kent’s Hill, and her conduct towards all exemplary. During a recitation in read­ ing under Prof. Torsey, I laughed at something the professor said, and another student laughed, too. Prof. Torsey said, ‘ Stop laughing immedi­ ately,’ and we could not. Instead of correcting us as a gentleman, for I grant we did wrong, not intending it for impudence but merely because we could not control ourselves, he took the other student (she gives her name) by the ear and pulled her to a front seat, and took the back of the book and knocked me in the face with it several times ; this lie did before a class of ladies and gentlemen. IIq never spoke one kind word to me during my stay ; his only spirit towards me was a domineering one. Ho governed by fear, not by love. This the other student certainly will tell you was done, if she says anything about it; ” and then she gives me the reason why she thinks the other student might not like to say anything about the matter. She thou continues and says: wiBut there is a just God, who will certainly bring the one who caused your grief to a higher �♦> 118 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. tribunal than an earthly one.” She offers to make oath to the truth of this statement. In another letter, dated June 19, 1867, the writer says : “I think Mr. Torsey is a good, teacher, as far as his scholarship extends; and, were it not for his strong prejudices, he would be a good disciplinarian. He is a man to be feared more than respected. He has a faculty of appearing very religious, and will make a favorable impression upon a man who sees but one side of him. But the man who knows him as thoroughly as I know him will not be disposed to speak of him in favorable terms. Mr. Torsey may be a Christian, but I have for years prayed that I might have a different kind of religion. The seminary folks’ meeting held at the seminary, and the action there taken did not change my mind at all about the matter. I was with them so long, that I understand how those meetings are got up. The hand that moves the whole thing is not seen by the undiscerning.” I have just received a letter, dated July 22, 1867, in which the writer says: “ I lost my wallet with its contents the latter part of the spring term. It was taken out of my room (which was left unlocked) some time during the night. I have not found out anything about it yet. The wallet contained about $700 in money. I remember at the time hearing of a number of the students who lost money and gther articles.” This student, at the time he lost his money, was boarding in the college building. It is a well-known fact, when they choose'to keep those things private, that they have a good faculty to do so; hence the school and the public know but very little about this student, or Miss Grover losing money, or the other students losing money and other’ articles, as this student says, at that term. In another letter, dated June, 1867, an old student, — one who has been there for years, and had boarded in the college; a student of good sound judgment; one who had as good a chance as any to judge cor­ rectly ; who was there when L. left, — says: “ Dr. Torsey’s authority in the school, I think, is unlimited. But this is my opinion, and, I think, is the opinion of nearly every student of the Hill, that whatever measure Dr. Torsey thought best to adopt, the faculty would unhesitatingly agree with him. As to what course they would have pursued in regard to Louise, if she had remained, I am not prepared to say, further than this, — I do not think they would have allowed her to graduate.” I have quoted from this letter to show what everybody conversant on the Hill knows to be true (although Torsey may say the trustees voted the diplomas; he may say this, that, or the other for an excuse that he t I £ * i �I THE CROWN’ WON' BUT NOT WORN. 119 did not know whr.t the faculty would do), that Torsey’s power i unlimited, in or out of the school, in regard to everything pertaining to the whole arrangement. lie had the whole power in his own hands, and could and did do just as he pleased with my poor girl. Had he adopted a course which would have saved her, it would have been sanctioned and agreed to by the other members of the faculty. At the bottom* of one of the letters from which I have made quotations I find the following : — •‘P. S. — A sZy, subtle, vindictive person can do almost anything to carry his point, under the cloalc of religion, and, at the same time, be sustained by a clique or sect.” This is exactly my opinion of the man ; and, if my poor girl was living, she would say that his treatment of her had proved him to be such a man. Having quoted largely from letters and other writings, without giving the writers’ names, in most cases unnecessary to the public, I wish for all who shall read it, fully to understand that I have, in every ease, quoted the exact language of all, both letters and other writings; and that I have and shall keep each aud all on tile; and that I have not made a quotation from a single letter marked private or confidential. Will Dr. T.. or any who dealt with her, yet come out openly and attack her previous good character It would seem rather strange aud incredible for Torscy, or any other member -of the faculty, the steward or his wife, at this late day, to make any such attempt; when, during all those five years, with my other three daughters, who have been there from one to two terms each, while I or Mrs. Greene have been on the Hill, to take them to, from, and to see to them there, from six to ten times yearly, stopping from one to three days each,— and one time Mrs. G. was there over three weeks, during the sickness of two of the girls, — no complaint had ever reached us from Torsey, any other member of the faculty, the boarding-master or bis wife, that Louise or the other girls had been remiss in lessons, disobeying rules of .the school, or in any way that they had behaved unbecoming as students at their school. No, not a word of complaint had ever reached us from them by any other person or student but what all four of our girls were well-behaved at the Hill, until twelve o’clock at night, May 23, 1866, and, like a thunderbolt, that report struck us to the heart! None can tell the awful shock but those who received it. It will ill become them ‘ at this late day’ to complain to the public, while during those live years they could find nothing worthy of the least complaint to her parents, who should have been informed aud con­ sulted at the time if she was at fault. In view of all the evidence of her / i 1 �I 120 (■ THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. good standing at home and elsewhere, and the absence of any complaints against her up to this time, I will let the public draw their own conclu­ sions, only saying, that, although they tried to make her account for all the little things lost during the term up to the time she left, they cannot hold her responsible for Mrs. Grover’s money, which they pursued and took from Miss M.; also, the wallet and money of Mr. Gower, a student; a music-book, and lots of hats, and other things, which were lost there soon after Louise left. Dr. Torsey admits to us in that faculty meeting one fact, which all who knew her will endorse, when he says, “ Your daughter, although in rags, with her open and frank countenance, and her lady-like manners, will find friends wherever she goes ; any one will take her in ” (he should have excepted himself). This shows at once that deception or dishonesty was no part of her nature. It is not strange, therefore, that she should be misunderstood and misjudged by those who we believe have practised deception, and understood that art so long and well. An eminent writer has said, “ What the world wants is not honesty, but acquiescence.” Without fully subscrib­ ing to that sentiment, that idea has been .plainly illustrated, I think, on Kent’s Hill. Acquiescence in the decision and opinions of the faculty would have covered a multitude of sins. Louise knew full well their power and disposition to crush all who should attempt to say anything in palliation or excuse for her, as she wrote to her sister, “ It will be useless for you to say anything in excuse or palliation; it will break you down; bend beneath it.” She foresaw the course they would pursue towards her sister if she tried to defend,her; she knew how they had pursued her about hearsays aud'little things. She w'ould, doubt­ less, if she could, say to her parents, for any defence you may make for me, that faculty will pursue, harass, and try to break you down. It has been said that the article written by one of the officiating clergymen at her funeral, who was assisted by a prominent citizen of Peru, and pub­ lished in the “ Loyal Sunrise” of Nov. 23,1866, was untrue, and the position therein assumed, in saying “ her enemies were relentless,” was wrong. I can only say that those gentlemcn.had access to all the communications between Dr. T., myself, Louise, her writings, and various letters from her class, and other students, and that they came to the conclusion that such a course as all this indicated towards her and her family did not look like the actions of friends. I will state, for the information of the faculty, trus­ tees, and that committee of students, that neither I nor any member of my family knew anything about the article that appeared in the “ Sunrise ” of January 11, 1867. i I If >■ �I THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 121 Let me recapitulate and sum up some of tbeir proceedings, and the treat­ ment Louise, her sinter, and her parents have received at the hands of tins faculty and those under them, and then judge whether this is the action of friends or enemies. Monday night they say something to her about the clothing. Tuesday Mrs. Daggett and Miss Case enter, unbeknown, and search their room, then go into an examination. She explains. They closely search and open all her things ; that little fancy box or trunk, holding about a quart, could not be exempted. They, when exhausted in their accusations, call in Mr. Daggett to assist them. She frankly tells them all the whole truth, as she says in her class letter: “ I told them the truth as near as I could in my distracted state of mind.” She did not deny a word, — refunds. But these, some say, friends were not content; they must disgrace her sister, also. They proceed up to and into Dr. T.’s part of his house (as I sup­ pose, to report progress’, and to get further instructions), then enter C'hestina’s and Miss Reed’s room. They tell her L.’s confession and all, repre­ sent that she had lots of marked and unmarked articles in her room, trunk, and drawer, and say what an awful thing it is ; then ask to, and search her trunk and all her things. Are they content? Not yet. They ask her if there is not another trunk kept there. Was this not trying to make them or L. account for all the articles lost at this term? Was this like the action of friends to my girls, withoi# knowledge to me, and without authority, to enter Miss Reed’s and my daughter’s room, —a room as sacred to them ; a room where they had rights as well as you, kind reader, have in your own quiet domicile, where no ruthless hand has a right, without due process of law, to enter and overhaul at will? They may say that they asked leave of these students to do this, that, or the other thing. What students would dare to deny under such circumstances? They find nothing, but tell her sister all in the worst form. Mr. Chandler, who comes home with C. that night, knows it all in an exaggerated form, as told by Miss Case and D. Mr. Swaglcs, a boarder with Dr. T., tells L. lie knows all, Wednesday, on the stage. They leave her alone that night, although Miss Daggett and three lady teachers board in the same building. They have no friendly word to say to her, no advice to give. They do not approach her lonely room to see if she does not desire some friendly act, some friend sent for to read or pray with her. They all knew she was in trouble. Was it be­ cause they were afraid they should displease Dr. T., or was it, as he said, because “ she was under censure”? Would it disgrace them? Do the ’ teachings of Christ appear in those professed followers? She, as it J �122 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. were, with her brain on lire, walks her lonely room through that night. She writes in her letter the next day: “ I tried to read my Bible last night, but could not,” thus showing a partial derangement, a wretched state of mind. Does this look like the action of Christians or friends in those who had known her so long? Torsey takes her alone the next morning, and has a long conversation with her. He appeals to her to know what she wants done. She says : “ I want it kept from the school, — to stay and graduate.” He tells her the school knew it; that she had better leave that day. Will he deny this? He tells Miss Reed so, aud that L. further said, “If she • could not graduate, there was no future for her.” lie tells Chestina “ it would not have been best for her to have goue on to the stage,” etc. If he had not desired her to leave, or if he had wanted her to have graduated or been willing for her to, would he have answered Chestina as he did ? Would l.e have said it would not have beeu best for her to have goue on to the stage? She would have been pointed out as the girl that Stole. He could not help letting it out to her sister that he meant everybody should know her con­ fession about the money. If he had desired her to have stopped and grad­ uated, his answer to C. would have been : Yes ; she could have graduated. I wanted her to, and if we can get her back, she can now. In two weeks after she left, he tells Roscoe Smith, who lived then near me, as he (Smith) tells me in the presence of others, that Torsey told him in presence of others, that when L. made the request to have it kepi from the school, and she stay and graduate, he told her the school knew it. She writes soon as she leaves the Hill, after failing to see her sister before she left, that Dr. Torsey “ in­ formed me this : that I had better leave to-day. ‘ Not expulsion,’ he said; ‘ we won’t call it that; but I advise you to go home.’ Practically, is amounts to the same thing, however. How I feel, God only knows ; yon never can,” etc. Mr. Smith further said that Dr. T. told him and others, at the time above referred to (he then pretended to think she was living), all about her confession, and other things in that last and private conver­ sation, aud further said if either was crazy, it was her mother. With the letters he has written me, does the reader see any friendly band in all those proceedings? Will any parent believe for a moment,’ if this was their case, their child, that all those proceedings were the acts of friends? Would friends have reported her private confession to disgrace her? She had done all she could to deserve forbearance. In God’s name were they not doing all they could to ehagriu and mortify her sister in the house of the princi pal of this school, — to disappoint, distract, and break the heart of L. ? Does that long string of written misrepresentations of Professor Robinson, which 4 I r �it TIIE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 123 ho calls fads, look like the actions of a friend? He says: “ At the request of the faculty Mr. Torsey called to see Miss G. and talk with her about"the matter.” He does not say why or what they requested him to see or talk with her about. Again he says: “No intimation was given her that she must leave the school, —that she could not graduate. Mr. Torsey expressly said to her that if she left, it would not be on account of any action of the faculty.” (What whoppers ’) Does any one believe she was seeking to leave in disgrace? See the sworn statements of Miss Reed, C. S. Greene, Louise’s letter, Mr. Smith’s statement. Query: For what did the faculty request T. to call to see L. ? She had confessed, explained all, refunded the money. She had but two weeks longer to remain. She was feeling bad enough. If she was the bad girl they now would have people believe, did they expect to reform her in two weeks, if no intimation was to be given her about leaving, oi' that she could not graduate? I repeat, why did the faculty request him to call and talk with her about the matter? Oil, could she speak, then we should know what further he said to her, — what the fac­ ulty sent him to her for other than advising her to leave that day, and say­ ing “ we won’t call it expulsion.” (It is expulsion, but I will deceive, dissemble, withhold the real fact, won’t call it what it is, what you and I understand it to be.) Why is all this prevarication? All this does not look like the actions of friends. To me and to my family it looks like the doings of some unfriendly hands, enemies, and relentless ones, too. Would a friend have written me as Dr. T. did, June 30, 1866, — not answering my one question, but putting a half dozen insulting questions to me, and then adding this threat, “ Such reports as these may oblige us to state the facts publicly ” ? Again he writes me, July 11, 1866, again asking questions about flying reports of what he has heard that I and Mrs. Greene have said to certain persons, ami then adds, “ You know she stole money and can find no one that will tell you I ever brought the matter before the school.” And then advising a double lawsuit in those words, “By bringing a ease of libel or slander, followed on our part by a prosecution for malicious prosecution and for slander.” Had I given him any cause for those insulting letters? The reader can judge, as I have laid before them every letter and word I have written him since L. left, they being only two in all; and I have kept a copy of all the letters I have written him since Louise first went to that school. I know whereof I speak, and that 1 have not given him cause thus to insult and abuse me. Would a friend at this time, when 1 had spent five weeks from home in this sad and fruitless search to find any reli­ able trace of our child; my wife prostrate after she makes one trip with r �1 I THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. mo, and, despairing of ever finding her, takes her bed ; my children in the greatest distress and commotion watch for some tidings of the missing one, they needing all my care ; but duty and anxiety for the lost one kept me away as long as a possible chance or hope remained. Yet, on two occa­ sions when I did reach home, I found those letters before named, from this pompous, bigoted, overbearing, and heartless man. Was this sympathy, or was it not to awe me into silence at the fear of his publicly disgracing my once lovely girl who had fled in dismay before his power? Judge ye which. Would a friend have disregarded the warning, of Miss Reed and Chestina about her probable destruction, and the earnest wish to have some one pursue her to Lewiston, as they had requested Harriman to do ? Why did this head man, — the only one fo order and direct on the Hill—parley, hesitate, argue and thus try to quiet their fears ; why put it off from twelve to six o’clock, after he knew where and how she had gone? (I know he has said he thought best to wait until after the stage returned from the depot, at four, to see if the conductor could tell whether she stopped at L. or not.) This would be very uncertain,—a most miserable excuse for delay. She should have been pursued regardless of where she should stop. Would he have thus delayed if it had been his own child? Although I cannot recall the past or recover our daughter, whom we took so pure, so innocent, in 1861 to Kent’s Hill and put under the charge and protection of this “ Rev. H. P. Torsey, LL.D., the President” of that religious institution, should we — after the long years we kept her there, after her suffering and death, under the circumstances of this sad case, with the disposition those who dealt with her show to disgrace her memory and to injure the feelings of parents and friends,— should we bear it all, and the thousand misrepresentations of what she was guilty go uncorrected ? I believe it to be a duty from which I cannot escape,— a duty I owe to her memory, to myself and family, to her numerous friend, and to the public,— to state all the facts of this case which have come to my knowledge, and leave all to judge whether my daughter and family have been fairly used by those who control that insti­ tution. I, as I told Torsey in that faculty meeting, should not dare to trust another child to his care. When we consider how liable the young are to step from the strict path of rectitude, and know not how great the temptation may be, if for the first offence, for five dollars (God only knows the real cause why it was done), frank acknowledgment ami private restoration are made, should they make such woful work, such hasty reports, pursue to such extent, give her such advice, neglect her, and delay to notify her friends till too late to save her, till she had time to get beyond our reach? When we consider ’f I �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. I 125 how many in early life and some in mature years have done something or caused others to do as bad, as the taking of five dollars, and all has been quietly kept with those alone who necessarily knew it, — they being usually well-disposed persons, who have in afterlife made first-rate men and women, have been an ornament to society and done much good in the world; whereas exposure might have ruined them forever; — surely “ kind words can never die,” and may be productive of much good. Was there any good reason if all was true, for putting the worst construction upon this, her first offence? Should they not have used every means to keep the matter private, made the best of it, allowed her to graduate, or at least quietly and immediately notified her friends before intimating to her what the result would be? She had a right to be heard by counsel; we bad rights and should have been notified early in the trouble. I had paid them money enough to put them under some obligations; they owed some con­ sideration to so old a student (of five years). She had lost enough there to have entitled her to some forbearance. They may say that they could not have kept it from the school; tliey seem to have power to keep the taking of money and other articles by other students quite still. Who took Mrs. Grover’s ten dollars and five cents? But few knew it, and less know who took thirty dollars, the hats, and music-book since L. left. They have a good faculty to keep what they choose from the school and the public. How much have they said about those sixty articles that Louise lost at the last term at the college? In God’s name do not, for the sake of truth and justice, ever again represent that L. confessed in her letter that she stole even unmarked articles of clothing, when she distinctly in her letter to her sister says: “ I had no intention of stealing them ; for every article I took I had lost one in the wash, and put those on in their stead, expecting before the term was done to find my own. There was some sort of necessity-for this. For instance, I came to the college with three or four good whole drawers; to day as I ride away I have none. Was it so strange tliat I should put on others also unmarked in their stead ? ” In her class letter referring to the unmarked articles she says: “ But if my own garments had not come by the close of the term, I should have left those where I got them, in the wash.” She further says: “I can feel myself guilty of but one crime, the taking of the five dollars.” There is no con­ fession of stealing clothes at all. What a reward for her frank confession did she receive by those who dealt with her 1 Here I wish to put a question to the good judgment and common sense of all. If my girl had been a pilfering, thieving person, or a loose character, one who had been caught �126 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. in mean things, had got herself out,-by deception or otherwise, of dirty scrapes, would she have laid this so in ich to heart, take so much blame to herself, and think she h.i I disgrace I herself and frien ds, think her parentsan 1 friends would not forgive and be willing to receive her; that the Saviour was an iron door to her, shut and bolted ; that God would not hear or forgive her in this or the world to come? And was not Miss Case too bad in trying to impress upon her the enormity of the crime, and was not Torsey trying to do the same thing, when he, as be writes me, says, “My talk with her was about going to God and to you with the whole matter ” ? Again he writes: “I had a long conversation with her the morning she left, and urged upon her two things, first, that she go to Jesus with the whole matter, making this sad event the beginning of a humble, earnest Christian life ; and second, that she go at once to her father and mother, telling them all.” Now I appeal (to her confused and distracted mind) if this was not making her believe that she had committed so terrible a crime as to get down to a mere nothing before God and her parents to ask pardon, and that she leave the school in disgrace, tmd go at once to her father and mother telling them all; as though she had committed a heinous offence, a great crime, so much so, that she must go at once to them. How could she graduate? No delay would answer. If this was necessary, how do you suppose she thought he, Torsey, looked upon her crimes? This in my opinion was just what he meant, and did bring her to see herself when he advised her to leave, and bow much mercy do you suppose she could expect from him? Do you wonder that she writes, “heart breaking” as he left her? One has asked, what reason existed why they should desire to disgrace her, to send her away, and thus rob themselves of one of their best scholars at the approaching commencement? I answer, what good reason had he to refuse her reasonable request, and turn her out of his house noth threats? Did he give her or me a sufficient reason? Did it not plainly show that'it was at least in part because he disliked her friend, who had left his school, and, as Louise writes, because she and her folks were not right on the goose ? It is clear to me that he was carrying into execution his threat, “ if she should do anything that looked like a wilful violation of any rule, she could expect but little forbearance from the faculty.” Yes, that man and this faculty knew that she was not with them heart and soul as be expressed it; that after she graduated, not by word or pen would they receive from her aught but condemnation of the narrow and bigoted course they had pursued towards her and others who did not think as they did, and that this faculty was human and liable to err. Disgrace would destroy her in­ fluence. Iler talent for writing they might have feared. JI A �r— THE CBOWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 12? In reply to the report and misstatements made by A. <T. Blethen, E. M. Smith, A. W. Waterhouse, Margie Ilouschild, Nellie A. Wing, an 1 Mary E. Deering, acting as and purporting to be a committee of students chosen May G, 18G7, at a chapel exercise, after they had requested their teachers to withdraw; I say to this committee and to the public that, after a care­ ful perusal of’this pamphlet, they will find that I have produced evi­ dence and circumstances which will satisfy the impartial reader that most of the positions assumed in their preamble and resolves, and the statement therein made by this committee are refuted and shown to be untrue, while they were putting them before the public as “ facts,” of which they say, “ many of us were personally acquainted with the circumstances; ” when in fact they did not have any personal knowledge of what they' state. They’ go on to assert what was “ utterly false,” and with great boldness resolve what “ is truthful.” The reader will see that the doings of these students were a short time before the graduation of some of them, and to get into the good graces of this faculty, of which Torsey is chief, — and in fact as many students have expressed it, — Dr T. is the faculty. I know and have seen enough to believe those students Lave it about right. Favor­ itism had much to do I believe in their overmuch zeal to acquit and putf Dr. T., while they make up such a string of misstatements against an .old school-mate, one whose reputation and standing was as good as their own for five long years at that school, and send them broadcast over the State to disgrace her memory, and injure the feeling of her friends, while she sleeps in death and can make no reply. Is not Dr. Torsey able to make his own defence? The public may think it would have been as well to have let the faculty have had all the honor of pursuing their dead pupil. Torsey and others may say they knew nothing of this action of the students, he being away, etc. But I know this old angler so well, who knows how to throw his line and cover the hook, that I believe he knew just what would be done in his absence and how it would be accomplished. There are always enough who wish for favors to keep him quietly’ posted. Who believes that the other teachers did not know what was to be done when they left the hall? What right had students to remain after service if the cause was not known to, and permission given by the teachers? On reception of the action of this committee through the public journals, I addressed the fol­ lowing note to each member of this committee, under date, of June 7, 18G7, addressing each respectfully as follows : — “ As y’ou appear before the public as one of the committee who have made numerous statements in regard to my’ daughter’s leaving the college at Kent’s Hill, and as you state them to be facts, and that you were person- 1 ■4 �128 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. ally acquainted with the circumstances, and that you do so to correct false and groundless statements, please inform me what personal knowledge you have of what Messrs. Torsey, Daggett, his wife, and Miss Case said or did to Louise, or what they did not do or say? “ Please stata how you know that the crime was not known to any member of the faculty, until many of those otherwise connected with the school knew it; and that Torsey notified me to be in Lewiston before any morning train left; that the teachers did not know nothing of the matter until others were in possession of every circumstance; that, by the President, never has a single act of unkindness been manifested towards any student; and that Louise was not expelled from the school? “ Yours, respectfully, “Jonas Greene.” ii Is there anything disrespectful in this letter? Certainly not, the reader will say; and believing, as I do, that three-fourths of their statements were entirely false (and knowing some of them to be so), that this was a wicked and uncalled-for attack on our dead child, I was under no obligations to write them; but as I did not know but some one of this committee might be in possession of one fact, at least, of what they state they had knowledge of, and as I have spared no pains to obtain every fact possible, being very desirous of getting at the whole truth. As there was one ungrammatical sentence in those letters, my friend, to whom I showed them, and pointed out this sen­ tence, and the reason why I put it in, will smile to see how one of those sprigs of learning, Mr. A. J. Blethen, for the reason that he’ could not answer any of my questions, he having assisted in publishing as facts that which he knew nothing about, snapped at this bait and for his answer, wrote over the top of my letter these words, — “ Should advise a careful perusal of English grammar,” and returned it to me, evidently as an insult. He has put forth statements as facts, and could not give me a civil answer; how does he know a single one of them to be true ? I advise him, and the other four members of this committee, who have made no reply to my anxious but respectful request, to let Dr. Torsey, and the others who are implicated in this sad affair, take care of their own reputation, while he and his associates had better be attending to their own business. Modesty should have prevented her own sex, at least from appearing before the public to disparage her memory, and wound the feelings of her friends. �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 129 From A. W. Waterhouse, one of this committee, I received a respectful note, but entirely failing to answer any of my questions. He says: — “ With regard to statements made by the committee, of which I was a member, I will simply say, we endeavored to state the simple truth; nothing more, nothing less. As to explanations, which you ask, I refer you to the statements as printed. You cannot blame the students and friends of Dr. Torsey for wishing to have a fair statement of the case before the public.” »r What fair statement have you spread broadcast over the State? Simply this. You have repeated Torsey’s and the others’ statements to clear themselves, without asking or trying to find out a single word of what the friends of Louise knew or had to say in her defence. Not a word as to his or their knowledge does this member of this committee give me as to how they know what they published as facts, to be true. He does not answer one of my questions, but refers me to what they have printed ; as much as to say, — you must take what we have said as true because Dr. T. has told us so! Does that make a clear case for the party implicated to say he is innocent? They quote from L.’s letter with a relish where it tells against her; while nothing is said about any part of the letter where “ H. P. Torsey, LL. D., the President,” is implicated! The public will at once see where they desire the whole blame to rest. As I have before said, fear or favoritism predominates on the Hill, and their reward came speedily, as this committee of six took one-third of all the prizes awarded to that whole school at their closing exhibition. From the other four members, I got no reply. As I have spoken of a certain denomination usually talcing sides with the faculty, and showing a great desire to apologize aud to clear them from blame (no doubt but what’there are many exceptions), let me give the reader a sample how some of their leading members have met this sad case. In October last, while I was at Lewiston for the remains of my daughter soon after they were discovered, and there waiting for the coroner to return, as he was absent, — as I intended to have a j;ost mortem examination, to ascertain the immediate cause of her death, — while I was slowly pacing the sidewalks in sad and solemn thought, a stranger approached, and asked a question or two, and then said, “ Is this Mr. Greene, of Peru, who has lost a daughter?” And on receiving an answer in the affirma9 �130 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. tire, he said, in substance, “ I am one who do not visit the taverns or stores much ; I usually stay at home ; but have heard that much has been said about your daughter’s leaving the school at Kent’s Hill; and many arc disposed to blame Dr. Torsey very much, while others may think differently. But I am oue who wishes to see justice done, — do not take sides or part in street controversies.” Thus he continued in a cool, sober strain, for some time, I making but little reply, as I was feeling very bad. But thinks I, who is this cool, fair-talking stranger? He soon said, “We are to have an investigation, and if T. is to blame, let it be known; let him take the consequences; if otherwise, let him be acquitted; let justice be done, and have the matter cleared up; ” or words to that effect. I began to think that all this fair talk meant something. Just as we were about to part, I looked at him and said, “ Sir, although a stranger, I hope you are willing that justice shall be done to the memory of my poor, dead girl ?” He said, “ Certainly,” or words to that amount. As we were passing along, he said, “ I might as well say, that I am one of the trustees of that institution. My name is S. R. Bearce, of this place.” In a moment I thought I could see the whole length and breadth of him. • I knew just where he would end, if this conversation was continued. I knew naught of him ; but knew he must be a Methodist. He talked quite freely. I asked him some questions about the trustees. I said, “ Then Torsey is there by your (the trustees) authority? ” “ Yes,” was his reply. You control the whole matter, — do you ? ” (Meaning the general management and supervision of that institution.) His answer was, “ That is the purport, or our right; but w’e leave most all to Dr. Torsey. We do not have much to do, except in such a matter as this.” (Meaning the investigation spoken of by him, I suppose.) I asked him, — “when they proposed to investigate the matter? ” “ Oh I ” says he, “ when you have the inquest.” And said, “ I see by the paper that you are to have it to-day ; and I have written (he did not say he had sent for him) Torsey, and he will be here by noon to-day.” As we parted, thought I, “He was not a very disinterested stranger; and how did he know whom the coroner will see cause to summon before him as witnesses?” The coroner did not arrive that day; but those interested Kent’s Hillers (who never went one mile to my knowledge, out of their way; no, not one ~r r ! �I THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. V i .131 of them, to save my child, or in any way ever offered to assist me to find her) did come. Torscy, Mr. Daggett and his wife (and no doubt, if Miss Case had not gone home to New York, she would have come also) were prompt, and on hand, to testify and tell their story to clear themselves, without being called by the proper authorities willing witnesses in their own defence. AJittle more modesty would have made them appear as well. I waited until the next day (Thursday), and, as the coroner had not arrived, and as the time was fixed for the funeral on Sunday, and there was much to be done at home to carry out the arrangements, I was obliged to take her remains home, where I arrived with them on Friday evening. On Thursday forenoon, this sage and fair-talking S. R. Bearce, came into my brother’s saloon in Auburn, and asked about the inquest, and said, “ The coroner has got home” (which was not true), and said, “Torsey was there, but must go home at noon.” My brother, his wife, and some others were present. Mr. Bearce, my brother, and his wife began to talk about the cause and death of L. (I say but very little.)’ He (Bearce) again began in a seeming fair argument; but, as my brother’s wife said something in Louise’s defence, he (B.) then went on, stated the case, argued, and cleared T., in about two minutes, from all blame. He did not then, or at the other long interview on the street, ask me a single question, as to what I or my family knew of this sad case. The reader can see from whom he desired and did get his information, or how much he cared about “justice being done.” On his leaving the saloon, my brother, who was a stranger to him, says, — “ That is the man who so unceremoniously snatched that memoranda book out of my hands the other day, when I, with four others of L.’s uncles and aunts had just arrived at the spot where the remains of L. lay, and were trying to identify her. I had just taken this little book from her reticule, and was looking it over for that purpose.” At a later period, I learned that this man sent a team post-haste through to Kent’s Hill (where it arrived at midnight), to notify Torsey. This shows the great interest taken, when the reputation of Dr. Torscy, the school, and denomination is at stake. The public have seen in many of the papers of this State, the following statement, after the account of the anniversary exercises at Kent’s Hill, June 5th and Gtb, 1SG7 : “ By request of Dr. Torsey the trustees made a thorough investigation as to the conduct of the faculty in the case of the late Miss M. Louise Greene, and, as the result, they adopted resolutions and put them on file, entirely exonerating Dr. Torsey and the faculty from ... 1 �132 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. all blame, and fully approving their course.” Mark well the first point in this statement: “ by request, of Dr. T. ” Then it was not the trustees who instigated this examination. He desired to get before a committee of the trustees, and, with a long, sanctimonious face, tell his story, aud, backed by his special friends, he thought he could make them believe he was not to blame. He well knew I was not fool enough to appear at such a time and place before so one-sided a tribunal. As Dr. T. aud the faculty, by this published statement, stand fully acquitted, and the trustees’ committee are made to say they fully approve their course, the public are not informed how this was done. I owe to the memory of the dead, to myself and family, to show how this was accom­ plished ; how “ full and searching an investigation ” (as one paper reports this matter) could have taken place. On the 27th of May, 1867, I received a letter from F. A. Robinson, informing me that there would be a meeting of the trustees of that insti­ tution, June 5th, at ten o’clock A. M., “at which time the course of the faculty with reference to your ’daughter will be investigated by a com­ mittee chosen for that purpose. The faculty invite you to be present, and to prefer any charges you have to make against them, or to make any statement you wish to present.” To which I replied, May 28, as follows : — “Prof. Robinson: Sir, — Yours of the 28th is received and contents noticed. You name the time but not the place of the meeting of the trustees. From whom and by whom are the investigating committee to be chosen ? ” To which he replied, May 29, as follows: “ The place of holding the meeting is in the seminary building, Kent’s Hill. The committee will be of the trustees, and, of course, appointed by them. At an informal meeting held at Bath a few weeks since, the gentleman were indicated to constitute the committee.” He gave the names of five of the trustees as that committee. On the receipt of this, I, May 31, answered as follows : “ On the receipt of yours of the 27th, inviting me to an investigation of the course of the faculty in reference to my daughter, in answer to my inquiries of the 28th inst., asking you from whom and by whom are the investigating committee to be chosen, I never was more surprised in my life, than, on the receipt of your answer of the 29th, to think, in a matter of so great and vital importance to me and my family, that you should so coolly inform me that the trustees have appointed that committee from their own members, and that the meeting should have been appointed in such a place and at such a time. I wish you to say to Dr. Torsey that if he chooses to proceed I f 1 �5 ! THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. y / h~ I ' 133 iu this sad and heart-rending case in that manner, self-respect forbids me to take any action before a committee which I have no voice in selecting.” If the object of this investigation was really to bring out all the facts possible in this sad case of the departure and death of Miss Greene, and to ascertain if Dr. T., or any one connected with the care and control of that institution, was in any way to blame, and to satisfy the friends of Miss G., and the public, who, to some extent, to say the least, believe that a great wrong was done by some one, then every possible means should have been taken to give her parents and friends a fair hearing. An entirely disinterested committee should have been selected ; a proper time and place should have been agreed upon ; all parties should have had ample time to prepare for the hearing. Then the public would have placed con­ fidence in their decision. It would have allayed the excitement. My objection to the committee was that they all were members of the trustees, directly interested to sustain their teachers and the school. The trustees consist of twenty-six gentlemen, scattered over the State, most of them belonging to the Methodists, and selected as interested persons, who are expected to work for th‘e interest of this school. Two of those trustees belong to, and are the leading spirits of that faculty, namely, H. P. Torsey, and F. A. Robinson, who is a brother to Torsey’s wife. The reader will now see how this matter stands. Dr. T. and some of his associates are accused of dealing under prejudice, unjustly and wrongfully, with an old student laboring under public censure. This man (who, by reference to their annual catalogue you will see, stands at the head of the list of Trustees as President) seeks to clear himself. He goes to his friends to their annual State Conference holden at Bath. He there makes a smooth speech, wherein he alludes to this affair. He has well matured what he wished to say, to arouse the whole conference to defend and sus­ tain the reputation of that school. After alluding to attacks which some would make, or had made, of this affair to injure this school, he, in substance, says, speaking to the conference, “ This school is your school; its reputa­ tion is yours to sustain and defend.” Wasn’t this well put to the members of that conference, who were to go forth to their respective appointments, and each would be expected to work for this their pet institution? The reputation of their school is at stake, — his reputation is at stake, — and this cunning old fox expects that, through this conference of ministers, the members, on their respective charges, will also labor for the school; and, when they do that, they must also sustain him and his reputation. The public will see whether I am correct or not. Robinson says, at an informal meeting held at Bath a few weeks since, “ The committee was i J �134 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. indicated.” It is fair to suppose that this informal meeting took place soon after this speech of Torsey’s ; and it is also fair to suppose that he or his special friends managed to get such a committee as he wished selected. As this gentleman, S. R. Bearce, of whom I have before spoken, was one of this committee, I could not expect justice from him, who had given so hasty and decided au opinion in advance of any trial; and, further, as one of the leading members of tUs committee had already appeared, through a public journal, in a lengthy article in Torsey’s defence, aud the manage­ ment of this institution. My objection to the time and place was, that it was on the day of, and one hour after, the anniversary exercises were advertised to commence; w hen and where it must be all excitement and hurry for the next two days, — when and where the very air is tainted with and every breath is expected to be blown for Torsey and this institution. Some of their friends have given this as a reason or excuse for their neg­ lect to look after and take care of my daughter, because of the approach­ ing anniversary, two'weeks ahead, — that the faculty were so much engrossed in preparation for the same. In one year they invite me to an investiga­ tion just as the opening exercises commence, when the time of the faculty must be nearly all taken up in the performances. All must see that they, the faculty, meant no such searching investigation as is reported that they had. I must have occupied two days, at least, to have fairly presented my case to the committee. Was this a proper time’to investigate the cause of the death of my child? Was this a public or private investigation? By the notice I received I supposed it was to be public. I am informed by one who . made numerous inquiries that day, on the Hill, of various students and others, about such a hearing, that he found but one person, and that was a lady student to whom I had written about the meeting, who had any knowledge that such an investigation was to be had ; and by the way this man Torsey, — who pretends and testified before this committee how long it was before he knew L. had gone so publicly on the stage as to be seen from the college to get on to it at ten o’clock in the forenoon, in front of his house, and who was so indifferent or undecided as to wait until six o’clock at night before any one started to notify me,— could watch and know that this lady student had received a letter from me, and was so impertinent as to go to this student (who was to graduate the next day, and just then would feel a great hesitancy to deny his request), and ask her for that letter, which he took immediately and read before this committee, as I am informed. It is evident that he did not understand the reason of that letter being sent her at that time. I leave him to enjoy all the credit which he will gain in that trans- » f I �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. .V ■ 135 action. At the special time and place, and when the trustees and com­ mittee were assembled, one gentleman present, on motion and by vote, was allowed to remain while the investigation proceeded ;tlic other gentle­ man was questioned as to who he was, where he belonged, and what his business was there. A motion was made to exclude him; but, before that motion was put, it was suggested that the motion had better not be put, as the gentleman would understand and would withdraw without being voted out. This gentleman then said he understood this to be a public meeting; if so, he should remain ; if private, he would withdraw. They said many other things about some other business to be done before they proceeded with the investi­ gation. At the suggestion of the trustees he finallj' withdrew. Subsequently at about six o’clock at night he was notified that he could attend at that ad­ journed meeting. Query: Was this a public or private investigation? Twill call it mongrel. But this gentleman tells me it was certainly intended to be private. With Torsey and his special friends as witnesses, what other result and report could the public expect than what has appeared in some of the public journals ? To what extent this has allayed the public feeling, and relieved Torsey and his associates from blame, I am unable to say. To show the unfairness of this transaction, suppose I had selected a committee of my friends, .nd had appointed some public day for a hearing at my house in Peru, and then, about one week before the hearing, notified Torsey to be present, and make such defence for himself and associates as he chose, in regard to their doings and my daughter leaving the school. How would he and his associates have treated such r proposition? But I am aware that the trustees may say “ Mr. Greene was no party to this transaction. We were only investigating the doings of our teachers or faculty at our school. One of our members wrote and invited him to be present, etc. He has no right to complain of our action.” If they choose to treat this matter (the cause of the death of my child) in that way, they can do so. I can only say, if this was their case they might look upon such action in a different light; they might think this was treading on delicate ground. You are interested to sustain this school; you were selected as such to work for and to sustain its reputation; and when you attempt to investi­ gate the cause of my child fleeing from your principal, and to an untimely death, you should do it fairly, and not rely upon your own faculty’s statement and other interested witnesses to fully justify and exonerate them in this sad case. There is not a member of ibis faculty or trustees, or an intelligent person in any community, who would refer the smallest matter in dispute to such interested referees. There is not v. lawyer to bo found so void of fairness as to advise a client to attempt or accept such a �136 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. proposition. It seems to me that Dr. Torsey’s course, in this attempt to clear himself, in so unfair and unjustifiable a manner, in so grave and ■wretched an affair, is enough to convince the public that he wofully wronged, and wickedly neglected to care for our child. If it was not so he would not have made such desperate efforts to clear himself from public censure. Was there anything done to save her? Oh I her bitter words in her letter: “ If I could have had an opportunity on the Hill to retrieve the past! If this thing had not been made common talk and public property, there might have been a future for me.” These words ought to wring in Torsey’s ears while he lives. He made this appear so to her. He says he told her the school knew it; and his urging her to go home in disgrace, to leave that day, — this, no doubt, is what she means by not having an opportunity on the Hill to retrieve the past. Again she writes: “ They tried to make me account for all the little things lost during the term.” When they, as Miss Case said they did, searched that little fancy trunk, holding about a quart, were they looking for articles of clothing in that ? Were they not trying to make her account for all the lost articles lost that term? and, were they not disgracing, abusing, and driving her to distrac­ tion, when they, as Mrs. Daggett told me, examined her person, and • the uuder-clothes she had on, so-far as to see that her chemise was? marked with her own name? Mr. Daggett admitted to me that, when he was called in to assist his wife and Miss Case in this examination (as I sup­ pose after they had exhausted their skill and abuse on my poor girl), he questioned her about two linenjiandkerchiefs; he would not say that he was cross and severe on her; but I have very good reasons to believe that he was severe beyond reason. In his testimony before the committee of trustees he would not say that he was not cross with her. Have they found those small articles which they wrongfully accused L. of taking, but did not find, after pursuing her and her sister to the shameful extent to which they did? -Why do Torsey and Robinson con­ tinue to harp about that skeleton key? They told us in that faculty meeting that they did not accuse her of using it wrongfully. She,, in her class letter, says: “ My having that key did look bad; but I do not believe that they really thought I used it wrongfully. I certainly never did.” When I called on Daggett to see that skeleton key, he and his wife said they never saw or knew anything about the key until L. left. The faculty said they said nothing personally to her about the key. but had told students, publicly, that if any of them should have in their possession such keys, and things should be lost, they would be suspected. Why lecture students publicly, if the having a skeleton key was an unheard- I �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT KORN. r- 137 of event, and the keeping of one such a crime as to cause them to write continually about it to enlarge her crime? They well knew it is no uncom­ mon thing in this and other schools for students to have such keys. An old student at this school told me they should not have thought it any harm to have kept one as a curiosity; and yet, L. having one in her possession. . (although given to her by one of their own students, of which Mrs. Dag­ gett gave me the name of the giver) is spread abroad by Torsey and Robinson, both private and public, as a heinous offence, — a crime. They not only tried to impress upon her, this poor distracted girl, “the enormity of her crime” (Miss Case’s own language), but they try to “impress” tho public with the same. That key I have never been able to find. In that faculty meeting, one week after L. had left, and our fears were that she was dead, he (Torsey) seemed desirous to know what we were going to say about the matter, — thought it best for us to say but little in regard to the same. Yes; this unfeeling man thought we could lose our child in such a heart-rending manlier and say but little about it, while he and bis associates send broadcast over the State all kinds of stories. We must be­ lieve all they say, take all his insulting letters, let them connive to get up student committee’s reports and trustee committee’s reports, publish and send them over the State, and her friends not say a word. Does it look as Robinson writes, “ after as private an examination as possible,” when Chestina and Mr. Chandler, who came home with her, knew all; Mr. Swagler tells L. the morning she left he knew all; Miss Case takes all hei class, before L. left that morning, and tells them all; Torsey tells her that morning the school know it? Is it true that they kept it as private as pos­ sible, or was it not making it public ? I never accused him of publicly rep­ rimanding her before the school. This sly, cunning man has a different way, I think, to accomplish his ends. But his often and repeated denial of doing so has of late led me to think that something of that kind was done by him. I submit to the public if I have not shown him to have been her enemy for • a long time. At any rate, she looked upon him as such, and a revengeful one, too. Does not this pursuing their d,ead student, to disgrace her mem­ ory and to injure her friends, show that Louise well understood that man? Did she not understand his power and will to do, to accomplish his object? If anyone doubts his infallibility, then private and public indignation mustbe aroused against them. They are not content with the death of their pupil, who made immediate, full, frank confession and restitution, and atoned with her life for that small offence ; but even now it comes to me that they threaten, if I dare defend my child’s character from numerous mis­ representations set afloat, that they will further disgrace her memory and I �1 138 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. injure her friends. Therefore we or the public need not be surprised at any stories or any means they may take to accomplish that end. In the lan­ guage of their circulars, can “Parents feel assured that their sons and daughters will find here a safe and pleasant home ” ? Sarah Dow, one of L.’s class, tells me lately that Miss Case, the precep­ tress, on the morning of May 23, before Louise left, called all the class into her room in the college, and told them all about the affair, and said she could tell them now ; she had not had liberty to do so before. Then some­ body must have given her liberty to publish all to her class. Who but the faculty could do so, of which Torsey is chief ? This must be about the time T. was talking with L., and telling her the school knew it. Did Miss Case know that she would be expelled? It does look like that; or she would not have been telling all to them unless she was preparing them for that event, reporting all in such a manner as to make it look; as Miss Fuller expressed it, “ so large then to us.” It is clear to my mind that this one of the .leading spirits of the faculty then knew as well as Torsey that she would be expelled. The reader will see that, any way which they can explain it, they did not mean to spare her feelings or save her from disgrace. My poor girl knew it well. One other member of her class writes me, June, 1867, that Miss Case did, on that fatal morning, “ immediately after breakfast, call our class into her room ” (the quick eye of dur poor girl no doubt saw this movement, and quickly divjned her intention) ; ” and the principal object, she said, that she had, in calling us into her room, was to tell us her course in regard to the matter from the beginning, and also to tell that L. confessed the charges brought against her.” Then her first object was to explain and clear herself. (The others were also very ready to do that.) The next object was to publish her private confession to all the class.' Why, in the name of all that is good and noble, did not this preceptress, who should have acted the motherly, or at least a friendly, part, and extend her protecting care over all she in part presides over, those whom she is directing and controling, — why, instead of making all so public and to explain her course to others, did she not, the evening before, go to my lone, distressed, and dis­ tracted child, and speak words of encouragement and comfort to her troubled mind, and give her kindly advice, to see if she did not want some assist­ ance? Benjamin Hamman told me, at his house on Kent’s Hill, May 26, three days after’ L. had gone, that just before he started for the depot with his coach, on which she rode away, he heard something of her trouble, and knew by her looks that she was feeling bad, although she tried to keep up J 'X- �1 THE CEOWN WON BUT NOT WORN. t" 139 favorable appearances, and saw she was clad in old apparel, and that she was taking nothing with her but a little reticule. His fears were excited for her safety, and while disposing, at the depot, of the baggage and CXpress matter, he thought he ought to get on to the train and go to see what became of her, but could not think of any one to take charge of his stage team. He thought he would gain time, and, if possible, before the train started, go and talk with her. Just as he got through, he started to go to her- on the platform. As soon as she saw him coming towards her, she turned and went directly into the cars, and, as they were about to start, he did not pursue. He then learned that she had purchased a ticket for Lewiston; and, on his return to the Hill, meeting Miss Reed on the street, she says, on speaking of her sudden departure without taking her baggage, and in her ordinary clothing, and fearing the sad result liable to follow, he was affected to tears,—he saying, at her request, that he would take a team and go with Chestina to Lewiston, in pursuit of Louise. If this arrangement or request of Miss Reed had immediately been put into execution (and I have no doubt but what it would have been had Dr. Torsey been out of the way, where he could not have been consulted), she doubtless would have been saved, as about three hours would have taken them to Lewiston, where Louise remained more than four hours at the Elm House after a team could have been started by Mi-. Harriman to pursue her. There can be but little doubt but Torsey’s influence prevented Miss Reed’s attempt to get a team started to pursue her. Miss Recd says, after the long and wretched delay, in which she and Cl|estina got all out of patience, heart-sick, in waiting - until six o’clock at night, when the team came to take Chestina home, she felt as if it was too late to save her; that before that team could reach me and I could get to Lewiston, she would get be­ yond our reach, or, what she more feared, would bo dead. An old student informs us at our home that Louise was once, in his and in the presence of the assembled school, at prayers, severely reprimanded by one of the faculty, because she did not rise during singing; and after she had given as a reason for not rising that she was sick and unable to stand up, he, with harsh and ungentlemanly language, calling her by name, sent her to her room. Louise had told her mother of the same, and said she felt so sick during prayers that she could not stand. This was some time during the last year of her stay at that school. Dr. Torsey, at one time after prayers, while lecturing the students, and in a slurring manner, called her by name in regard to some small matter about leave of absence, all tending to show their prejudice and desire to wound her feelings. The student above referred to told us of a case which, to Iris mind, was clear, w here I �140 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. Torsey, on account of the religious sentiments or opinions of a student, ■— an able writer, one who was excluded from, and was not allowed a chance to compete for, distinction in composition, on account of his well-known religious opinions, which came in contact with the established religion of this school, — a great outburst of indignation was expressed against an argu­ ment which this student made in their lyceum, on the affirmative of the question, “ Whatever is, is right." He was talked to and his arguments ridiculed. Ever after he was not allowed a fair chance as a writer or de­ bater in the school. Another student writes me, and among other things, speaking of Torsey, says: “ In fact, I do not admire his religious belief, neither do I admire the gentleman, not because of any particular individual misusage, but sim­ ply did not like his way of acting towards those who d*d not believe as ho would choose to have them. I noticed it on several occasions, and others with me in that manner of thinking. It is my private opinion that he has his favorites, and that those favorites are favored, though in a sly way.” Dr. Torsey is only a man possessed of human nature, and is as liable, when in a strait place, to dissemble and deny what he did do, as others have done to screen themselves from blame. If a guilty person says he is innocent, will that answer if all the circumstances point the other way? If a man threatens to burn your buildings, and he is proved to have been out and near your place the night they are burned, with materials to fire them, his denial will not clear him from suspicion. If you are aroused in the night by some one who has stealthily entered your house, you make a vigorous and successful spring at and finally overpower him; and if he sould say he was tired, cold, and came in to get .lodging for the night, would you believe him, if he was armed with a revolver, dirk, and other deadly weapons? Judge and jury would infer his motives, — he would be held as a burglar. I find, on the 23d of May, 1866 (after my daughter had for the past thirty-six or forty hours been implicated, harassed, and pursued by those under Dr. T.’s control and direction), Dr. Torsey taking her alone in a room in the college, and having a long conversation with her; and, on bis leaving her, I find her without saying a word to any other person in that building, immediately taking off. her gold sleeve-buttons, her class ring, breaking from her neck a small cord on which she had long worn that very little key which opened that fancy trunk, and evidently, at this time, hastily writing those words on the lap of an envelope, “ Heart breaking; dearly beloved, adieu,” and tucking them into her diary, which she left in n A; �XT I the CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 1 141 her trunk. I find her going to her sister’s room, in another house, in an excited state of mind. Failing to see her, she writes a short note, telling her she was going to Lewiston, etc. I find her leaving money in Her trunk, and going in her poorest apparel, taking notlung of importance with her. I find her taking the- stage in front of TorSey’s house, at ten in the fore­ noon. I find him in his stable, which is attached to his house. Before twelve he is notified just how she left, and the great fear of her destruction made known to him. I find him parleying, delaying, consuming time, — saying be could or would do this, that, or the other thing, but doing noth­ ing to recover her for eight long hours after her departure. I find him tell­ ing her sister it would not have been best for her to have gone on to the stage, etc., and telling Miss Recd that. L. said she wanted it kept from the school,—she stay and graduate, — and that she told him if she could not graduate, there was no future for her; thus plainly indicating to him her awful fate. I find him writing me various things about her leaving, telling us things inconsistent with what he has written, and withholding things from us, which he had told others, about her leaving. J find her writing her sister the daj* she left, that Dr. T. advised her to leave that day. I find him long before telling her she could not expect any more favors of him or of the school; and if she should do anything that looked like a wil­ ful violation of any rule, she could expect but little forbearance from the teachers. I find she had confessed, privately, to three of them, just what and all she had done, and the reason why she had done so, excepting the money, — she gave no reason for that. I find her writing that she felt her­ self guilty of but one crime, — the talcing of the money, — and saying that was a mystery to her. At length her wasted form is discovered. With all this, and many other petty annoyances, with his well-known prejudice, I have a right to doubt his, and the other inconsistent statements coming from that faculty. I, and the public, have a right to infer and judge, under all the circumstances of this sad case, what was most likely said and done which sent her to an untimely death. And when I find him writing me, May 27, 1866, four days after she left, “ I had a long conver­ sation with her the morning she left, and urged upon her two things.” After stating the first, he says, — second, “ that she go at once to her father and mother.” Does that look like allowing her to graduate, within twelve days, when he was urging her to go at once home to her parents, in disgrace? Who will say he expected her to return and graduate? And when he writes me, June 30, 1866, “ She was not sent home,”—he saw that was too bare faced a lie, and he erased the words “ sent home,” and wrote the word “ expelled” over them, making the sentence read, — “Sho I �142 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. was not expelled.” Judge ye. whether this statement is true! I cannot see it in that light, when she writes that he said, “ We won’t call it expulsion, hut I advise you to go home to-day.” What in the name of Heaven was he doing but expelling her? God being my judge, I believe he is attempting to palm off upon me an absolute falsehood. And can he make the public believe that he was honest when he told Chestina and Miss Reed that he had no fears of her destruction? Is he more dull of apprehension than many students who greatly feared for her fate as soon as they knew how she had gone? He who knew her best, hei' sensitive nature, knew all about how she had gone, has no fears, tells about her going into a factory or running away. O consistency I He is a sharp, shrewd man, and thinks he can readily read characters, discern motives, and quickly anticipate re­ sults. Don’t tell me he did or could not understand what would most likely be the result. Under all the circumstances and evidences, I have come to the following conclusion, and from which I cannot retract, un­ less some new evidence shall be disclosed: — That as he (Torscy) found that he could not control and mould her opinions, and as she would not consent to his infallibility, he became prejudiced against her, — her influ­ ence, religiously, did not suit him, she not being with them heart aud soul (as he expressed it),— this annoyed and perplexed him much; and now, when he found she was in trouble, he thinks, I now have a good opportunity. Miss Greene, I will make you feel my power. I will so manage as to make you see that you have no chance to graduate, without saying so in ’so many words. (I do not believe he ever told any student so ; he has a dif­ ferent way of accomplishing his purpose.) I will, when I get you to see the hopelessness of your case, advise you to leave. Before your parents know anything about your trouble, you will be far away, as they may make trouble. This will disgrace you, and will also punish your father for his plain and pertinent letter to me two years ago. You will live through it, I think, — he not caring or thinking but little what would become of her. After she had gone, and when he found just how, and all about her leaving, he, at a glance, saw the serious turn the case was taking, and the result that would be likely to follow; he was greatly perplexed to know how to manage, or what to say or do. Hence his pretence that he did not know she was gone for some time. Then he hesitates, argues, delays, goes away; comes again, and tells what he had arranged to do; and then there is another two or three hours’ delay before he puts that airangement into execution. He saw the fix he would be in if Harriman and Chestina had immediately pursued and been successful in secui-ing her return, or saving her life. She would have confronted him before her friends, and said, .r'~- �r 1 UTE CROWN WON' BUI NOT WORN. 143 ■“ Yon sent me away in disgrace, and why do you pursue me ? ” This meet­ ing her and her friends he wished to avoid. Hence his neglect to pursue her, and his long delay to notify me, so as to give her time to escape be­ yond the reach of friends, or that the result might be as it was, before any one could reach her and save her life. If her crime had been a hundred-fold greater, so much-greater the neces­ sity and the responsibility resting upon him. He discloses to us his wicked deception most when he tries to make students and-others believe he loved her, was tender of her feelings, aud felt bad about her misfortune and death, when everything showed to the contrary. This outward appearance he attempts for effect. So is his great effort to be particularly kind to the students since this awful tragedy. He knows his reputation is at stake, and he needs all the friends which he can make ; and I have no doubt but what many have been the favors that students have received on account of the suffering and death of our poor girl. This man has been at the head of that school so long that in my opinion he has become arbitrary and overbearing. Authority and power for a long time makes men so. If he is that good and noble man, that kind and Christ-like Christian, some would have the public believe, why does he pursue this vindictive course towards her parents ; why write me his insulting letters? It cannot be any­ thing that I have written him, for the reader has seen every word I have written him since L. left, in those two letters before given. Parents who shall read this, were it your child, should you be willing to bear all we have and not say a word? No, you would not only say, but you would have all you could do to keep your hands off of him. It may be with all those who dealt so summarily with L. on the Hill, that their character from child­ hood up could stand such an ordeal as they are applying to hers, and each and all come out unscathed; it maybe so, with that committee of students, and with Dr. Torsey; but a close examination might disclose the fact that all have not escaped having some unfavorable reports circulated about them, at some period of their lives. One of my neighbors (kindly, he may have thought) advised me not to come out and make any defence for my child; said that a Methodist min­ ister told his wife that they at Kent’s Hill had fifteen counts against her,— fifteen thefts as he took it to be; and I have no doubt but thousands are made to believe such stories. If that be true then I have over sixty just such counts against them, besides the cash, post-office stamps, clothing, and various other articles lost there during the five years and previous to those lost the last term. I sought through the press to give our child in death the benefit of her I �lI 144 THE CROWN WON.BUT NOT WORN. previous good character, by publishing those numerous certificates, and strong proofs of her ever good standing and moral worth from a child up to this sad affair, not saying a word about or blaming any one in regard to her leaving and subsequent death. A large portion of the press (as I believe for fear of losing the patronage of this Kent’s Hill influence and that denomination,) refused to publish those statements or certificates of her previous good moral character. The publication of those certificates in some of the papers seemed to stir up this faculty and their friends everywhere to fresh attacks on her character; they seem to act as if they thought their only chance to escape public censure was to stigmatize her previous character, enlarge upon her last act, and make her crime appear so large that, they would be justified in them treatment to her, and they take shelter under thdir cry of “ Thief, thief.” The refusal of so large a portion of the press to publish those certificates, and the publishing of the other side by some of the papers, leaves me no alternative but to seek some other source to reach the public, and vindicate her previous character, and to show the great wrongs done her while living, and since she fled from that institution. * The friends of Dr. T. may say as did the friends of Prof. Webster of Boston, in the Parkman murder case, — “ Oh! he is so nice a man ; his repu­ tation stands so high; he is clear; he never did that act. He says be did not, and denies all knowledge of the crime, — the whole affair ; and you ought to believe him. Why, Prof. Webster has not murdered, has not cut up, boiled, or burnt his victim’s remains. That is horrible! too bad to think of in this Christian land.” And people would look at each other with astonishment when some expressed their belief that it was true. Yet it was so. And this grave professor denied and lied at every turn in his case until he found he must swing for it. Then, he owned and confessed all. And so it has been in a thousand cases. None can tell what man pos­ sessed of- human nature will do under bad circumstances. The reader can never realize how grateful we feel towards those of her class who asked Miss Reed to go to Torsey and see what could be done ; and to Miss Reed, for her efforts and earnest desire to get Harriman and Chestina started immediately after her. And our abhorrence and contempt for this modem Nero, who could fiddle, play upon words to consume time, prevent pursuit, while our poor child, heart-broken, was fleeing from him (who then stood in the place of, and should have extended parental pro­ tection to her), from all that was dear to her on earth, and going to destruction. I can now, as it were, hear’ the moans, the sobs, coming up from that I r I I �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 145 lonely forest, where our darling child so terribly perished. Her dying wail, saying to that heartless man, “ You saw me in great distress and you ministered not unto me ; you saw me in trouble, and you took me not in; you knew of my terrible disappointment, my heart-rending feelings, — for I told you I could not go home to my parents in disgrace. I told you if I could not graduate, there was no future for me. You advised me to leave. You sent me heart-broken to an untimely death, when you could have saved me. When you come v.p to the judgment-seat, where you and I shall stand around that great white throne, and before Him who kuows all things, will you then and there attempt to excuse yourself to the Judge of all, as you did to my parents, and say, ‘Your daughter was of age, and I had no right to control her; she was under censure, and it would be un­ proper to have sent her to my house and to my wife ’ ? ” Torsey and her other accusers on the Hill may have religion, but, I pray God to give me a different kind of religion, — a religion which shows some of the precept and examples taught by Christ while upon earth. In laying before my readers some of our departed child’s writing, permit me to state, that the first piece given was written by her when less than ten years old, the first she ever wrote, and then will follow others written all the way along from ten to sixteen, before she went to Kent’s Hill, with some written after and while she was attending there ; but as a large portion of her writings are lost there with her other things, .we cannot give some of her ablest productions to the public, unless they shall be restored to us. LIBERTY. Everything that God has made loves liberty. The little birds that sing so merrily to us, when deprived of liberty, lose their cheerfulness, and often pine away and die. The lambs that sport so gayly in the green fields, when confined, bleat piteously and seem to say, let me go; aud even the little worm that crawls beneath our feet, when confined to a narrow space, shows discontent. If liberty then be so dear to the animal creation, how much more so must it be to God’s intelligent beings 1 And how great must be the sin of those who deprive their fellow-beings of that liberty they so highly prize themselves, and also take away the key of knowledge that they may better subject them to bondage! HOW WE SPENT INDEPENDENCE DAY, 1857. Every one said Independence day would be pleasant; and so it was. Every one intended to enjoy themselves to the best of their ability, myself 10 �r 146 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. among the number. A thousand schemes for pleasure were proposed, and finally it was unanimously agreed that a visit to Rumford Falls would be just the thing, away from the bustle and confusion attendant upon a crowded celebration, away from the crowded street and the vulgarity and drunkenness that usually characterize such a miscellaneous gathering, to that scene of rural beauty. Accordingly six o’clock A.M. found us on our way to that delightful place, in company with a few of our intimate friends and school-mates. The day was warm and pleasant; the tall trees waved their leafy branches above our heads ; the tiny birds warbled their morn­ ing songs, and all nature seemed to participate in our enjoyment. After riding about eight miles, a loud rumbling sound gave notice of our approach to the cataract. Leaving our teams a short distance, we walked up to the very brink of the precipice which overhung the water, when a magnificent sight lay beneath our feet. The verdant hue of the overhanging trees • blended with the deep blue waters as they foamed and dashed down their rocky bed; the everlasting mountains that proudly rear their lofty heads in the distance ; the clear blue sky over our heads ; and the fancifully woven carpet of green grass spread out beneath our feet, — all these and many other attractions formed a picture worthy of a painter’s skill. Beneath the wide-spreading branches of a noble tree, where a spring of clear cold water bubbled up from the rock below to’ quench our thirst, we seated our­ selves to rest, and also to partake of the various refreshments provided for us. » After enjoying a quiet chat and a good lunch, we took a last look of that charming spot, and soon were rapidly travelling on the homeward way, stopping, however, a short time at the house of one of our number, where we were entertained with a feast of good things. The old family clock struck six as we arrived home again, and methinks in the future, when we look back upon the days that are past and gone, our minds will delight to linger upon the remembrance of that happy Independence day. LIFE: WHAT IS IT? What is life ? — to some, " a breath, A vapor flying to the skies; ” To others, a gay, fantastio path Bestrown with flowcry phantasies. What is life? — a dream to those Who idly stray until its end; A drcam, upon whoso final olose A sad awakening shall attend. I J f 1 1 �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 14.7 What is life ? — a journey long And drear, trhen travelled all alone, But vrhen companions cheer tho wny, Ono upon which wo long would stay. What is life? — a darksome night, With but ono star to light tho gloom, And on Death’s wing wo take our flight, To dwell ’ncath Heaven’s unclouded sun. Peru, Dec. 24, 1859. THOUGHTS BY THE WAYSIDE. “ O Mr. B., it seems too bad to cut down that clover,” said I to our hired man, one sultry summer day, as he was busily engaged in mowing down the fragrant clover that lifted its tall heads, crowned with beautiful blossoms in our little enclosure. “ Why ? ” queried he. “ Because it smells so sweetly and looks so pretty.” “ Its beauty will soon fade,” he replied, resuming his labor. I, too, turned again to my work, but his thoughtless words had awakened a train of thought in my mind; and in fancy I again beheld the counte­ nance of a lovely maiden with whom I associated in my early school-days, and whose history I well knew. Hers was a beauty of the regal cast': wavy hair of purplish blackness, flashing black eyes, a form of stately beauty, and fair, round face, every feature of which was cast in beauty’s mould. An enviable lot was hers; the only daughter of an aristocratic family, her wish was law ; her pleasure, their chief aim to secure. Petted and indulged by her parents, flattered by her associates, to her life must have worn a cheerful look, and earth a paradise. But soon the scene changed. Pecuniary embarrassments swept away her father’s fortune, and with it went most of their fashionable friends. Death came and removed one after another of that family band, till parents, brothers, all were gone. She was almost penniless and alone in a great city. Alas I too truly had she learned the mutability of earthly enjoyments; and, as I recalled the story of her misfortunes, I thought of the farmer’s words, “ It will soon fade.” Gone were her wealth and her numerous friends and relatives,—her earthly all, faded and withered beneath the sharp scythe of time. Again, I see a young man, his cheeks flushed with ambition of youth, and eyes sparkling at the thought of the future glory that should be his ; of the wealth he would gain and the fame that should surround his name with a halo of glory. Again I saw him in riper manhood; he had gained that emolument for which he toiled. Wealth had come at his call, yet it L 2 �148 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. brought increased cares. Ambition had raised him to an equality with great men of his age ; but it brought no real happiness. He was blessed with a model wife and family to sympathize with him in affliction and to rejoice at his joy; yet mingled with pure affection was much dross. He had reached the summit of the hill, and now enjoyed the world’s favor; yet one thing was wanting; without it, true happiness cannot exist. He had sought it in pleasure, but it was not there; in riches, but found it not; in fame, but the search proved useless; in the busy walks of fashion he found it not; neither did it dwell in the halls of literature and art. De­ spairingly he turned away, thinking that true happiness dwelt not on earth, when his eyes rested on a humble volume lying on the shelves of his book­ case. It was old and faded, and bore marks of neglect by the dust which had gathered thickly upon its lids. Thinking to beguile a few moments, he listlessly opened the book, and the first passage which met his eye read thus ; “ Come unto me, all ye that are weary and heavy laden, and I will give you regt.” Rest! was not this the treasure for which he had searched long and diligently, but found it not? Rest for the weary and heavy laden; was he not wearied with toil and cares?—heavy laden with burdens of anxiety ? Instantly he resolved to seek that rest, to obtain that peace in the way which the Bible pointed out. He was this time successful in his search. By slow but sure degrees his mind began to comprehend the true end of life, — to see that not man’s but God’s favor must be sought, ere the longings of his immortal spirit could be satisfied. And when this was done, when the barriers of pride and sin were removed, and the light of religion shone upon his soul, his cup of happiness was full to overflow­ ing. Did our Saviour call home his darling child ? He could look with an eye of faith up to that blessed land where sorrow and suffering come no more, and behold his child among the angel band which dwells at the right hand, of our Father, and rejoicing in his smiles. Did men scorn and despise him? Turning to God’s holy word, he reads, “Blessed are ye, when men shall revile and persecute you.” And when the death-angel came knocking at the door of his soul, he could say, with the inspired prophet, “ Though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for Thy rod and Thy staff will comfort and sustain me.” Such piety, like fruitful seed planted in fertile soil, grows and expands, choking out each obnoxious weed, till, transplanted, it blooms forever in more congenial climes. Sorrow and disappointments may overwhelm -us; friends may depart and enemies exult in our distress ; every earthly pleasure may wither and fade, as the morning dewdrop from the grass, or as the grass itself sinks / I �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 119 beneath the sharp scythe of the mower; yet with religion for our support, we shall safely tread the mazy labyrinth of life, and finally repose in that land of the blest, where sickness shall come no more, and where enjoy­ ments are eternal and unfading. LINES. I sat within my chamber, Ono cold and wintry night; Around mo winds wero blowing, And tho moon refused her light. And as I sat there thinking Of tho lovo that onco was mine, Of tho friend, who, in life’s morning, Was cut down, by tho band of Timo,— ! I Jly mourning heart cried wildly, " How can I walk alone • The dark and dreary pathway That leads to our Father’s homo? “ I miss thy bright, sweet presence, 0 friend forever gone! While others walk in gladness, must I wander alone ? “Even.now my feet aro weary, And hardly find tho track; If thou, lovo, could’st but guide mo, rd fear no turning back.” I Tho darkness grew still deeper, Still wilder camo my cry,— I cannot live without thee; 0 Father, let mo die! ” i When on my spirit vision Two forms wero shadowed forth, Ono, with a crown of glory, And ono like thoso of earth. “Fear not, for I am with you," Said Jesus, from on high; And tho voico of my lost darling Whispered, “I, too, am nigh." IN MEMORY OF A MUCH LOVED FRIEND. Hard, indeed, it was to leave theo, Beautiful, in life’s bright bloom: Harder still it was to lay theo In tho cold and silent tomb. ♦ i �150 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. Yet wo know our God is righteous, In his presence thou art blest; And wo, praying, hope to greet thee, In that sweet and sinless rest. Will heaven’s sweet and thrilling music Fill thy heart with sweet refrain 1 ’Midst the joys of angel worship Wilt one thought of mo retain? Will affection’s strong, deep tendrils, Severed hero by death’s rude hand, — Will they not bo reaching downwards, Yearning for mo in that land ? Father, grant mo faith and patience, Strength to wait, and labor on; That in death I may bo worthy To arise, and join mine own. SPRING. Night is gathering round us, twilight veils the sky; Whispering winds are telling spring is drawing nigh. Birds are flying northward, in angolio notes Music sweet is swelling from thoir little throats; Calling to each other in the early morn, Waking us poor mortals oro ’tis fairly dawn; Graceful little creatures, fairy-like and gay, Harbingers of summer, everywhere are they. I From the earth uprising, robed in brightest greon, Clothing earth in beauty, tho springing grass is seen; Trees once bare and ragged, angular and slim, Beneath spring’s genial influence, soon will look quite trim. Cedar, spruce, and hemlock, soon you’ll charm no more, Budding oak and maple will eclipse you soon; All nature stirring round us, all earth with life replete, Proclaims that earth is waking from her long winter’s sleep. > These arc but a small portion of her early writings. I would have been glad to have given the public the story written by her at the age of twelve years, but the length of’the same, prevents it. I give these as samples to show the drift of her youthful mind. The next is an account of her first start for Kent’s Hill, in 1861, the day she left home. A LEAF FROM MY JOURNAL. Tuesday, Jifarch 12, 1861. — This morning we left our pleasant home for a sojourn among strangers. The sky was clear and bright, and gave I �THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. -r 151 promise of a pleasant day, and the air was just sharp enough to send tho • blood dancing through every vein, giving clearness and vigor to both body and mind. Leaving home is usually an unpleasant affair to us, but We had looked forward so long and so eagerly to this journey that its approach was a signal for rejoicing. What if we icere going among entire strangers ? wo should soon get acquainted ; if we did not, ’twas no matter. We knew we should like, and started in the best of spirits. A journey of so much importance must have some remarkable incidents. Ours first happened in this way. On our way to R. it became necessary to cross the Androscoggin river on the ice, which was rather a hazardous pro­ ceeding. We got along well enough, however, till we reached the farther shore, when crash 1 splash! and the first thing I knew I found myself sit­ ting in not the most graceful attitude in a snow-bank: my companion near by was oh-ing and oh-ing at a great rate, while the big trunk stood on end between u£. Afar off was seen Charley-horse, walking demurely along just as if nothing at all had happened, and no doubt pleased at finding his load so suddenly lightened. At first I could hardly tell how I came there, but on looking towards the river I saw at once that near the shore the ice had suddenly given away, causing the sleigh to plunge down two or three feet, and necessarily throwing us out. Luckily the shore was so near that wo landed on the bank instead of going into the river, for a cold water plungebath would not have been, just at that time, very agreeable. We gatherep up ourselves and accoutrements, and finding nothing damaged (except the ice, which was badly fractured), went on our way rejoicing. (Aly “ Leaf” being covered, I must finish my story another time.) THE ANGEL’S CHOICE. When tho day was finished, and tho starlight Had fallen soft over tho earth, From out tho beautiful cloud-laud The angels were gazing forth. Long they gazed, for our earth was lovely, - With no trace of sorrow or sin; Liko tho radiant bowers of Eden Ere tho serpent bad entered in. But list! for tho silcuce is broken, And forth, with a tiny footfal, Steps one from tho band of seraphs, And soft to tho others sho calls: — “Sisters! of nil the blight things That unto mankind aro given, * ! �M - 152 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. Which would you choose to dwell in, If earth was your homo, and not heaven ? ” “ In a cascade bright and sparkling,” Said one of the laughing elves; “ Or, down ’mid the coral islands, Whore tho giant sea-monsters dwell.” "In a rose, that all might love me; In a diamond, that I might enduro; ” But tho first angel spoke up quickly,— “In a snow-flake, that I might bo pure! ” CHANGE. Tho sunshine would not seem so bright, If there were never storms; Wo greet tho spring with deep delight, Wo hail tho harvesf morns. Wo smile to see the busy boo Sip summer’s golden grains, Yet turn well pleased to homo of ease When white-robed winter reigns. Tho sweet would never seem so sweet If it could always last, And “written language” fail complete, If “spoken” words wore past. Wo lovo our books, yet turn to look On nature’s wido-spread range; For mind and matter too, you’ll find, Seeks everywhere for change. The past is pleasing in our eyes, The present very good; Yet no man lives who would not grasp H is future if ho could.. GONE HOME. With a feeling akin to gladness we utter these words, as one after another of our number goes at the call of duty, or of pleasure, back to the dear home-circle, to mother’s love and friends. But when God calls them up yonder, where the home eternal is, the shadow of the golden gates through which they entered rest darkly on our hearts. In this room, where his voice was so often heard, it is well for us now to i I �THE CBOWN WON BET NOT WOEN. 153 make mention of one who on earth is no more. Will Jones, — he has been with us at many a May walk, and many a festive scene; he has toiled beside us up the rugged hill of science, and made the ascent less wearisome to many a tired traveller. Would he linger then, when motherland called for her loyal sons? They who knew him best were least surprised when he came to the Hill, a soldier, to bid it a final goodrby. For by one of those strange foreshadow­ ings of the future, known only to genius-lighted minds, our friend was sat­ isfied that he would never return. But he had heard the voice of duty, and duty to him was law. On Monday, the 1st of February, the 7th Maine Battery left Augusta for Washington; on Friday, the 5th, it was stationed at Camp Berry, East Capitol Ilill. Then the fever fell upon him and he saw the familiar faces of far-off friends in Maine ; on Kent’s Hill he walked again “ in the old way,” and the “ prayers of our chapel ” were ringing in his ears. On Monday, March 28th, the news of his sickness first reached us and the next Friday he died. Not died,— “ There is no death; what seems so is transition. This life of mortal breath Is but an entranco to tho lifo Elysian Whoso portals wo call death." r Believing this, we may not mourn that only twenty-two short years of earth-life were given to our friend. The school, the great world he would have benefited, the little circle of intimate friends, — a school before unbroken, — may lament their own loss, — his gain. God fitted him for ‘ this life, then gave him life eternal. “ 0 earth, so full of dreary noises ! 0 men, with wailing in your voices ! 0 shining gold, tho waiter's heap ! 0 strife! 0 curse! that o'er it fall, God makes a silence through you all, .And giveth his beloved sleep.” Spring of 18&1. CONSISTENCY. Yes, my friends, believe in youthful enthusiasm; like to have young folks lively; tell them to move quick; be cheerful, and. at the same time inform your nephew he’s going to ruin because he whistles Yankee Doodle, or claps his hand enthusiastically over the speech of Mr. So-and-So. Cry out against despotism and tyranny; have a mortal horror of the Pope of Rome ; hate Catholics, because they are obliged to yield implicit I �154 I HIE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. obedience; cause the eyes of little children to dilate with wonder at your marvellous stories of Blue-Beard, who didn’t torment his friends while living,—but kindly ate them up; but take care to terrify everybody .within the reach of your influence by a series of diminutive despotisms, or irritate them by petty exhibitions of authority. Hake minds your study, that you may do them good (of course), and when you have found their most sensitive spot grasp it with iron fingers. Make jokes; make a thousand of them, and laugh complacently all the while. Tell your friends it’s a fine thing to laugh and be merry; but if a poor, innocent little joke comes unexpected into your presence, annihilate it with a tremendous frown. All this you may do, and more ; but remember “ Precept whispers, while example thunders.” ANNIVERSARY DAYS. And by this term we do not mean those dry intellectual feasts with which college students are supposed to delight their patrons, — such as come to us on the Hill when June comes, let who will be presi­ dent. But we each set apart a few days from life’s common routine, and devote them to the past. Anniversary days! Individuals have them; the nation has them ; and once in a great while God puts a distinguishing mark on some part of his time, and it becomes henceforth an anniversary day for all mankind? We make our anniversaries of vastly different stuff. Some are fine and silken and full of golden gleaming lustre, and when, as time comes round, we bring forth the beautiful garment, it clothes us with joy unspeakable. Then time weaves a gay, flashing garment and we think it will last us for­ ever. But we hang it in memory’s closet, and, lo I all its beauty is gone. There is sombre black in that closet, and we wear it at times next our heart. It is wonderful to think how thickly sown are' the seed of these memory days. May 27th is an anniversary to some, and yesterday afternoon was to how many ? Birthdays are universal anniversaries ; not only our own, but our friends. They have been aptly called mile-stones marking our progress on life’s journey, —a journey where all the travellers are homeward bound. And when the eternal gates are opened to those left behind, there remains only this record, “ Died.” “ And ever in our hearts wo keep The birthdays of the dead.” I �IF 1 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 155 The war has made many anniversaries that all coming time will observe. July 4th and Washington’s birthday seemed about all the nation used to have in common; but now we must add April loth and tho date of the close of the war. Grief here and gladness there formed a bond uniting us all. From tho beginning God saw the need of these great bonds of a common humanity, and so made the Christian Sabbath consecrated to holy memories of his working and his rest and gave us Christmas week, — an anniversary set apart forever as a memorial of what Christ hath done for all mankind. LILLA LUNT. Died op DrpnrnEr.iA is luz SraiiEn or 1862. Two littlo hands that at morning . Were first to bo clasped in my own, And two dunning eyes that, from dawning Of day till tho starlight and moon Lit tho heavens, nover wearied or slumbered, And whoso glances were like to tho gleam Of tho daisies that blossomed in spring-time, Near our homo on the banks of tho stream; — Fair baby hands whoso close clinging Wo almost can feel now at even; And a voice whoso last earth-singing Was of mother, home, love, and heaven; Face whoso innocent sweetness • Nover was clouded by care, Shrouded about and shaded By the softest and brownest of hair; — Little thought wo that our darling Would'bo borno from our arms so soon; Littlo thought wo that spring roses Would lio on her breast in tho tomb 1 Ah well! wo must strive to bo patient, Kneel humbly and bow ’neath the rod; For wo know that our Lily, transplanted, Now blooms in the garden of God. * WOMAN’S DUTY AT THE PRESENT TIME. Tread softly, students, in tlicso halls ! 0 man of business, pause, For a nation bows in sadness now o’er liberty’s dear cause. THo downtrod million of tho earth have, trembling, staked their all; With our success their freedom’s won, and with us, too, they fall. �156 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. While the tramp of gathering thousands is resounding through the lan< And brother mcetcth brother in death-conflict hand to hand, Have wo no duty to perform, — no laurel crown to win ? Shall woman stand with folded hands before this monster sin? You’ve read in history’s pages how, when Freedom’s Sky grow dork, ’Twas lighted up by woman’s faith; —think of Joan d’Aro ! Oh, ne’er was cause more holy, or ne’er could man or maid Moro freely lift the heart to God with hand upon tho blade. For wo fight against injustice, and, in every battle won, Wo have struck a blow for freedom, and a world is looking on; Yet still waters run tho deepest, and ’tis not alone by war That tho greatest good’s accomplished— silent influence's bettor far. ' Let no selfish lovo restrain you, — country first, and then onr friends; What is ono without tho other ? Would you clasp a coward’s hand ? While our brothers toil in battle, wo who stay at homo can pray; And our God, tho God of battles, ho will give tho victory. Few things are more noticeable now than the prevalence of mourning. You cannot stand in any crowded assembly without remarking this. One day on the street you meet smiling faces, —they have come from the post­ office perhaps, and that letter has made their sunshine, — then over the swift wires comes the news of victory, and lo I there passes you a figure in black, coarse black, most likely, — for the pay of a common soldier will not buy fine crape for the mourners. There is no display of sorrow, no pageantry of grief to tell the world, at large, they have lost a friend, — only a quiet changing frbm the gay garb of yesterday to the shadowy one of to-day. Oh, these sad-eyed, pale-faced figures, in black, pass by us more fre­ quently than they did years ago, and in their sorrow lies a deeper meaning 1 What they have lost has been sacrificed for the benefit of a nation; and a nation shares their grief. “ Oh, when tho fight is won, Dear land whom triflers now make bold to scorn, Theo, from whoso forehead earth awaits hor morn, Row nobler doos tho sun Homo in thy sky ! how bravor breathes thy air, That thou hadst children who for theo couldst daro And dio as thine have done I IN MEMORIAM. Sunlight upon a now-mado grave, And turf above the breast Of one who stood among us once, As student and os guest. L I �1 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 157 “Moro light! moro light!” this dying wish Of Goethe’s poet soul Round echo on thy lips, 0 friend! Round echo in My soul. God heard; ho always hears tho prayers Of those, whoso lives uro given To country and to him; ho scat Tho eternal light of heaven. Yes, it is well, — let tho sumo old bell, That in tho days gone by Rang out to him tho hours of time, Bing in, —eternity. Who next shall fall for country’s honor 7 Who next shall sleep ’neath tho starry banner! God pity tho rhothers, and pity all Ror whom tho sheen of sunshine shall fall On a vacant chair, a desolate home, And tho now-mado gravo of a friend! BREVITY. Brevity is the soul of wit. It is also the true test of wisdom. Cmsar’s “veni, vidi, vici,” has lived, and will live, because it is short, sharp, and full of meaning. It was Milton — was.it not ?— who being requested to put Christ’s miracle at the marriage-feast into poetry, expressed it all in ono immortal line ? “ Tho conscious water saw its God, and blushed.” People who stayed at home, and made long and loud professions of loyalty, were not apt to be the truest patriots. You remember that sublime verso in Genesis, which describes the creation; “ And God said, let there be light, and there was light.” Do you also recollect how rhetoric speaks of one who thus gives the same idea in many words: “ The Sovereign Ar­ biter of the universe, by the potent energy of a single word, commanded, light to exist, and immediately it sprang into being?” Mark the change. Such “ linked sweetness, lopg drawn out,” is anything but pleasing. Of what avail a long lecture, or sermon, or even prayer, except to weary or disgust the hearer? Religion does not consist in many and high-sounding words ; but is best shown in those little, decisive acts of every-day life. No man ever made his words immortal who did not make them brief. Scripture commands are always short and comprehensive. The Lord's Prayer is short; and no superlluous words can be found in the ten com­ mandments. �158 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. = The shortest verse in the Bible is one of the most affecting. “ Jesus wept!” What could be more touching? The King of Glory mourning over fallen man I -----A FRAGMENT. Past, Present, and Future, — Oh, what is there hero That is worth one regret, one lingering tear? When the summons is given, — 0 spirit, return To the hands of thy Giver — poor wanderer come homo,— Wo mourn not, we weep not, for that whioh is fled; Though our tears fall like rain on tho face of the dead, They are tears for tho living, for those who alono Over life’s weary pathway must still wander on. Yet courage faint heart! to thee comfort is given, For tho dear ones who’vo left us are happy in heaven. Wo shall miss their sweet presence, and yoarn for their lovo, Yet, sometime, God helping, wo’ll meet them above. MYSTERY. There once was a dove, — in her nest, Seven birdlings chirped; and three Were weak as weak could bo; Three strong, — and one tho best And dearest of the seven, Ho plumed his wings for heaven. And tho mother-bird wept. 0 mystery! It is all as sad as sad can bo. ’ Tis a mystery all. •' There once was a ship, — she sailed Where tho tide-waves ebb and flow, And laughed at tho storm; when, lo ! Snapped every sail, rent by tho gale, Bent every most ’noath slavery’s blast; Her future seemed to mook her post. God knows tho fato of our bonnio boat, Tho Union,—will it ever float As before ? To us ’tis a mystery. Whon.oreeds are confused, and in strife Stand tho guides to tho Heavenly Feast, And ho who reads most knows tho ioast Of tho way, — who shall wonder if Life, Young Life, all aglow for tho fight, Bo wearied with waiting for light ? Who shall blamo if it falters, and who if it falls ? Lot God judge. To us ’tis a mystery all, And wo cannot know. Thoro were once two friends, — two friends Who loved each other so, That when God bado ono go, f 0 �F" .THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 159 1 The other prayed, — Oh, send Some token if tho coni That has reached tho heavenly gcal Holds dear to his heart the left behind ! 0 mystery ! yo fools and blind, Yo cannot know. There was once a slender vine, Planted on tho brow of this Hill, And it flourisheth there still, Grown strong. Its tendrils twine Round right; its fruit through all these years Has fallen midst a fall of tears; Wo can but wonder as it grows. Wo ask its future. Well, God knows. To us ’tis a mystery. There’s a stream, ’tis deep and wide; Who near it, oft repine; Who cross it, make no sign When they reach the other side. Dark is the hither shore. Though each one must pass o’er, And fain would know why they must go, And where, and whence its waters flow; ’Tis a mystery all. There were once eight sticks, all found In the Pine-Tree State; somo straight, Some wero crooked, and strange to relate, Sinco they grow on such similar ground; Somo wero bending as willows when breezes blow; Somo unyielding as granite. Now, tell me, who knows, Why they grafted themselves on tho tree of knowledge, And camo m masse to tho Wesleyan College? For to us ’tis a mystery. The following was prepared for her graduation piece in 1866: — THE STUDENT’S REWARD. Since the world began, rewards and punishments have been distributed with an impartial hand by their great Author. The mother smiles approv­ ingly upon the first warm impulse that prompts her little one’s heart to deeds of kindness. The world bows in homage before its own great men; and God himself on those he loves showers blessings. We all look for­ ward to the reward which is to be ours, and choose our life-work according to that which promises most. With the various dispositions of mankind, there must ever be an infinite diversity of tastes; but,— ■I �160 THE CBOWN WON BUT NOT WOBN. Whilo others sing of " Homo, swcot homo,” Or pant for tho battle’s strife, Bo onrs tho pleasing task to toll Tho joys of a student’s life. The mind may be likened to a watch; and the main-spring which keeps all its curious machinery in motion is the love of influence. Nor is this the ignoble passion that it at first appears; for he who aspires to greatness must first make himself worthy of praise. And here, the student’s pre-em­ inence is plainly shown; for those habits of energy, perseverance, close and patient thought, which have been formed in the study-room, will tell forcibly upon the minds of his fellow-men. Wealth may upraise its golden rod and call for worship from the gazing throng; hereditary princes may proudly walk the earth in robes of borrowed greatness; beauty’s potent spell may charm the enraptured senses ; but t “ Ono glanoo of intellect, liko stronger magio, will outshino thorn all.” The more we learn, the more are our capabilities for enjoyment in­ creased. This constant culture is not needed by our grosser natures ; but our tastes adnrit of unlimited improvement. None but a painter’s eye can appreciate the wonderful delineations of a Michael Angelo; and an edu­ cated ear alone can perceive the delicate harmony of our great composers. To the uncultivated, some simple arrangement of colors or of sounds would be more pleasing, because better understood. And then man is an imitative being. As the streamlet takes its coloring from the pebbles over which it flows, so we — by studying the lives and deeds of those whom history delights to honor — are insensibly led to imitate them; and a mind familiar with these lofty examples is ever striving to reach the height their goodness gained. We have only to look about us for exam­ ples of the practical advantages of an educated mind. Ask yourself who among the circle of your acquaintances has the noblest soul, the warmest heart, and the coolest head to guide it, and your own good judgment will point unerringly to him, who in the morning of life laid up for himself treasures of wisdom. To this general rule genius is no exception. ' Goldsmith was loud in expressing his contempt'for mathematics, and his dislike of logic and ethics; he endeavored to persuade himself that learning arid dulness went hand in hand, and that genius was not to be put in harness; says Irving, his gifted biographer, “But looking still further, we find him possess­ ing just such a character as these opinions would, indicate. Having laid no regular and solid foundation for knowledge, he ‘ takes no heed for the - �1 THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN. 1G1 present, or care for the future,’ follows no plan, adopts and rejects these recommended by his friends. At one time prepares for the ministry, next, turns to the law, and then hits upon medicine.” His genius gave him a pleasing style of composition; but his ignorance made him the batt of ridicule among the literary men of his day; and he died of a fever, brought on by anxiety in regard to unpaid debts, extravagantly incurred. Of him it was written by Garrick, — “Hero lies poet Goldsmith, for shortness called Noll, Who vroto like an angel, but talked liko poor Poll.” The pleasure of conquering our tasks is no small part of the student’s reward, and, like partial payments on a note of hand, is given us by fre­ quent instalments as we proceed with the work. One of the strongest, incentives to exertion which human nature is capable of feeling is the hope of being remembered after death. “ Forget me not,” is the heart’s language at all times, and still more earnestly is it uttered when the departing spirit takes its flight to the land of the Great Unimown. And this boon, so earnestly craved by all, to whom is it finally given? History shows us that the learned, the wise, the truly good, are fresh in the peo­ ple’s memory, when prince audr conqueror, court and courtier, have sunk into oblivion, or are known only in the songs of those whoso genius haa rescued them from merited neglect. Yea, fellow-students.— TL'-te thyself worthy, and thy honored namo Shall livo in pictured and in monumental fiimo;Tho stern historian shall thy praises tell, And future generations on thy virtues dwell. I need not here mention that it is our duty to improve the talent God has given us, since his word so plainly commands it. “ Get wisdom,” for “ wisdom is better than riches,” is the language of the inspired Scripture. And Solomon says, “The heart of the wise man secketh after knowledge.” Duty brings its own reward; and, if it were not so, the “ well done ” of an approving conscience is plainly audible to our spirit car. Are other in­ ducements needed to strengthen the student’s laudable purposes? TT/rnt more can be desired? Conscience commends, fame rewards, and more than all, the approving smile of God is ever waiting to crown him with the laurels of success. The two last pieces here given to the public arc the last productions of hers, so far as we have any knowledge. I could fill page alter page with 11 �162 I THE CROWN WON BUI' NOT WORlr. such productions as are here given of her early and later writings ; although a large number were lost with other things at the Hill. We regret the loss of one of her ablest productions, written soon after she went to the Hill,— title, Ancient anti Modern Chivalry; and if any person who shall read this, has, or knows of any one who has, a copy of that article, we should be greatly obliged for a copy of the same. In closing, permit me to say to all who shall have patience to read this narrative through, that with much research and toil, I have gathered up the evidence and circumstances from which I have based my conclusions, and, in pamphlet form, lay them before the public; .asking the public journalists of the State, if the fact comes to their- knowledge that I have made a statement of this sad case, to notice the same in their journals. Justice will give such notice a place in those papers which published the reports of committees on the other side from Kent’s Hill. In view of all that has transpired on the Hill, and the course Torsey has pursued towards Louise while under his care and since she died, his disposition shown to, and the treatment of her friends, I must say, I loath and detest this mis­ erable compound of intrigue and deception, and desire him to be kept out of my sight and mind if possible. I will not attempt to call him deserved names, as I can find no terms in the English language that will do him justice. I cannot pass unnoticed that whole-souled class-mate of Louise, Adelaide Webb, who, untrammelled by religious creeds, speaks out fully her true sentiments without fear, and says, “ I have long wished for some avenue through which to express my esteem and love for Louise,” etc. (See her letter in full on page 61.) “THE CROWN WON, BUT NOT WORN,” Was the title of Louise’s exhibition piece, prepared and read by her on the stage, in June, 1865, in regard to the life and death of the lamentedLincoln. Its length precludes its publication here. Being forcibly impressed with that title, and her effort, and their sudden exit from earthly scenes, caused me to adopt that title. The following lines of a distinguished poet are applicable to the close of this sad narrative, — “ Man’s inhumanity to man Makes countless millions mourn.” y �■ ■ I - J I I �r 1 K f 1 ' \ \ \ \ l,.'\ L i A �' ■ A 1 r C < 7 - ~ l<rf; i ? J Jl I ’ THE CROWN WON BUT NOT WORN; ’J y | Jj. ej IL LOUISE GSEEUE, ; s * I■ls!i Pl .. Bfc STUDENT OF FIVE YEARS M1 »■ jpo ■: ■ ■k'.'l AT KENTS HILL, ME. * Is mS k |# L ■T BY JONAS GREENE. /1 i //J iA �gr OmmANDERY Iji j***! TS TEmPLRR PAUL G. FORD \ 72 HIGH STREET ST. ALBANS, VT 05478 OF-Hi£ STffTE of m April Fool's Day, 199*+ Dear Viv, Although I do not owe you a letter as of this date, having mailed you a letter this past Monday (28th), I do want to accompany the enclosed pamphlet with a few remarks and observations. First: I am sending this booklet to you that it may be placed with the other two —which I presume you have, either there or in Augusta. I am sure you would like to send them to KH for their historical collection. (After you and I helned ourselves to what we wanted, I cannot be sure that KH still possesses conies of their own!!??!) Secondly: I have just reviewed this renort of the then-trusteesv~ It would seem, from this distance in time, that this whole affair was a tempest in a tea pot. By this I mean: why was such a to-do made over the taking of a few garments from the laundry; moreover, how could these incidents result in such a tragedy? Thirdly: This entire laundry-'affair would almost seem to be the culmination of other rule infringements of which Louise was guilty. Too many times in the nast she had completely disregarded the rules and had done just about as she pleased. For example: On page 23, read the 3rd paragraph of Sarah Palmer’s affidavit. Also: Read Emma Huntington's on cage 29. See also nage 3^? Abbie Fuller's affidavit, the M-th paragraph. These all indicate that Louise was not adverse to violating the rules whenever it suited her. This fact is well underscored by Mary Chapman's testimony as recorded in the first paragraph on page M4. I hone you will take time to check these. They are most illuminating —and I have taken some little time to extract them for you; so act accordingly, y'hear? To sum it up: Louise's annoying actions apoear to have reached a toleration summit.?which could no longer be ignored. The clothing episodes seem to have brought all this to a head and served as the direct cause for her dismissal. �=2= In Dr. Torsey's affidavit I was surprised to note his error in composition. He enclosed in quotation marks indirect statements. He intended, I am sure, that these be direct quotations, but his punctuation dissolved his intent. I have marked these infractions for your attention at the bottom of page 12 and the top of 13« All of the students’ and staffs’ affidavits seem to have been conroosed from a submitted outline. Many contain the same phrases; moreover, all seem to have followed a questionnaire. Not that such a survey should be looked at with askance, but it does seem to weaken each writer’s reflections. 7But I guess that „ii___ ; is is how it’s done in court where each witness asked the same or similar questions, It just seems a bit too obvious and contrived. I hope you can find the time and mental energy to ingest --and digest— these remarks and to check the references. THEN...I would like your oninion and, as they are wont to say at committee meetings today: your "input." I’ll now leave you to your assignment and will be _eagexly awalting_noX.Jonlx^i^^eajctic!rL_to this pamph/let but also your reply to mine of the 28th. Respectfuliy^submitted, P.S. I just happened to think —which is an unusual circumstance! Why don’t you keep that poem I sent; then you can include it with those pamph^lets when you send them to KH. Remember JFK’s widely-heralded statement about "Ask not..." etc. ? Well, look at this one, which was in Edgar M. Smith’s commencement address some three quarters of a century earlier: Do not think that the world owes you anything until you have done something . for the world. Eerie, eh? Oh, another afterthought. As you ceruse this report, notice how the trustees and several of the faculty refer to HPT as Mr. Torsey while the students refer to him as Dr. Torsey. (I never did learn what institution conferred upon him his D.D. or his Ll.D.) � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Greene, Louise Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource The Crown Won but Not Worn, or M. Louise Greene, A Student of Five years at Kent's Hill, ME. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Greene, Jonas Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1867 https://archives.kentshill.org/files/original/f0492397ad304f1b5909739f559490a5.pdf 13c4fc8186af164be0606779fdeb8c95 PDF Text Text - LIBEL REFUTED: 1 - V TO ■ si I 9 ■■ < I '/i LEWISTON: PRINTED AT THE JOURNAL OFFICE, LISBON STREET. 180S. �— LIBEL REFUTED: A TO 1 GREENE’S PAMPHLET, j BY THE TRUSTEES OF THE J i' I MAINE WESLEYAN SEMINARY, AND FEMA LE COLLEGE, I KENTS HILL. LEWISTON: PRINTED AT THE JOURNAL OFFICE, LISBON STREET. 18GS. �\. INDEX. 1 r INTRODUCTION'....................................... GREENE’S PAMPHLET, TRUSTEES’ ACTION, AFFIDAVITS,— Allen, Elizabeth A., Bowers, Eliza C., Case, Frances S., Chandler, Perry, Chapman, Mary E., . Church, Florence A., Daggett, Orrin, and wife, Daggett, Mrs. Orrin, Dow, Sarah E., Fuller, Abbie S., Harriman, Benj. W., Huntington, Emma O., Packard, Alvin, . . Palmer, Sarah F., . Pattee, William S., Pike, R. Ella, Reed, Mira I., Reed, Stillman A., ... Robinson, Prof. F. A., and other teachers Torsey, Rev. H. RE­ STATEMENTS AND LETTERS,— Allen, Louise F., Allen, Rev. Stephen, Ayer, John, Bearce, S. R., Brett, F. Augusta, ... Brookings, M. Ellen, - . Chase, A. Fitzroy, Cox, Mellie M., .... Crawford, Rev. J. B., Deering, Wm., .... Fletcher, G. T., ... Fletcher, N. O., Fossett, Mary IL, Fuller, S. Jennie, ... Howard, Gen. C. IL, Howard, Rev. R. B., - Page, 1 - 3 5 ■ 9 21 ■ 27 15 47 43 22 16 20 26 34 45 2!) 42 23 40 33 29 34 14 9 49 25 43 51 55 51 52 53 50 53 7 49 51 25 22 52 52 �iv Hunton, Nancic E., Linscott, Sarah E., . . . Ludden, Hon. M. T., ... Merrill, Mrs. H. E., Mills, Mrs. C. M., .... Parker, Charles M., Patterson, Mrs. Caroline, ... Perley, Eliza J., . . . Perley, Prof. John, .... Springer, Aurilla, .... Woodward, Hon. Joseph T., MRS. GREENE’S LETTERS, (Extracts,) MISS GREENE’S LETTER TO HER SISTER, REVIEW,—......................................................... Credibility of the Pamphlet, What was Mr. Greene’s real object? Gross Misrepresentation, Errors and Falsehoods, Skeleton Key, Alleged criminal neglect of Mr. Torscy, Alleged Insanity of Miss Greene, Review of Miss Greene’s letter to Chestina, MAINE WESLEYAN SEMINARY, - 41 24 51 41 51 54 49 36 54 50 55 58 56 59 60 62 69 73 78 80 84 85 90 i �I IjSTTRODUCTIOISr. In October, 18G6, the remains of Miss M. Louise Greene were found in apiece of woodland iu Auburn, Me. She had left Kents Hill on the 23d of May, where she had been a student in the Maine Wesleyan Seminary from March, 1881. Sympathy for the afflicted friends of the deceased, the manner of her leaving Kents Hill, and preceding occurrences, naturally created considerable excite­ ment, which was increased by the circulation of many erroneous and unfounded stories and reports against the teachers and others connected with that Semin­ I ary. The Trustees have twice sought to have a fair and thorough investigation, in the presence and with the concurrence of Mr. Greene, for the purpose of deter­ mining, in a satisfactory manner, whether- the teachers or any other persons are culpable. But he has declined all.such proposals; and has chosen to appear before the public with his version of the affair, in a pamphlet of one hundred and sixty- two pages, recently published, entitled, “ The Crown Won but not Worn.” On the second page, Mr. Greene says it is his object “to circulate this pam­ phlet as extensively as possible”; and he has been pressing its sale in every 0 direction. The charges of prejudice, neglect, misconduct and gross cruelty, with which the pamphlet abounds, arc calculated to do the greatest injustice to the Institu­ tion and all connected with its management, and to the denomination by whose liberality it has been chiefly sustained. These charges are so presented, and so interwoven with garbled extracts from anonymous letters, asseverations of Mr. Greene and his family, and al­ leged quotations from the diary of tho.deccased, that the pamphlet is suited to mislead the casual reader, and to create a prejudice cruel and unjust against the persons assailed. c, �* 2 The Trustees, therefore, Have deemed it their duty, as public servants en­ trusted with the care of this Institution, to present a plain and full statement of the facts: and to vindicate the Seminary and its officers from undeserved censure. And they have appointed the undersigned members of the Board of Trustees, to take such measures, as might seem just and proper, to defend the Seminary against these persistent assaults. We have endeavored to present the case fairly and truthfully in the following pages, to which we invite the attention of the public. We have carefully avoided any statements injurious to the reputation of the deceased, excepting what strict justice to the living required. And we regret that the extraordinary course of Mr. Greene has imposed the painful necessity of presenting any facts unfavorable to her character. ANSON P. MORRILL, DANIEL B. RANDALL, STEPHEN ALLEN. j I ■ ■ �GREENE’S PAMPHLET Mr. Greene charges, among other things, that one of the printed rules of the Seminary, which required that all articles of clothing put in the wash should be plainly marked with the ownei s name, was not adhered to ; “that many articles sent to the wash by teachers, students and even help, were unmarked’'; that foi students to take articles from the unmarked pile, not their own, when their own were missing, was not only prac­ tised, but allowed, if not advised, by those having charge of that department”; that the articles found in his daughter’s room, “of which she had any knowledge, and which were not hers, were there by necessity, and not by theft, her own being gone”; that Miss Case and others claimed as their own and took from his daughter’s room some unmarked articles, “when the chances were equal that they were Louise’s.” lie states that a very large number of articles were lost by Louise, and insinuates, if he does not directly assert, that some of them were stolen or wrongfully detained by teachers or others em­ ployed at the Seminary. He says that the skeleton key, which it appears she had had for some years at Kents Hill, and with which she could unlock all the students’ rooms, was given to her, “and kept as a kind of keepsake; and that while having the key was charged against her as a crime, no attempt has ever been made to prove that she ever used it wrongfully.” As to the five dollars, taken by Louise, he alleges that “she did not equivocate nor deny it, but confessed and restored it without hesitation, when no evidence or proof was attempted to be brought against her”; that she was treated with great harshness, and “accused, tried, condemned and virtually ex­ pelled,” in a most reprehensible manner. !/ jt fl if I is • �r 4 lie claims that this cruel treatment was the result of preju­ dice and hatred, because she would not adopt the religious opinions of her teachers. . He asserts that his daughter "left Kents Hill in the morning in a state of extreme mental excitement, in her soiled every­ day apparel, after divesting herself of her jewelry, and taking nothing but her reticule with her; that it was known to Dr. Torsey°that she had so left, in the forenoon, and concern and fears were expressed to him that she would destroy herself be­ fore night; yet no means were taken to watch, follow, or pro­ ject her, until her sister, at six o’clock in the afternoon, was sent home,a distance of twenty-five miles in a direction opposite -0 that Louise had taken, to give him information, where she did not arrive till twelve o’clock that night.” Many other charges are scattered through the pamphlet, s:me of which will be noticed hereafter. In attempting to sustain his charges, Mr. Greene introduces, —hat he savs, are extracts from letters he has received, without ■ziving the names of the writers, statements he says he has heard from persons not named, and extracts alleged to have been taken from the diary of his daughter. He Las endeavored to create the belief that the teachers of ie Seminary should be held accountable for the death of his -laughter: and that the Institution and those connected with it instead of being sustained, should be execrated by the public. �ACTION OF THE TRUSTEES. When the remains of Miss Greene had been found, Mr. S. R. Bearce of Lewiston, one of the Trustees, took prompt measures to have au inquest held. He sent for Mr. Torsey and Mr. Daggett, and as Mr. Hamlin, the coroner, was in Bethel, he also sent notice by telegraph to him; but Mr. Greene left with the remains of his daughter before the coroner arrived. At the Methodist Conference in Bath, in May, 1867, a number of the Trustees being in town, an informal meeting was held ; and a committee was appointed to investigate the case at the annual meeting to be held about four weeks afterwards. Mr. Greene was notified of this arrangement by the Secre­ tary, and also by Anson P. Morrill, Chairman of the Committee; and he was requested to meet the Committee and present any grievances he might have. This plan was adopted by the Trustees, to allow Mr. Greene an opportunity to prepare for the investigation, and with the belief that an able and judicious committee could investigate the case conveniently and thoroughly, and without interrupting the regular' business of the annual meeting. But as the propo­ sal was declined by Mr. Greene, on the ground that the "Com­ mittee was appointed by the Trustees from their own mem­ bers,” the plan was abandoned. Copy from Secord of Trustees’ Annual Meeting, June 5, 1S67. "In accordance with a request of Dr. Torsey, it was voted, to make a thorough investigation of the administration of the Faculty in the case of Miss M. Louise Greene, now deceased (Mr. Torsey and Mr. Robinson being both excused from actiug �r 6 in this investigation at their own own request, request, and and A. A. “1P. P. Morrill Morrill appointed chairman, and J. J. Perry, secretary). To this end, witnesses were examined at length, after which the subject was quite fully discussed by different gentlemen of the Board. Rev. S. Allen then offered the following preamble and resolutions, which, after a full discussion, were unanimous­ ly adopted: Whereas certain reports have been published and industri­ ously circulated, during the past year, in which the administra­ tion of the School and particularly the conduct of the Rev. H. P. Torsey,the President, in the case of the late Miss M. Louise Greene, has been severely censured, although no complaints have been made to the Trustees, by the parties professing to have been aggrieved; and, whereas such reports are damaging in their tendency, and are calculated to mislead the public mind; therefore, Resolved, first, That, after a careful and patient hearing of the facts in the case, the Trustees find no ground for censure against H. P. Torsey or any other person concerned m the management of the Institution, in*the case of the late Miss M. T ouise Greene* that so far from having been “expelled, Miss GrX lTthe Institution of her o„„ notort witbont the 11 nf the teachers and before the Faculty had taken knowledge of the teac , f the TrasteeSr " “ rrX- - — lenient confidence in the abi i y diJcuit and responsible duties Torsey, in thef*r twenty-three years with success of the station he has fillJf , ledge unsurpassed by teotad, third, That■“• " Seminary and Female ;o conMo„oo of the P» •bo, 'lege- was tke continued prosperity o was never more. . at the present time ; damae in<r reports above referred than ;— the school, notwithstotag 11 £ ot the adminfetration to is a gratifying popular , of the Institution.^ j. Pm„. rf AOh^^^ . �7 In answer to inquiries, he stated that he was not there in behalf of fir. Greene; that he had been a teacher in Oxford county, and having learned that the case of Miss Greene was to be investigated, and supposing that the meeting of the Trustees would be open to the public, he had come to hear the investi­ gation. He was informed that this was the annual meeting of the Trustees, and that their regular business must first be attended to ; that it was not certain that the case of Miss Greene would be taken up. After considerable conversation, Mr. Knight retired, and the Trustees proceeded to their regular business. During the session, Mr. Torsey informed the Trustees that he desired them to investigate his administration, in the case of Miss Greene; accordingly, an evening session was agreed upon for this purpose; and Mr. Knight, who was still in the neigh­ borhood, was invited to be present. He accordingly came in, and remained till the close of the investigation, at a late hour in the night. He was then requested by the chairman, to ask the witnesses any questions he might wish, and to make any remarks he might see fit. He replied that he had no question to ask, and he could not see but the investigation had been conducted fairly and honorably; and that no blame could be attached to the teachers, so far as lie could judge, or words to this effect. From the notices of this Trustees’ meeting, by Mr. Greene in his book (page 135), it is evident that this Mr. Knight was sent by Mr. Greene, to act as a spy upon the proceedings of the Trustees; and it has been lately ascertained, that Mr.’Greene employed him to prevent fliss flira I. Heed from testifying before the meeting of the Trustees. And yet Mr. Greene repeatedly charges Mr. Torsey with employing "pimps and spies"! On the 14th of November, 1867, a meeting of the Trustees was held at Lewiston, at which a resolution was adopted, that will be found in the following letter from Mr. Deering: Letter from Hr. Deering to fir. Greene. Poutland, Nov. 15, 1867, Ilex. .Toxas Greene—Dear Sir: At a meeting of the Trustees �8 of the Maine Wesleyan Seminary and Female College? holden yesterday at Lewiston, a Resolve was passed, a copy of which I subjoin. The resolution was prefaced by a preamble referring to cer­ tain reports, now and heretofore circulated, in regard to the unfortunate and painful circumstances attending the death of your daughter, Miss M. Louise Greene; - and in reference to the book recently issued by you purporting to be a statement of the facts and circumstances connected with the sad affair. It is believed by the Trustees that your book is not fair and impartial, and that your inferences and insinuations are unjust and malicious. I quote from the preamble—"And we deem it but justice to Mr. Greene and to ourselves that an opportunity should be afforded Mr. Greene to prove his statements to be true, or if untrue, to correct and retract such statements, and if any parties have been blameworthy, that censure should rest where it belongs.” The Trustees desire the case shall have a full and impartial investigation by competent and disinterested men. They have, therefore, determined to ask you to consent that the whole case be submitted to, and investigated by competent men, with a vie w to having their report placed before the public. To precludethe possibility of an improper selection, they propose that either Judges Davis, Shepley or Barrows or some other man like these, of eminent standing, to be agreed upon by the par­ ties, shall be asked to appoint three suitable men, before whom Both narties may appear with witnesses, counsel and testimony. L “PPT ent to you, and I shall feel obliged, if you will inform me, without delay, by letter, if you will or will not accede to the proposition. ------- acceptance, the details in regard to the If you signify you be arranged hereafter, and should be as soon as reference can L I am, respectfully yours, .practicable. William Deering. , rm + Wrn Deering- of Portland be authorized to . �9 to nominate a reference, consisting of disinterested and honor­ able legal gentlemen, to whom the whole matter, together with, all the testimony and facts in the case may be referred, and whose decision in the case shall be final; and whose opinion, together with the testimony, shall be laid before the community in such a manner as said reference may determine. [All of the following affidavits were duly signed and sworn to. In copying, we have omitted signatures and certificates of Magistrates, for brevity.] Affidavit of Pev. II. P. Torsey. The earliest misconduct which I find charged against me in Mr. Greene’s pamphlet, is my refusal in the fall of 186-1, to permit his daughter to go to Mr. Chapman’s. At that time, Miss Greene met me on the Seminary grounds, and desired permission to leave the Hill, and spend the night and the next day with Mary Chapman. I asked her if she had a permit from her father. She said she had not. I reminded her of the rule requiring such permission, explained its neces­ sity, and assured her that the denial I was obliged to give, was given with reluctance; but that I hall neither the right nor the power to disregard the rule, or make her case an exception; but that cases must be exceptional in themselves. I have never varied from this rule knowingly. In the most friendly manner, I urged her not to ask me to do an unfair or unjust act. A short time afterward, she met me on the street, and again importuned me. I again assured her of my desire to gratifv herself and friend; and repeated my reasons for declining. Later in the evening, after I had retired, suffering severely from neuralgic pains in my eyes and head, she came with Miss Chap­ man to my house, and for the third time pressed her request. I replied as before; when she in sharp tones replied, as I under­ stood her, "I must say, you are unjust.” I told her I was not accustomed to such language from students. She asked pardon, but in a tone that seemed insincere and insulting. I then requested her to leave, telling her she could not expect further favors in that direction. This refusal of favors (as I afterwards explained to her) referred exclusively to her going to Mr. Chapman’s; and was made not on account of any diffi­ culty between Mr. Chapman and myself, for we were on the �10 • most friendly terms, but because she had been there three times without permission, once after having been refused by Prof. Robinson, and had insultingly censured me for a reluctant refusal to go a fourth time, contrary to our established rules and Another complaint made against me in the pamphlet, relates to an interview with Miss Greene in the room of Miss Robin­ son, one of our teachers, in April, 1865. Miss Robinson asked me to talk with Miss Greene concern­ ing her influence, which appeared prejudicial to good order; and her apparent hostility to the rules of the school. Miss ■ Robinson said that she had conversed with her on the subject, and thought a friendly talk by me would do her good. In the interview that followed, I made no complaint of any violation of rules; but expressed an apprehension that she was not ex­ erting so favorable an influence as would be desirable. I as­ sured her of the friendly feelings of the teachers, and besought her to abandon the course she had pursued. She at first de­ nied that her influence had been bad, or her spirit unfriendly to our discipline; and asked what evidence I had. I cited in­ stances that had been named to me ; and remarked that it must be true, to some extent, or so many different persons would not have received the same impression. On directly appealing to her if it was not so, she admitted it, and asked what could be done. I advised her to determine to conform to the rules, and to do it from the heart, or her good purposes would failthis remark, I had no reference to her religious opinions, nor was there anything said upon that subject. I spoke of the few rules we had, and of the importance of a hearty co-operation o the students with the teachers, in having them adhered to. 11 this, I pledged the teachers’ aid and sympathy. At the close of our interview, she said she should feel differently and wou change her course. The statements in Mr. Greene’s pamphlet, concerning 1S daughter’s leaving Kents Hill, are grossly false, so far as anl concerned, or have any knowledge. . The Monday evening before Louise left, Miss Case ca c. me and informed me that Miss Greene had been taking ai tic of clothing not belonging to her, and that Mrs. Daggett herself were investigating the matter. I requested her \ 1 4 �11 quietly, and to say nothing to any one about the matter. I had also learned that Miss Greene had taken some money. On Wednesday morning, at the request of the Faculty, I called to converse with her; having no authority or desire to ■ expel her from the school. No one knew of the interview ex­ cept the Faculty. Miss Case, at my request, called her into the College parlor. Miss Greene informed me what she had done; spoke of hav­ ing taken clothing before; said something about intending to return it at the close of the term. As to the money she said "a devil tempted her to take it.” On being asked what she in­ tended to do under these circumstances so afflicting to her and ' to us, she replied : “ It is known or will be ; and I cannot re­ main here, but shall leave the school.” I told her the teachers had said nothing of the matter to others, and that they would not speak of it, and had expressed no feeling but of pity and sorrow ; that I did not know whether any of the students knew, it, but it would be difficult to have it kept a secret where so many parties were concerned; that if she left then, it must be of her own choice. She expressed a desire to go to her uncle’s at Lewiston, and write her father to meet her there, as she would not then risk the refusal of a reception by her parents. I told her that parental love was stronger thau pride or passion, and they would receive her. After further conversation, she seemed convinced, and promised to go to her parents. Had she not determined to leave, the case would have been presented to the Faculty, for final settlement. In the investiga­ tion and settlement, her parents would have been allowed to take part, whether she remained Or returned with them; or as I told her, she could present statements and explanations in writing, to the teachers, trustees or school. After she determined to go home, I asked her which way she was accustomed to go. She named the usual way, but said she sometimes went by way of Lewiston. To avoid her attracting attention, and from regard to her feelings, I proposed to pro­ cure a conveyance for her; aud to speak to her sister to go with her, and to explain matters to her parents. She said she would go to her sister's room and make arrangemeuts with her. She thought she had better leave that day, I then suggested, it would be well to start soon after dinner. J �12 k After twelve o'clock, I was told that she had left for Lewiston. I supposed she had gone to her uncle’s, or had concluded to g0 home that way. Later in the day, on learning she had gone in her every-day clothing, I feared she might not stop at Lewis­ ton: but had no suspicion she would commit suicide. I had not then heard that she had ever attempted it before. I then determined to send some one to Lewiston to look after her and prevent her going further, if she had not already done so; and I spoke to Mr. Benjamin Harriman to go with his team. But after consulting with others, I concluded to ascer­ tain first, by the return train, whether she had stopped at Lew­ iston. On learning she had stopped there, I sent a student, Mr. Chandler, with her sister, to her father’s at Peru; telling her sister to explain all to her father, and Mr. Chandler to com­ municate to him my fears, and to advise him to be at Lewiston before any morning train should leave. I also wrote a brief note to Mr. Greene, assuring him of my deep sympathy in this affliction. In my interview with Miss Greene, I made no comments on the character or magnitude of her offense, nor did I censure her, in word or tone. She spoke of having drifted away from for­ mer principles; and I urged her to commit herself and her case to the Saviour, and not to allow this to ruin her future. I did not tell her that she could or could not graduate; that was a question for the Faculty to decide; nor that she would or would not receive her diploma. The diplomas were at the disposal of the Trustees, whose action I could not control or predict. But when trying to encourage her, I told her I would be her friend, and do all I consistently could for her. She exhibited no signs of insanity. She seemed calm at first, but when speaking of her reception at home, was much affected. She asked me if her going home would be expulsion. I replied) certainly not. The Faculty had taken no action in the case, except to advise me to converse with her. Many quotations, attributed to me in the pamphlet, are false, 01 are so made up of fragments of different sentences, or of sen fences out of their proper connection, as to convey false in' pressions. I have never said Miss Greene’s character was irreproacha« mid not gradle. I did not represent her as saying, “If she cot-... 1*1 �13 uate there was no future for her.” Nor, "I want this kept from the school, and stay and graduate.” Nor did I say, “If she went to Lewiston she must make arrangements with Chestina, about going.” “It would not have been best for her to have gone on the stage,” etc., was an expression of Louise’s views and feelings, not of mine. That I "told her that the school knew it,” is false. Speaking of a letter Miss Reed received from Mr. Greene, about the time of our last annual Trustee meeting, Mr. G. says: . “Mr. Torsey could watch and know that this lady student had received a letter from me, and was so impertinent as to go to this student, who was to graduate the next day, and just then would feel great hesitancy to deny his request and ask her for that letter, which he took immediately and read before this committee, as I am informed.” I had no intimation that Miss Reed bad such a letter, till she brought it or sent it to me, informing me she supposed Mr. Greene wished me to see it; and as its contents had reference to his not appearing before the committee, with the consent of Miss Reed, 1 read it to them.* I am charged in many places in the pamphlet with being habitually cruel and tyrannical as a teacher. In connection with other teachers, I have had the care of about seven thou­ sand students at Kents Hill; and I cheerfully leave my repu­ tation, in this respect, in their keeping. I send to the commit­ tee, with this, a few of the letters I have received on account of the assaults in that pamphlet. I am also charged with narrow, sectarian views in religious matters; and with treating very unfairly and unjustly all who will not agree with me. I have been openly and avowedly a Methodist, and am heartily attached to that denomination ; but I have never favored a student because he was a Methodist, nor neglected nor slighted one because he was not. Of the students and others that have been employed by me as assistant-teachers, three were Baptists, two were Episcopa­ lians, five Congregationalists, seven Universal ists, two Free Will Baptists, nineteen Methodists, and the religious sentiments of the remaining twenty, were unknown to me. •The above statement is fully confirmed by a letter from Miss Bead in our hands.—Committee. �14 About one-half of the religious students have been Method­ ists in sentiment. As a specimen of the spirit with which Mr. and Mrs. Greene have pursued me, I send to the Committee, with this, letters from Mrs. Greene to me, which I submit to their disposal. Affidavit of F. A. Robinson, J. L. Morse, D. G. Harriman and Miss Phronle B. Robinson. [The first three were Professors and the last a teacher in the Seminary in 1866 and previously,] Near the close of the Spring term, 1866, and a few days • after Miss Greene left, a meeting of the Faculty was called at the request of Mr. and Mrs. Greene, and was held at Mr. Torsey’s, and continued from about eight in the morning, till noon. Mr. and Mrs. Greene appeared greatly excited, and used violent and abusive language, towards Mr. Torsey and other members of the Faculty. They condemned us all, in the sever­ est terms; and repeatedly said that we had disgraced and destroyed, and were the murderers of their child. In reply to their criminations and misrepresentations, neither Mr. Torsey nor any other teacher uttered a harsh or unkind word. Our only feelings were those of pity for the daughter, whose fate was then unknown; and sympathy for her parents. The assertions in Mr. Greene’s pamphlet, that Mr. Torsey "stamped upon the floor, thus trying to stop us and stamp us down in that way”; that “Torsey virtually admitted that he was prejudiced against Louise”; and that “he admitted that it would disgrace his wife to take her (Louise) in, a few hours,” are utterly unb ue and unfounded; and many other statements con­ cerning that meeting, by exaggeration and misrepresentation are virtually false. In another place he says, that we (the Faculty) "have never offered to assist in the search for Louise.” This is also untrue ; lor near the close of that meeting, Mr. Torsey said to them,hat avails all this crimination? The object now should be tie finding of Louise. How can we aid you in this matter? e are ready to do anything in our power to assist you.” The charges made by Mr. Greene, in other places in his pam­ phlet, that large sums of money had been stolen from various parhes, and that we kept these matters covered up, are grossly �15 In all cases of discipline that have come before us, Mr. Torsey has always exhibited a spirit of great kindness and forbear­ ance ; and the oft-repeated charges against him, of cruelty and prejudice toward Louise, are unjust and untrue. At the Faculty meeting held the evening before she left, no other action was taken than to request Mr. Torsey to converse with her upon the subject. Affidavit of 3Ilss Frances S. Case. [Preceptress.] My suspicions in regard to Miss Greene, were first excited by the following circumstance: Miss Church told me that five dollars had been taken from her room; and that she was satis­ fied it was done by Miss Greene. Two or three days afterwards, Mrs. Daggett told me that several articles of clothing, which were known to belong to other parties, had come into ‘the wash in Miss Greene’s bundle, with her own name on some of them. The servants knew’ this before, and had reported it. An interview was had with her in my room; Mr. and Mrs. Daggett being present. Upon being questioned, she confessed she took the five dollars from Miss Church's room ; also, that she had clothing that did not belong to her. I think she said she took the clothing from necessity; as all hers had been lost, and intended to restore it at the close of the term, or something to that effect. Mrs. Daggett and I then went to her room, with her consent. She opened her drawers and the first garment I noticed,! immediately recognized as one I had made for myself; and she said it did not belong to her. Several other articles were found; but I do not now remember to whom they belong­ ed. The "box,” referred to, she unlocked herself. When I discovered its character, I at once turned away, saying, you should have told me. I said nothing harsh or unkind. I could not refrain from weeping. I communicated the facts to her sister Chestina: ■ but did not make them known to any other student ; and had no conversation with any other student, on the subject, until I talked with her classmates, the next day. The servants had discovered the missing garments in her bundle; and reported the fact. The money was returned to Miss Church. Hence i �16 . circulation before the Faculty meeting, which ^TlXth^veninn-. I was present at the meeting. No was held r the; evam ’"d aa’isod veiy ‘ U1I did Mt advise Mary Chapman not to remain with her that and did Mt know that she did not intend to remain with her ’T had a conversation with her class (already referred to) • Th»v had heard the reports and were l^atTexXd. °I had a conversation with Mr Green^ IIe asked how Louise was regarded among the students. My an­ swer was to the effect, that she was quite popular He d’d «o ask my opinion of her; and I did not give it. I know I did not use the temm irreproachable, in relation to her character. 1 asked Mr. Greene if he censured us for searching her room. He said he did not; that it was our duty. Miss Greene told me that she had had a skeleton key, but for how many terms, I do not remember. She did not say that she had used it improperly; but Miss Church told me that her door was locked, when the money was taken from her room. At the Faculty meeting, Mr. and Mrs. Greene were present. Mr. Torsey did not, to my knowledge, stamp his foot upon the floor, nor in any way treat them uncivilly. On the contrary, he was most gentlemanly, kind and forbearing, notwithstanding Mr. and Mrs. Greene’s bitter vituperations, and misrepresenta­ tions of his acts. Affidavit of Afr. and Mrs. Daggett. {Steward and .Stewardess.] The first circumstances which led us to suspect Miss Greene of taking articles of clothing, not her own, was, that one of the help missed a pair of new drawers from the wash, and in two weeks from that time, Miss Greene put them into the wash, having her own name marked upon (hem with blue ink. The Monday before she left, site brought down a fortnight’s wash, in which were a chemise belonging to Julia Sherburne; another to Amanda Herriman; a pair of drawers to Miss Bel­ cher, and a handkerchief (marked') to Miss S. J. Fuller. These articles, having been identified and claimed by the per­ sons referred to, we questioned her, in the presence of Miss i i I �17 - i Case, in relation to them. She at first said they were her own. On being asked how the handkerchief came to be marked S. J. Fuller, she said that it belonged to Jennie Fuller, and that Miss Fuller knew she had it. On being told it had been shown Miss Fuller, and that she knew nothing about her having it, after a long pause, she acknowledged that she took the other articles from the ironing-room, and that they did not belong to her; but declined telling where she got the handkerchief. As other articles of clothing had been missed, it was suggest­ ed that an examination of her room should be made, and Mrs. Daggett and Miss Case accompanied Miss Greene to her room, for that purpose. She opened her two drawers, and there were found in them, a chemise belonging to Miss Case; another be­ longing to Miss Abbie Fuller; a towel belonging to Miss Robin­ son; and one, unmarked, which she said was not her own; two collars belonging to Miss Case; a handkerchief of Miss Carrie Straw, and a pair of undersleevcs of Miss Nancy Hunton. She at first said that one of the collars was hers; but afterwards, that it was not. She acknowledged that she knew the chemise belonged to Miss Fuller, having heard her speak of losing it, and giving an exact description of it. She was asked why she had not returned it; to which she replied, she supposed she should, if she had known this would come up. A short time before it came out about the clothing, Miss Florence Church missed a five dollar bill, from her room. When we found the missing clothes in Miss Greene’s room, we sus­ pected she might have had something to do with the money. On being questioned about it, she said she had not got it. But on being further questioned; she admitted, she went into Miss Church’s room and took the money from her portmonnaie, which was in her drawer; and that she passed it to Mrs. Kent. She restored the money before she left. Between the time of this conversation and the time of her leaving, it was found that she had a skeleton key which would open all the students’ rooms, and also the store-rooms. She acknowledged it had been in her possession, about three years. We have read Mr. Greene’s pamphlet, and find many of the statements in regard to the Boarding House and ourselves, are untrue. On-the fifth page, he says “that for students to take articles 2 / �18 . I •I ! | unmarked pile, not their own, when their own were Xins »» not only prMtisrf, « »ll‘>"ed’ ir”»l »d™'d. bj ■ I ] avin"- charge of that department.” ^oL'hJetohteenth page, he undertakes to state how articles from the wa°sh were delivered; and that the unmarked articles would make a very large pile. . , We will answer these statements, by giving an account of the management in the washing department from the time we came here, until the close of the term when Miss Greene left. The first week of each term, the students boarding at the College, when altogether in the dining-room, were notified when and where to bring in their articles for the wash ; and that they must be all plainly marked; and each room was furnished w.ith the printed rules of the boarding house, one of which requires that all articles be plainly marked. We find but few unmarked articles the first part of the term; but as it progresses, the marks on some of them wash out, which gives us more trouble than the few unmarked articles put in. When ready for delivery, the ladies’ clothes were sorted, and those belonging to the occupants of each room were put into boxes numbered the same as their rooms. The unmarked arti­ cles were spread out upon the table, so they could be easily picked out. At tea, Friday evening of each week, the ladies were requested, wrhen they left the table, to repair to the iron­ ing-room and get their clothes ; and thg head wash-girl was present to see to their delivery. When any one did not find all her articles in the box, she was told to select her own from those on the table. But in no instance were they ever told or allowed to take unmarked articles, not their own, in place o like articles lost; unless after an article had been placed upon the table several weeks, and unclaimed by any one ; then, in some instances, we have told students, who said they had os such an article, and needed one of that kind, to take it for Iia week, returning it to the wash. Also at the close of each tcrnb when there were unmarked pieces not taken, we have put u’ upon the table and requested the students, when all togct'^ to examine them carefully, and select their own; and after examination, if anything was left and a student claimed to > lost alike article, and we were satisfied it was true, �19 allowed it to be taken, but to be restored if an owner was found. This is the extreme limit of any liberty ive have either directly or indirectly given any student,—to take an article of clothing not belonging to them. . That articles of clothing do occasionally get misplaced, and sometimes lost, we do not doubt. But during our stay here, of over three years, we have never known a student, excepting Miss Greene, to take a marked or an unmarked article of cloth­ ing not known to be their own, unless by an arrangement with us. The gentlemen’s clothes were delivered in about the same manner, on a long unoccupied table in the dining-room, every Friday, as they went from the dinner-table, and ini our presence. We have never had much trouble or complaint among the gentlemen about the loss of clothing ; nor indeed with the la­ dies, excepting in the latter part of the spring term referred to. And so much complaint was made to us at that time, that rye made every effort we could to find out where they went to. The result was, that we found most of the missing articles in the possession of Miss Greene. On the 83d page, Mr. Greene says: "He (Daggett) told me that some time in the day, on the 22d of May, he was called to the room where Mrs. D., Miss 0., and Louise were to assist in the examination; and, after questioning her about the clothing, —especially about two handkerchiefs she had put in the wash, he questioned her about them all he desired, then asks her about the missing five dollars. He says: 'The first word she spoke she told him where it was, not denying a word. He asked her if she would get it. She said yes, and gave it to him soon after.’ ” I (Orrin Daggett) will here give an accurate account of the matter, which I distinctly remember. After Miss Greene’s equivocation about the marked Fuller handkerchief and other articles, I felt confident she took the money. I first asked her, “Where is that five dollar bill you took from Miss Church’s portmonnaie ?” She colored, hesi­ tated and said : “I have not got it.” Feeling still more con­ firmed, by her appearance, that she took the money, I asked, "What have you done with it ?” She did not answer for some minutes, nor until I advised her to disclose the whole thing. / �20 At last she said, “I gave it to Mrs. Kent.” I asked her if she would restore it, and she said she would, and did so the next morning. These questions and answers, as given above, I told Mr. Greene in the conversation which he undertakes to give. He did not seem satisfied, and asked me several questions, among which was, “What was the first thing she said in reply to your second question, 'what have you done with it ?’ ?” I told him, she said she gave it to Mrs. Kent. I did not tell him that “she told me where it was, not denying a word.” Separate Affidavit of Mrs. Daggett. Monday, May 21st, Miss Greene brought down a bundle of clothing for the wash, rvitha list of the same, which she was not in the habit of putting- in, and is not generally practised by the students. This led the wash-girls to notice them more particu­ larly. They recognized some articles that were missing, and had been so minutely described that they brought them up to me. One chemise answered the description of the one Miss Sherborne missed. So I took it to her room, not as Mrs. Greene says, to see if she would own it, but to see if it was hers. She and her room-mate both said it was. A pair of drawers, I showed to Miss Belcher, being just such as she had described as missing, and she said they were the same. I did not know to whom the other chemise belonged, until after it was ironed and laid upon the table, where Miss Harriman found and claimed it, saying it was the one she lost two or three weeks before The handkerchief marked S. J. Fuller, was a common linen one and I should think nearly new. Mr. Greene states that I said it was an old one with holes in it, which I utterly deny Finding so many articles in addition to the garment she marked a few weeks before, led us to think there might be more brXTM-50^TuesdyTm°™^’ they were down to breakfast, Miss Case and I went into her room, and saw in her drawers, articles of clothing, which we recognized as belonging • ° tT H°ne "J bGlon-cd t0 Miss Case. Thinking Ly am! 7ishiQff t0 -Ce Bmong hol, a ™’’n “”to 1 ta .1 Here wore �21 her. She said she believed there were; and went to her drawer and took out the garment of Miss Case and handed it to. me. I then asked her if there were any more. She, after again look­ ing over her drawers and taking up articles which I knew were not her own, said there were not. This was all that was said about the clothing there. I then told her Mr. Daggett wished to see her, and we went to Miss Case’s room. Here was where we had the investigation; after which Miss Case and I went with her to her room, where we found the articles mentioned in a former statement. This was Tuesday forenoon, and I never mentioned the subject to her afterwards. Miss Greene had nice under-clothing in her trunk, for exhibi­ tion; but her common under-clothing was very much worn. She wore flannel drawers the first part of the term, and her mother carried them home before Miss Greene left, as Mr. Greene told me. I never saw in the wash such garments as Mrs. Greene de­ scribes in her statement, nor did Louise ever speak to me of losing them; and there were none such in the room when Miss Case and I were there. I had no prejudice nor ill-will towards Louise, and I never spoke unkindly to her ; and I would as willingly have tried to find missing articles for her as I did for the others, if she had told me she had lost any; and I think it is strange she did not tell me if she had lost as many articles as her folks say she had. I will note a few of the mis-statements in the pamphlet: On page 56, in the affidavit of Chestina S. Greene, she says: “Miss Case and Mrs. Daggett came up and went into Dr. Torsoy’s part of the house first, and then came into our room.” We did not go into Dr. Torsey's part of the house, nor did he have anything to do, directly or indirectly, with the investiga­ tion in regard to the clothing or money. On page 65, and following pages, is a certificate of Mr. Greene professing to give a conversation between Mrs. Greene and myself, in which he has made additions, omissions and changes. I gave him a true statement of the facts and circum­ stances in regard to finding articles of clothing in Louise’s pos­ session, not her own; and all his statements in that certificate or elsewhere, not agreeing with this and the statement made by my husband and myself, are untrue. �22 I will merely add that every place where he speaks of me or anything I had any personal knowledge of, is exaggerated or changed about the same as what I have noticed above. Statement of S. Jennie Fuller. I hereby certify, that the handkerchief, said by Mr. and Mrs. Daggett to have been found in the possession of Miss M. L. Greene the day before she left Kent’s Hill, was mine. It was nearly new, there were no holes in it, and my name ivas plainly marked upon it. How it came into Miss Greene’s pos­ session I cannot tell. The handkerchief was in use constantly for more than a year after Miss Greene left. Affidavit of Florence A. Church. I, Florence A. Church, do depose and say that I was a stu­ dent at Kents Hill during the spring term of 1866, and had some acquaintance with Miss M. Louise Greene, as we both roomed on the same floor in the College. On Thursday evening, May 17th, some time after the study­ bell rang, I was engaged in looking over my money, accounts, etc., and when I had finished, I put a five dollar bill into my portmonnaie, and all the rest of my money into a private desk. I closed the portmonnaie, put it into my table drawer and then closed the drawer itself. My sister was with me, and I think we did not leave the room that evening. After breakfast, next morning, a friend went up with me from the dining-hall to my room, and asked if I would loan her five dollars for a day. I replied that I would, and opened my drawer to get it for her; but on opening the portmonnaie, the bill, which I put in it the evening before, was missing. I was very much surprised, but said nothing about it that day to any one, except Miss Case, who told me that I ought to have re­ ported the matter at once to Mr. Daggett, the steward. The next morning I went to Miss Greene’s room and said, lt Louise, some one has taken five dollars from my portmon­ naie.” She was sewing, and when I said this, she colored very deeply, and did not look up. After a little hesitation, she an­ swered, “I guess you lost it yourself more likely.” When I saw her confusion, I felt sure that she knew where I had lost it and how; and I at once left the room. ’ �23 On the 22d of May I left for homo; and soon after Mr. Dag­ gett sent me the five dollars, writing that it was found in Miss Greene’s possession. As I put the money in my drawer late Thursday evening, and it was missing immediateljr after break­ fast the next morning, it must have been taken from my room while I was at breakfast, as we were not absent from our room before going to breakfast. I distinctly remember that Miss Greene did not come to breakfast that morning till I had fin­ ished eating; and I know that I locked my door that morning when I went to breakfast, and I also know that I found it lock­ ed when I returned, and my key was in the lock. Affidavit of Ulrs. Sarah F. Palmer. [Formerly Sarah F. Doe, a classmate.] ! ■ i I was a class-mate of Miss M. Louise Greene. I joined the College-class, during my first term at Kent’s Hill, in August, 1863. Dr. Torsey’s treatment of me was excellent. He was ever kind and sympathizing. He was like a father to me; and while there I always felt free to consult with him on any matters that were not quite clear to me. So far as I knew, he exercised a sim­ ilar treatment towards all his other students. His treatment of those students who were unmindful of the rules, was gentle and lenient until all such measures failed, and when obliged to re­ sort to severe discipline it appeared to cause him deep pain. I think his leniency towards Louise was certainly remarka­ ble. It is very unpleasant to speak thus of a classmate; but the bitter misrepresentations that have been so widely circula­ ted compel a statement that otherwise I would gladly omit. I think, however, that Louise was very careless respecting the rules, and do not think she would hesitate much about annoy­ ing the teachers, I boarded at the College building only one term, our last. While there I lost no article of clothing, and heard but very little complaint in this direction. I never understood that students were allowed to take clothes not belonging to them, under any circumstances. I never heard any complaint from Louise about losing clothes. On the morning that Louise left, I did not speak with her, but saw her at the breakfast table, when she appeared unusually �24 lively and cheerful. I knew, sometime during the forenoon, that she had left the Hill, but I did not then believe she would commit suicide. I do not remember of hearing any one, on that day, express the fear that Louise would commit suicide; and I never be­ lieved that she had done so till after the discovery of her re­ mains in October following. I heard no reference, whatever, to this affair before the school. Statement of Sarah E. TAnscott. I was a member of the school at Kents Hill, during the Spring term of 1866, and met Miss M. Louise Greene, nearly every day, in the drawing-room. On one occasion, shortly before she left, I heard her say, while in the drawing-room, “I have been telling Chestina that I want her to enter the College course at once, and not wait so long as I did before entering.” I heard much conversation, from Miss Greene, that term, but not one word against the teachers, or school. I i Affidavit of Elisabeth A. Allen. I, Elizabeth A. Allen, of Brunswick, Maine, on this 23d day of November, A. D. 1367, do depose and say, that I was a stu­ dent in the Maine Wesleyan Seminary and Female College, most of the time from the summer of 1858 to the summer of 1862, when I completed the College course, and graduated. I boarded in the College Boarding House, so called, from the summer of 1860 till the summer of 1862—six terms. While boarding there, I lost no article of clothing, excepting two or three handkerchiefs, of little value. I heard but little com­ plaint from the students about articles being lost; and, so far as I could judge, all reasonable care was exercised by the Steward and Matron, in relation to all matters under their su­ pervision. Miss M. Louise Greene boarded in the College Boarding House most of the time while I was there. I was acquainted with her, and frequently conversed with her. I never heard her complain of losing clothes in the wash, nor of unkind treat­ ment from Mr. Torsey, or any of the teachers. She was fre­ quently spoken of by the young ladies of the Seminary, as �25 singular—inclined to say and do things that appeared strange and mysterious. But I knew nothing against her moral char­ acter. Statement of Louise F. Allen. I was a student in the Maine Wesleyan Seminary and Female College from the summer of 1862 till I graduated in 1865. Dur­ ing the first two years, I boarded in the College Boarding House. While there, I lost no clothes in the wash, or in any other way. I heard but little complaint of such loss, by other students; and, so far as I can judge, all reasonable care was taken to return clothes to the owners by those who had charge of the laundry. I was well acquainted with Louise Greene, who boarded in the “College” most of the time when I was there. I do not remember hearing her complain of losing clothing, or of being unkindly treated by Dr. Torsey, or any other teacher. Statement of Hilary H. Fossett. [Classmate of Miss Greene.] I first joined my class, at Kents Hill, during the fall of 1863. I was present the whole course, excepting one term and a few weeks of another. Dr. Torsey treated me very kindly. His treatment of other students was kind, as far as I know. In his treatment of Lou­ ise, I think he was lenient. As to her character and deport­ ment as a student, respecting the rules, I think she was disposed to evade them, and had the ability to do so adroitly. I think her success, in this direction, was calculated to give annoyance to the Faculty. I cannot remember anything in particular she ever said of Dr. Torsey’s treatment of her, or of his character as a man; but she often referred to him in a not very complimentary man­ ner. I boarded in the College nearly six terms. I lost a few clothes—of no great value. It never entered my mind, that I was “allowed” to take things from the wash unless I was satis­ fied they were my own. I did not anticipate, when I first heard that Louise had left, that she would commit suicide. I did not hear any reference to this matter, before the school, by any of the Faculty. �26 c I had heard that she had a skeleton key, but did not know she made improper use of it. Affidavit of Sarah JE. Dow. [Classmate.] I entered upon my course of study in the Female College, at Kents Hill, in the fall term of 1864, and remained there two years, graduating in June, 1866. I was a classmate of Miss M. Louise Greene; but did not feel intimately acquainted with her till the beginning of our last year, when we roomed near together, two terms, in the house now owned by Dr. Torsey. Our whole class boarded at the College building, during our last term. My room was on the same floor with Miss Greene’s, and near hers. During my entire stay at Kents Hill, Dr. Torsey uniformly treated me well; indeed, I considered him my true friend. I have no doubt that Dr. Torsey’s treatment of his students was impartial. I am sure I never knew anything contrary to this in Miss Greene’s case; but I think he was very lenient with her. During our last year, in a conversation in my room, Miss Greene spoke of her interviews ■with Dr. Torsey with respect to her disobedience of rules. She represented Dr. Torsey as com­ ing to her in a tender, sympathizing manner, sometimes even with tears in his.eyes, and entreating her to yield a willing compliance with the rules; but she added, boastingly, "I would not be moved by any of his entreaties.” I never heard her say that Dr. Torsey spoke harshly to her at these interviews. On Tuesday afternoon, before Louise left, a classmate came to my room, weeping, and said in substance, You know, girls, that some one has been suspected of stealing; what would you think if I should tell you that it is one of our class ? We ex­ pressed great surprise, and asked which one it could be. She answered, "’Tis Louise.” I could not at the time .believe it possible, till I was at last compelled to by her (Louise’s) con­ fessions. • I did not know that she was alone on Tuesday night until the next day. I saw Louise a short time after breakfast on the morning she left; she then appeared as cheerful and social as usual. Sometime after this, Miss Bowers and I went to the �27 room in which Miss Reed was practising, but I do not recollect a single word of the conversation that took place at the time. I had no fears on that day that Louise would commit suicide: nor did I ever believe that she had, till after her remains were found. I never heard any reference to this matter, of Miss Greene, before the school by any member of the Faculty, dur­ ing that term or at any other time. While in the College building, I lost two or three small arti­ cles, but always supposed they were lost accidentally. When I did miss articles I went back to the ironing-room and inquired for them. If they were among the unmarked articles, I was permitted to take them, but was not allowed to take them un­ less I could identify them. This rule was observed by all, as far as I know. I never heard Louise complain of losing clothes, and I think it incredible that she could have lost so many clothes in eleven weeks as she is represented to have lost dur­ ing her last term. Affidavit of Eliza C. Bowers. I, Eliza C. Bowers, of Monmouth, classmate of M. Louise Greene, do depose and say, that on the morning of May 23d, 18G6,1 was in her room in the College at Kents Hill, and found her at her toilet; and saw nothing that led me to infer that she had not been in bed as usual the previous night. She told me she had slept alone; and had her bed been unoccupied during the night, I think I should have noticed it. And I further say, that I understood from her room-mate (Mary Chapman), that the reason she did not stay with Louise that night, was because she preferred to stay with Miss Hunton, and not that she was prevented from remaining with Louise by Miss Case, or any of the Faculty. I further say, that Dr. Torsey was impartial and kiud in his treatment of the students under his care. There was scarcely a student who did not think thus of him, and who did not love and respect him as a teacher and friend. I never knew him to make any distinction among the students under his care, or to show any partiality on account of any religious or sectarian views of any of the students. I have never intend­ ed, in anything I have written or said, to cast any blame upon the Faculty, in their treatment of my lamented classmate, if. Louise Greene, but sincerely believe they desired and intended �28 to exercise justice and kindness towards her, in this matter. Mr. Greene has given in his book, several extracts from my private letters to him and Mrs. Greene, and S. R. Newell, (not, however, giving my name,) in answer to letters addressed to me, proposing numerous questions about the affair connected with my unfortunate classmate; also, about the Faculty, espec­ ially Dr. Torsey, and Miss Case, the Preceptress. These ex­ tracts are published without my knowledge and consent, and in violation of the confidence which I placed in Mr. Greene. These extracts make me say what I did not intend to say, and what the letters do not say, were the whole letters published. The extract ou page 138, was in answer to a letter of Mr. Greene, dated Peru, June 22d, 1867, in which he says, “I have lately been informed that before Louise left, on that fatal 23d day of May, ’66, that Miss Case called all the class into her room, and told them all about L’s trouble. What time was this? And did she say or intimate whether she would be al­ lowed to stay and graduate, or would be expelled? What did she say about the whole matter? Did she seem to think it was an awful thing or crime?” To this, I replied, in substance: “ Immediately after breakfast, on the day Louise left, Miss Case called our class into her room, and told us the whole affair, and said one object she had iu calling us into her room, was to tell us her course in regard to the matter, from the beginning. She did not say but what she expected Louise to remain and grad­ uate. From what she said to us, I inferred that she did expect Louise to graduate; as she spoke of the course she, L., might pursue, and the whole matter would be overlooked and forgot­ ten, Miss Case spoke in the kindest terms of Louise, and seemed deeply afflicted at what had occurred.” This is the substance of what I wrote to Mr. Greene. I did not keep a copy of the letter, but the above is, as nearly as I can recollect, what I wrote. I am confirmed in this by a friend of mine, to whom I read my letter to Mr. Greene. I further say, that Miss Case called the class into her room, on that morning, in compliance with the earnest request of the class to know the facts in the case. Rumors were flying through the college building, among the lady students, and her class thought they had a right to know from the Preceptress, all the circumstances of the case. I �29 Affidavit of Emma C. Huntington. I, Emma G. Huntington, of Hallowell, upon oath state, that I attended the Seminary at Kent’s Hill during a part of the years 1864 and 1865: that I roomed on the second floor in the Sem­ inary building, in room No. 10 ; that the room of Miss Louise Greene was next to mine, and I was acquainted with her, but not on intimate terms, she not belonging to my class, but to the next class below. One day, I think in the spring term of 1865, my room-mate was absent, and being very much engaged, 1 locked myself into my room and took out the key and hung it up. My room-mate’s key was also hanging up in the room. Whilst I was studying, some one knocked on the door—then, after waiting a minute or two—knocked again. I made no answer or movement. Imme­ diately afterwards I heard a key put into the lock, and some one turning the key, apparently to open the door. I then rose and looked to see what was about to happen, and saw the door open, and Miss Louise Greene entered the room. She seemed as much astonished to see me as I was to see her. She said she found her key would fit one of the doors near by, and thought she would try it in mine. I made no other reply than an ex­ clamation of surprise, and she turned and left the room. Neither she nor'I ever afterwards alluded to the subject. Affidavit of Mira I. Heed.* I, Mira I. Reed, of Roxbury, do depose and say, that I have lately read a pamphlet entitled "The Crown Won but not Worn,” by Jonas Greene, of Peru: and that 1 find therein a statement which purports to be an affidavit, made and sworn to by myself; which affidavit contains certain statements, quite different, in expression and in fact, from what I thought and intended when I signed the affidavit. After the close of the fall term, 1866, and while at home, I receilfed a letter from Mr. Jonas Greene, asking certain ques•Mr. Greene says, on page 53 of his pamphlet:—“ I will here state, without fear of contradiction, that Miss Reed is a young lady whose standing in society, morally, intellectually, and religiously, entitles her to confidence and respect. She is a teacher of much practise, and. as a scholar and teacher, takes rank before the public where known, among the first order.” Whatever may be said of many of his statements, we cheerfully admit that the above is true and reliable. �30 tions about Louise and the manner of her leaving- the Hill. By­ advice of my friends at home, I did not answer his letter; be­ cause I did not wish him to have any writing, signed by me, I fearing that he might use it against the Institution at Kents Hill; but as my brother was soon going to carry me back to the Hill, we decided to call at Mr. Greene’s, on our way, and answer his questions in person. We did call in November at Mr. Greene’s, when he again re­ peated his questions. Noticing that Mr. Greene began to take my answers in writ­ ing, I hesitated about giving them in this form; when he said, ‘‘You need not fear; this shall not be used to injure you.” I answered, "I have nothing to say against Dr. Torsey, or the Institution, and do not wish to say anything that shall be used against them.” Mrs. Greene here replied, “It would not be best for you (I understood her to mean me as a student,) to say anything against them, for we already know enough against them back of this, without your testimony.” Mr. Greene also said, “ This is a matter of great interest to us, and we wish to know all about this, simply for our own sat­ isfaction.” After this explanation from them, I proceeded to answer their questions as well as I knew ; but they gave me no intimation that these answers would be printed or made public; nor did I ever intend or suppose that they would be, till after the publi­ cation of Greene’s pamphlet. As we were leaving Mr. Greene’s house, Mrs. Greene, appear­ ing to think that we (my brother and I) were favorable towards Dr. Torsey, remarked, “You needn’t try to shield him, for he is as guilty of murder as if he had taken a knife and cut her throat.” * I saw no more of Mr. Greene, till the last of the following January (18G7), when he called to see me at Kents Hill. lie said he wished to talk with me again about Loui^g, and asked if I would take a ride with him for that purpose. I did not wish to go, and privately asked my chum what I should do, but she could not tell me. Mr. G. appeared deeply’ affected, -wept much, and I knew not how to deny’ his request. We drove toward Readfield Corner, about half a mile, when �31 we came to a Mr. Skofield’s. lie stopped here and requested me to go in, though I was an entire stranger to this family. After we were in the house, he took a paper from his coat pocket, and said, “ I want you to give a sort of certificate to Louise’s character.” The certificate that he wished me to give was already written upon the paper, which he took from his pocket, and which he then read. He was in great haste and read the certificate very rapidly. I then took the paper and read a few lines of the beginning, but as the writing was not very legible, and as he was in great haste, I read only a few lines. I did not then realize the importance of what was read to me. Mr. Greene then proceeded with the remainder of his paper. I noticed that in different pages there were several vacant spaces. He said. "I left these spaces for the purpose of insert­ ing other things afterwards”; and added, “I will put this doc­ ument in better language.” Whether it is in better language or not, I will not say, but as it reads on the 53d and following pages of his book, it is not as I then understood it, and it greatly misrepresents my opinions. In my answers to Mr. Greene, which he claimed to have written, it was my purpose to tell the whole story as far as I knew it. I did not keep back anything favorable to Dr. Torsey, but all this is suppressed in my affidavit as given by Mr. Greene. When I first heard that Louise had left, I did fear that she would commit suicide, because I had heard that once before, on the death of a friend, she had made the attempt to commit sui­ cide. I think I expressed this fear to Miss Bowers, when first told that Louise had gone. On page 51, Mr. G. makes me say that Miss Bowers said to me, "Won’t you go and see Dr. T ? I think you will do best with him.” Miss Bowers did not ask me to go to Dr. T.’s, because I could*" do best with him,” but because I roomed in Dr. T.’s house, and could see him most conveniently, and I so repre­ sented the mat! er to Mr. Greene. On page 55, my affidavit as given by Mr. Greene, reads as follows : "Dr. T., in the first conversation in our room, told us that he had never suspected Louise of any dishonesty in that direction; said he had a long conversation with her that morn- ■J �32 ing. Louise said, “If she could not graduate, there was no future for her.” I asked her what she proposed to do. She said, “I want this kept from the school, and stay and gradu­ ate.” I said “the school knew it”; that she then broke down, crying and feeling terribly.” I did not represent Dr. Torsey as saying that Louise said to him, “I want this kept from the school, and stay and graduate,” for I do not recollect that I ever made, or heard, or read the remark till I saw it in Mr. Greene’s book. What Dr. Torsey* did say (as I recollect it,) was this: “I asked Louise what she proposed to do under these affecting circumstances.” She replied, “If the school know it, I cannot stay.” The expression, “stay and graduate,” was not used in my hearing, and I feel sure that I never repeated it as coming from him or any other person. In various places he makes me speak of a "long delay, a ter­ rible suspense,” another, “long delay, a horrible suspense,” “a terrible commotion on the Hill,” “a terrible excitement and feeling about the matter,” “all out of patience waiting for the team,” etc., etc. These expressions are not mine, and were not made by me, and must be the result, I suppose, of his at­ tempt to “put this document in better language.” There are also some other statements as given in this affida­ vit, which misrepresent me, for while I did make use of some of the expressions given, yet they were made in connection with other remarks, which he has suppressed, and which, if given, would put my whole statement in a very different light. Having made these corrections and explanations, I will re­ sume my present statement. When Mr. Greene had finished reading the paper above referred to, we left the house, and I supposed we had got through with the matter; but as we drove into the street, Mr. G. said, “I have business at Readfield Corner; you would not object to going down, I suppose?” Of course, I could not well object; and he drove on. As we neared the Corner, he said to me, “ Life is uncertain, and as you talk of going West, if you should not live, this paper will be of no service to me, unless you make oath to it.” I strongly objected to making an oath. He again assured me that nothing that I had said or assented to should be used against me, or the Institution, refer- �33 ring, as I supposed, to Dr. Torsey and the other members of the Faculty. I still objected, but he insisted so earnestly, that I at last yielded. I will here say, that I do not think Dr. Torsey was guilty of any intentional delay in sending word to Mr. Greene. I never knew that Dr. T. was unkind to Louise, in any way whatever. He certainly appeared very deeply affect­ ed, on the day Louise left. He manifested the deepest sorrow and sympathy, and Cveu shed tears while conversing with us about L. I mentioned these things in my conversation at Mr. Greene’s house, to which Mrs. Greene replied, contemptuously, “Oh, crocodile tears!” I frequently heard Louise speak favorably of Dr. Torsey, and only a few days before she left, she, in my presence, urged her sister Chestina, to enter the course of study then, and graduate. She also asked me to use my influence in persuading Chestina to this course. 1 was at Kents Hill nine terms, and Dr. Torsey’s treatment of me and other students, was never, to my knowledge, in any way unkind; on the contrary, he was ever kind and obliging; always ready to lend a helping hand; and I am very much grieved that any statements of mine have been so construed as to appear injurious to Dr. Torsey or the Institution, for I have never had any such intention. On page 113 I find the following: "Dr. Torsey tells Miss Reed, that he had no regrets when he went to Lewiston, and to the place where her remains were found.” Here again I am grossly misrepresented, for he did not say “he had no regrets.” He did say, “As I stood viewing the ground where she was found, I reviewed the whole matter in my mind, and asked myself: could I have done differently, not knowing her intentions ? and I did not feel that I could have done differently, under the circumstances. And I felt to thank God, that in my conversation with Louise, on the morning she left, I did not censure her, either in word or deed.” As frequent reference is made to the conversation of Dr. T. about Louise on the day she left, I will here add that, among other things, he said he told Louise that morning that this affair need not ruin her future; but that there was a future for her if she would lead a> virtuous life; that she said she would go to Lewiston and send for her father; that he told her if sho left 3 �34 she had better go to her parents; that she answered, “They will not receive me”; that he told her, her parents’ love would predominate over their passions; that she replied, “They will not receive me,” and gave the reason why they would not; that he again advised her to go to her parents, and also to con­ fess to her Saviour. He also repeated to us many other things which I cannot mention here. I have always thought that Dr. Torscy was the true friend of the students, and think he has, in this sad affair, been greatly misrepresented. The foregoing statements have been made of my own free will, and without solicitation, prompted simply by a sense of duty. Affidavit of Stillman A. Heed. I, Stillman A. Reed, of Roxbury, do depose and say that I was present at the conversation referred to in the foregoing affi­ davit of my sister, Mira I. Reed, in Mr. Greene’s house; and that the statements she has made of that conversation are true, according to my recollection of it, and that I believe them to be true. Affidavit of Abbie S. Fuller. [Classmate.] I first entered the school at Kents Hill, in November, 1862. I was in the same college class with Miss M. Louise Greene, having joined the Class in the spring of 1864. I cannot say too much in praise of Dr. Torsey’s treatment of me; for he did everything for me that he could do, to make my school relations happy and agreeable. I always felt that he was one that we could all go to when we wanted advice, and be sure to find a sympathizing friend. If his treatment of others differed from that toward me, I never knew or heard of it. I never knew much of the differences between Dr. Torsey and Miss Greene, but so far as I observed, she was treated as well as the rest of the class: I was not very intimate with Louise, and had no personal knowledge of her violations of school rule; but the members of the class often conversed about these violations, and regretted that Louise was not more careful of the rulcs.and of the feel­ ings of the teachers; and remarked further that she was treated �35 with great leniency by the Faculty; and that it would not be surprising if sometime she were expelled for her misconduct. While at the Hill, I boarded in the College, except one term and part of another. I may, on one or two occasions, have lost a handkerchief or some small article in the wash, but notl^ ing of any consequence. When I lost anything, I went to the Matron about it. We were never allowed to take clothes that we could not identify. I never heard Louise complain of losing things, nor can I see how it was possible for her to lose so many as she is represented to have lost during her last term. Sometime before noon on May 23d, I heard that Louise had left the Hill. I knew not where she was going, but supposed she was g-oing home. I had not the slightest fear that she would commit suicide: indeed, such a thought did not occur to me till the next day, when some one suggested it. Even then, I did not believe such a thing would happen; and did not be­ lieve it till after the announcement that her remains had been found. I never heard any reference to her leaving made by any mem­ ber of the Faculty, before the school. I will here explain the letter, an extract from which is found on page IS of Mr. Greene’s pamphlet. My home is in Augusta. Mr. Greeue was a member of the Senate last winter, and called on me several times, to talk with me about Louise. On t-wo of these occasions, Mr. G. asked me if I would not write to his wife, saying, “She is very anxious to have from you a full de­ scription of that garment of yours, found in the possession of Louise.” Thus urged, I complied with his request, and wrote a letter, apart of which is found on the page above indicated. It was a strictly private letter and never intended for publica­ tion. I had already declined Mr. Newell’s request to furnish him with a letter for publication. In addition to the explana­ tion asked for, I felt that I must add a few words of sympathy for the mother of Louise; but did not mean to say one word that could be wrested into a condemnation of Dr. Torsey or the . Faculty. In commenting upon this letter, he says: “This classmate does not think they did all that might have been done to save her,” etc. If by “they,” in this quotation, he means my class, he is correct; but if by “they,” he means the Faculty, he is ut- �36 terly wrong. In my letter I regretted that "a word in season” had not been uttered by our class; and when I wrote that, I did not have the Faculty in my mind, for I have always thought that the Faculty did everything they could have done to save leer. Again, he represents me as saying, “it appeared so large to us then.” It certainly did appear “large,”—not, however, as he insinuates, on account of any representation of the Fac­ ulty, but on its.pwn account; and if now “it looks so small,” it is not because her first error was in itself “ small,” but be­ cause it was so, in comparison with her last and greatest error, suicide. Statement' of Elisa J. Perley. [Cinssmate.] I, Eliza J. Perley, of Unity, Classmate of M. Louise Greene, whose sad death has called forth,'fvom both friends and stran­ gers, so great sympathy, do give iUas my opinion, that the charges brought against Dr. Torsey, regarding his treatment of Louise at the time of her leaving Kents Hillyare indeed ground­ less. Nor do I believe that any one in his position at the time, could have acted more judiciously than did he. \ Knowing, as I do, Louise’s great pride of character, I do not believe it would have been possible for him, by any persuasion, to have caused her to remain on Kents Hill, after knowing that her story was current among the students; nor do I believe'that the Faculty were in any way the means (as her father affirms) of rendering the matter public. Mr. Greene says, in his book, "Sarah Dow, one of L.’s class, tells me lately that Miss Case, the Preceptress, on the morning of May 23d, before Louise left, called all the class into her room in the College, and told them all about the affair.” Sarah Dow did not know, when she made that statement, that on Tuesday evening, May 22d, myself and one other of the class having heard tho sad report from one of the students, vis­ ited Miss Case’s room to know the truth. As we told our story, she expressed great surprise, and for some time refused to acknowledge that she knew anything of the affair. When we urged her still further, she says, “Do not urge me, girls, I can tell you nothing.” We told her we thought we had a right, in the name of the class, to demand an explanation. She then said, “Call your class to my room in the morning, and I �31 will try and tell you all.” Could Mr. Greene have seen the tearful eyes and trembling lips of our dear Preceptress that eve­ ning, he could not, I think, have made the cruel remark—“A more cool, unfeeling person, I never saw.” Again, Mr. Greene remarks in regard to Miss Case—"Know­ ing that Louise disliked her, for what I believed were good reasons, and believing she was prejudiced against Louise, I thought she might have assisted, under such feeling, in injur­ ing my child.” It may be consoling to Mr. Greene to know that, at the time Louise left Kents Hill, she was preparing a beautiful oil painting as a present to Miss Case, in which she was taking great pleasure, and of which her class frequently heard her speak. Does this look as if "Louise disliked her for good reasons”? As regards Dr. Torsey and his treatment of students, I can say, as for myself, (and I say it in deep gratitude to him,) that during my stay of seven terms at Kents Hill, his treatment of me was ever that of kindness. Nor had I the least reason to imagine that it was on account of any "favoritism” on his part; nor was I governed by "fear”; neither could it have been on account of "religious opinion,” for when I went to Kents Hill I had no religious opinion. As to his kind management of students generally, surely the hundreds of testimonials that could be collected from all parts of our country, ought to prove to the public that his is not a "reign of terror.” And regarding his treatment of Louise, one little event, that occurred during her last year at Kents Hill, should, I think, have some weight in the public mind. The class will remember the affair when I say that it was in the fall of 1865, when her class were invited to a supper at her room. (She was boarding herself.) While there, Dr. Torsey called, and brought her apples, grapes, and the first ripe pear from his garden. After he had gone, Louise said, "Girls, Dr. Torsey has been very kind to me this term”—and then spoke of sever­ al times when he had brought her little dainties for her table. One other matter I would mention. On the day that the remains of Louise were buried, I wrote to Mrs. Greene a letter expressive of my sympathy; but of course intended for no eye except her own. What, then, was my surprise to find it pub­ lished in full iu "The Crown Won but not Worn”! �38 One year ago I received a letter from S. R. Newell, of Peru, requesting me to send him a statement of the standing and character of Louise, so far as I knew, for the purpose of publi^ttion. I answered it,positively declining to have my testimony placed in print. Mr. Greene must have overlooked that remark in my letter; for he copied extracts from it, freely; and still he remarks, "I have not made a quotation from a single letter marked private or confidential.” As to my opinion of the character of Louise, I can truly say, I knew nothing against her. I never knew any violation of rules on her part. As to her veracity—I never questioned it. Of her possession of a skeleton key I had no knowledge. Of Louise as a classmate, I loved her truly,—and at her death I was a sincere mourner. Extracts from Affidavit of It. Ella Pike. I have been a student at Kents Hill, most of the time, for the last five years. During all this time, Dr. Torsey has been uni­ formly kind to me, in every respect; and also, as far as I could judge, to every other student. I never knew nor believed that he made any difference with students on account of their relig­ ious opinions, and do not believe he would be'influenced by any such motives. I was well acquainted with M. Louise Greene, during her last three terms, and roomed near her, one term, in Dr. Torsey’s house. For a long time before Louise left, it was a matter of common talk, among us girls, that she would evade the rules whenever she could without detection. Her general character was that of a sly, cunning person, in the evasion of the rules of tho school. During her last term, Miss Greene boarded at the Col­ lege, and Miss Mira I. Reed took her place in the room with Chestina. On tho morning Louise left, she came to Chestina’s room, where I was studying alone. On coming in, Louise asked for Chestina, aud, on being told that she had gone to the College, said, "I’m sorry, fori am going to Lewiston to make purchases for the Exhibition, and I wish to see her.” She then went to the mirror and arranged her hair, cuffs, etc.,saying, "I did not complete my toilet before starting, because, if I did, I feared the stage would go before I could see Chestina.” She also ad- �39 ded, "I will leave a note for Ches.”; which she did, writing it in my presence. Soon after, she left, saying as she went out, "Good-bye,” to which I laughingly replied, “Farewell,” supposing of course she would return that night. * She was as cheerful and social as usual; and there was noth­ ing in her appearance to excite suspicions that she meditated suicide; nor did I ever believe she had committed suicide, till after.her remains were found in Auburn. I do not remember to have heard, during that forenoon, any one, except her sister Chestina, express any fear that Louise would commit suicide. In the early part of the afternoon of that day, Dr. Torsey came up to Chestina's room, where were Chestina, Miss Reed, and myself. He told us of his interview with Louise, that morning; that he had said to her that this trouble need not de­ stroy her future, but that there might be a glorious future be­ fore her, if she would lead an upright and virtuous life; that he asked what she proposed to do; that she said she would go to her friends in Lewiston; that he then told her that if she left she had better go home to her parents, acknowledge her faults to them, and also confess to her Saviour and ask His forgive­ ness; that she then said she could not go home, because her parents would not receive her; and that she had no hope with z her Saviour, for he had cast her oif long ago; that he then told her that her father had lately experienced religion, his heart was tender, and be would receive her; and that he tried to en­ courage her faith in the Saviour, that he had not cast her off. One of us then asked Dr. Torsey if he thought Louise would commit suicide. He replied, “I have no fears of her commit­ ting violence upon herself. She may conceal herself awhile from her friends. She would be more likely to go in her ordi­ nary clothes, as in this way she would excite less attention.” Dr. Torsey then asked Chestina what she thought should be done; but I do not remember her reply, except that she referred to the proposition of Mr. Harriman, which was, I think, that he would carry her home to her parents, if she desired to go. This is the substance of what I heard at that interview, though I may not have given all the remarks in the exact order in which they occurred. During the interview, Dr. Torsey appeared deeply affected, and manifested great sympathy for Louise. I ! ! ___ �* 40 I have never boarded at the College, and, of course, have lost no clothes there; I have been very intimate with many ladies boarding there; but never heard any one of them com­ plain of losing clothes, as I now remember, and I have heard several of them say they never lost anything there. During that term, I heard no reference whatever, by any member of the Faculty, to this matter of Miss Greene’s, before the students, except that in the next class-meeting, held after she left, one of them asked the students to remember the wan­ dering one in their prayers. Affidavit of W. S. Pattee. I was a student at Kents Hill during the spring term, 1866, and had some acquaintance with Miss M. Louise Greene. On the 23d of May, in that term, I went to the depot in the stage, with several other passengers, among them Miss Greene. She was lively, cheerful and full of conversation. I asked her how far she was going, and she said, "To Lewis­ ton”;—she also spoke of Miss Case, the Preceptress, who was to leave at the end of that term; and said, “She has been a very kind and faithful teacher." Another student present said, laughingly, “ I guess you don’t mean quite that, Miss Greene,’’’ or words to that effect. She replied, "I do mean it; and I think, it will be a difficult matter to get another teacher who will fill her place." I asked her also, if she had finished her ^exhibition piece. She said, "I have not; I .have not touched it yet”; and I think she added, “I have not even chosen my subject yet.” She said further—“I have been at Kents Ilil* now fifteen terms, and I think it will seem very strange when the term begins next fall, not to come back again.” While conversing -with her at the depot, as I was not going in the train, I asked her when she was coming back. She gave me. an evasive answer, but I gathered from it, that she intended to return the next day. I did not return to the Hill till evening of the next day, when I learned, for the first time, that Miss Greene had been in trouble, and had not returned. I noticed that she was dressed rather shabbily, but there was nothing in her appearance that indicated mental derangement, and I never believed, for an instant, that she had committed suicide, until after her remains were found in Auburn. �4 41 Statement of Nancie E. Manton. I was a student at Kents Hill, eleven terms, and graduated from the Seminary there in June, 1867. Nearly all of that time I was quite intimately acquainted with Miss M. Louise Greene, till she left; and was with her a great deal during her last year there. During her last year I frequently heard her speak in praise of Dr. Torsey; and among other things she said, “I like Dr. Torsey; I like him much better than I ever did before.” I did not hear her say anything against him in this time, and do not think there was any prejudice in her mind, against him; and I did not hear her say anything that indicated unkind feel­ ing or prejudice, on her part, against any of the teachers. June 28, 1866, Mr. Greene wrote to my father, asking for a description of the undersleeves of mine, found in the possess­ ion of Louise. I replied on the sixth of February following, but Mr. Greene gives in his book only a part of my letter. I gave him a minute description of the undersleeves: not only of the manner in which they were made, the "peculiar stitches,” &c., but also of the material of which they were made, having a part of it then at home. Of the different marks by which I was able to identify them, Mr. Greene gives only one, the "peculiar stitches”—and to this he frequently alludes in a very sneering manner. I boarded in the College building the whole time I was at school, and never lost an article of clothing in the wash, except the undersleeves, referred to above. I never heard Louise complain of losing anything, though I was in her room a great deal. Neither my parents nor myself were Methodists; but I never knew any difference in treatment on account of religious views, towards myself or any other student ; and I am sure that there was no difference on this account. I never saw anything whatever, in Louise, that indicated mental derangement or insanity. Statement of Mrs. II. E. Merrill. During the fall term of the school at Kents Hill, 1865, I washed for Miss M. Louise Greene and her two sisters, Chest iUa and Estelle. A week’s washing for the three, usually cou- �♦ 42 sisted of one pair of sheets, one pair of pillow-cases, three pairs stockings, three pairs drawers, three towels, three chem­ ises and six handkerchiefs. Occasionally a night-dress was washed, but not more than three different ones were brought to be washed during the term, and these were whole and good. The sheets and pillow-cases were also in good condition. The chemises, drawers, stockings, handkerchiefs and towels, taken together, were decidedly poor. Affidavit of Alvin Packard. I, Alvin Packard, of Cambridgeport, Mass., do depose and say that in the spring of 1866, and for several years preceding, I was a resident at Kents Hill, and owned and lived in a house there, adjoining the one which Dr. H. P. Torsey occupied. Early in the spring of 1866, I determined to sell there and re­ move from the State. Mr. Jonas Greene, of Peru, learning this, came to my place to purchase it. We talked the matter all over, and I told him my terms, and he wished to consider the matter a few hours. Previous to this interview, Dr. Torsey had talked with me several times about buying my place; and before Mr. Greene returned, Dr. Torsey came in again and agreed to my terms, and as I had offered him the place before this, I felt under some obligation to close the trade with him, and did so. When Mr. Greene returned, he seemed quite disappointed that I had already sold it; and thought he (Greene) could have given me a better bargain, as he would have taken my carpets, etc. He wanted the place, as I understood the matter, for the purpose of being near a good school, so as to have good oppor­ tunities for educating his daughters. During the last two terms of school at Kents Hill, before I left, Miss M. Louise Greene roomed in my house, and I frequently heard her say, in sub­ stance, "I hope father will buy your place. It will be a good place for the girls to attend school; and when we have finished our education, we can move out West or South.” Louise frequently spoke of Dr. Torsey, in my family; but always in the most respectful terms, and she never gave any intimation of prejudice or ill-feeling on her part, against any of the Faculty, or that there was any such feeling on the part of the Faculty toward her. I never saw anything in her conduct or appearance that indicated insanity. �43 Affidavit of jilary JE. Chapman. [Room-mate.] I first came to school at Kents Hill, in the spring of 1859. I attended school here most of the time till the fall of 18G4. In August, 1864, I went to Westbrook Seminary and attended school there that fall term and the following winter term. In the spring of 1865; I returned to Kents Hill, and have siuce pursued the course in the Female College. On Friday, a few days before I left for Westbrook, I came up from Readfield Corner, where I then lived, with a carriage, for the purpose of taking Al. Louise Greene to my home, that she might spend Saturday and Sunday with me there. Having made known'my errand to Louise, she immediately went to Dr. Torsey for permission, but soon returned, saying, “He will not grant me permission to go.” She again left me, and I have since learned that she went to Miss Robinson, one of the lady teachers, and begged her to intercede with Dr. T. in her (Lou­ ise’s) behalf.. I did not go with her to Miss Robinson’s room,—did not see Miss R. at all. Louise did not tell me that she had been to see Aliss R. She soon returned and asked me if I would go with her to Dr. Torsey, while she once more requested permission of him. I did go with her to Dr. T.’s house (I did not see him on the street at all), when she again made known her request to him. Louise did not have any permit from her father with her. Dr. Torsey said, “I do not see how I can give you permis­ sion, Louise; for, if I do, others will want the same privilege of going from the Hill without permission from home.” She replied, “If your decision is final, I submit; but I must say I think it unjust.” He said that she had no right to judge his actions. After further ’conversation between them, Dr. Torsey said, "You need not expect any further favors in that direction; as you have already beeu down to the Corner several times, without our permission.” Miss Greene replied, “I have asked but few favors, and still less have I received.” Dr. Tor­ sey then said, “Aliss Greene, you may leave the house.” AA’e then said good-night to Airs. Torsey, and went back to the Col­ lege; though I did not go in again, but at once returned to Readfield Corner. �44 I will here say, that Louise had already, before this refusal, been home with me to the Corner three times,- without per­ mission from the Faculty. Once, when she thought I had asked permission for her; and another time, when I suppose she had asked for herself, though it seems she had not; and a third time, when she asked Prof. Robinson, after starting, but did not get permission. Since I have been at the Hill, I have boarded at the College building, every term except two. I have lost several articles of clothing, but no more in proportion to the number of terms, than I lost at Westbrook ; nor any more than would naturally be lost in any boarding-school. When I did lose articles of clothing, I made known the fact, at the proper place. The Matron, or some one appointed by her, was present when we selected our clothes; and this person allowed us to look over the unmarked articles, which were spread upon a long table. If I was able to identify my clothes, I took them; but was never allowed to take articles, unless I could identify them. Miss Greene and I roomed together during the last term she attended here, and I never knew that she lost any clothes; nor did I, during that term, hear her say that she had lost any. I have never received any but the kindest treatment from Dr. Torsej’; and never knew or supposed that his treatment of other students differed from that toward me. During the last year that Miss Greene was here, I frequently heard her say, "Dr. Torsey is very kind to me.”—"I like him much better than I used to, and I think he likes me better.”—“I could ask no better treatment from any person.” She also added, "I think he means to do right,”—or words to that effect. These remarks were made, not only before me, but also in the pres­ ence of others. I never knew, nor believed, that Dr. Torsey made any differ­ ence in his treatment of students on account of their religious opinions. The evening before Miss Greene left, the rumor was current, among the Indies, that she was suspected of taking the clothes that had been lost. How the rumor got out, I never knew. Upon asking the Preceptress in regard to it, she refused to converse with me on the subject. I never heard any teachers refer to the matter before Louise left, nor during that term, �45 after she left; except this. At the next class-meeting, held after she left,—one of the Professors referred to the one who had so suddenly and strangely left, and asked the students earn­ estly, to remember her in their prayers. On the morning Miss Greene left, I saw Dr. Torsey, as he came from the room, where he had been conversing with her. lie seemed deeply affected, and had been weeping. I did not see Miss Greene again, except as she passed the door of the room in which I was reciting, on her way up street. I have been told that she took the stage at Dr. Torsey’s house. Some­ time after I returned to my room from recitation, I first learned that Louise had left the Hill, and had left some of the clothes that she had worn in the morning. I then feared that she might commit suicide. This fear was caused by the fact that Louise had told me that once before she had attempted to com­ mit suicide, but failed in the attempt because she took so much that it acted as an emetic. She said she did this at the time of the death of a very dear friend. She also added, “If any great calamity ever happens to me, I think I shall commit suicide.” She told me these things confidentially, while conversing, one evening, about the above-mentioned friend who had died; and I never mentioned them to any person until after she so strange­ ly left the Hill. I do not think I heard any other student express any fear, that forenoon, that Louise would destroy herself. Most of them appeared to think that she would go out West, or to some place where she would be a stranger, and try to retrieve the past. I did not stay with Louise the night before she left; but I had no permission from any teacher to be absent from my room. On the contrary, I twice asked-Miss Case for permission to stay with Miss Hunton that night; but she positively refused to grant my request, and told me that I must stay in my room. Neither Miss Case nor any other teacher knew that I was absent from my room that night. I roomed with Louise four or five terms, and never saw any indications of insanity. Affidavit of B. IP. Harriman. The stage and express running between Kents Hill and Read­ field, is owned by me. �r it 4G I was for a long time acquainted with M. Louise Greene, and on themorningof May 23d ,1866, she rode with me to Readfield Depot, in company with several other passengers. I had heard a rumor that some student was in trouble; but did not know who it was, till after we started for the Depot. She appeared very lively and cheerful on the way down. I asked her how far she was going. She said she was going to Lewiston to buy some white kids and other things for Exhibi­ tion, and should come back that night. After the train had left, I asked the ticket agent for what place she had bought a ticket; to which he replied, “Lewiston.” I had no conversation with her at the Depot. I saw nothing whatever that indicated insanity. I got back to Kents Hill that day, sometime after twelve, noon. I soon met Dr. Torsey, who asked me if I would take a team and go in pursuit of Louise. (There was no other train for Lewiston that day.) I told him that I had no team to spare; but that if they would furnish the team, and I could get some one to take charge of mine that afternoon, I would go. Dr. Torsey appeared anxious to do promptly all that could be done for the unfortunate lady and her friends. I went to a neighbor and obtained the promise of a team; but when this was done it was past one o’clock; and it would not have been possible to get started before half past one to two o’clock. The traveling, at that time, was very bad, and I could not have driven to Lewiston in less than four hours and a half at the best; probably not in less than five hours. I met Dr. Torsey again and spoke to him of the bad going, and also of the uncertainty that she had stopped at Lewiston; and advised not to go in pursuit of her till after the train should return that afternoon, and we could learn, certainly, from the conductor, that she had stopped at Lewiston. After some conversation, this course was agreed upon; and, on the return of the train, I learned from the conductor that she had stopped at Lewiston, and so reported to Dr. Torsey. I am sure there was no unnecessary delay in the matter; and I believe that if we had sent a team directly to Lewiston, wo could not have arrived there before it would have been too late to find her or to save her. �47 Another reason why I advised to wait till the return of the train was, that she had told me and others, that she should re­ turn that night; and I saw nothing in her conduct to lead me to think that she would do otherwise. I had no fears at the time that she would commit suicide; nor ever afterwards that she had, till her remains were found. Mr. Greene reports a conversation with me, in which he says of me,— "His fears were excited for her safety,” etc. (Page 139.) This is a mere assumption of Mr. Greene, and without any foundation, in fact. On page 90 he says: “If Mr. Harri­ man had been advised, or perhaps I ought to say, permitted, to follow her at the time he said he‘would, I think she would have been saved”; and on page 139 he says, “and I have no doubt but what it” (the pursuit) “would have been, had Dr. Torsey been out of the way, where he could not have been consulted.” The falsity of these extracts will be apparent in the light of what I have said before: that I advised not to go in pursuit till the train should return. Affidavit of Perry Chandler. I entered the school at Kents Hill in the fall of 1863, and have attended here, since that time, seven terms. Was here during the spring term of 18G6. I had quite an acquaintance with M. Louise Greene, as I recited in the same class with her a part of the time. I first heard that she had left the Hill, about three o’clock, P. M., of the day she left; at which time I was requested to go with Chestina Greene (Louise’s sistter) to her father’s, in Peru. We started about six o’clock, P. M., and arrived at Mr. Greene’s house about midnight. When we arrived, none of the family were up except Mrs. Greene. Chestina went into the house, while I staid to take care of the horse. Mrs. Greene kindled a fire, and it was nearly or quite an hour before I re­ tired ; but during that time, no reference whatever was made, in my presence, to Louise, or to the affair that brought us there. I suppose Chestina told her mother the cause of our coining, before I went into the House. Mrs. Greene and Chestina went with the lantern to show me the stable, while I took care of the horse, Mrs. Greene remarking that she would rather do so than disturb Mr. Greene, if I could take care of the horse. I ■■ �1 48 ■ - '•< i I did not see Mr. Greene that night; and do not think he was informed of the affair before 1 retired. Of course I do not know how Mrs. Greene felt that night; but she manifested no outward feelings of anxiety, or even of surprise. I remember this*the more distinctly, as I had expected they would manifest deep feeling, and I had been thinking, on my way there, what I could say to them to comfort them. At my request, Mrs. Greene called me about four o’clock, next morning; as I wished to make an early start for Kents Hill, so as to be back to my recitation. I inquired in the morning for Mr. Greene, and was informed by Mrs. Greene that he and Chestina had started for Lewiston at three o’clock. While eating my breakfast, Mrs. Greene referred to the affair of Louise, for the first time, in my pres­ ence, and said, in substance, “I am sorry Louise has done as she has; but hope the matter can be so arranged that she can go back and graduate at the end of the term.” I was surprised to hear he'r speak of the affair so calmly, and remarked to her, that I was glad she took it so cool. There was no intimation of insanity on the part of Louise, and there were no fears expressed that she (Louise) would commit suicide. On page 33 of Mr. Greene’s pamphlet, he professes to quote what Chestina and I said to him, and that among other things, I said, ‘‘It was the general belief on the Hill-that she was de­ ranged,” and that 1 "expressed fears for her safety.” In reply to this, I will say that I did not see Mr. Greene at all; and fur­ ther, I have not the slightest recollection of saying that it was "the general belief on the Ilill that she was deranged.” And I know that I never told him so. Statement of Rev. Stephen Allen. [Slade 11th Dee., 1867.] I have been well acquainted with Rev. H. P. Torsey, Presi­ dent of the Maine Wesleyan Seminary and Female College, for the last twenty-five years, having resided on Kents Hill about six years of that time, and having had frequent occasion to visit the school and examine into its affairs. For skill in school discipline, I know of no superior to Mr. Torsey. By familiarity with the students, kindness and tact, he has secured, to an unusual extent, the confidence and esteem of his ■ I * �49 pupils; which has been shown by many substantial tokens of their regard. His success in school management has resulted largely from u ready insight, by which he has been enabled to anticipate and prevent mischief in its incipiency. Though he has had pndcr his care, probably more students than any other teacher in the State, comparatively few cases of expulsion or any other ex­ treme punishment have occurred. In case of serious misconduct, so far as I have been able to observe, he is inclined to the most lenient treatment, compati­ ble with the discipline of the school. During the twenty-four years he has been at the head of the Seminary, the school has prospered beyond all its previous his­ tory. I have heard but few complaints of his discipline; and those were mostly from students who had been guilty of misconduct. Statement of jJIrs. Patterson-. [Former Stewardess at Boarding House.] While we had charge of the Boarding House, the clothes, after being washed, were laid on a table, sorted, so that those occupying the same room were laid together.* Those that were unmarked were placed together at the end of the table, and all could have access to them, if anything was missed from theirs. Sometimes there was some complaint on account of missing articles. Sonic that were with us three years did not lose an. article. I do not recollect of hearing complaint from Miss M. Louise Greene, about losing many clothes, and feel quite sure that Mrs. Greene’s statement of her daughter’s losses, is not correct; as her wardrobe, sonic of the first terms she was at school, was not abundant. i it f 1 [The following letters are mostly from persons not connected with the Meth­ odist church, and most of them voluntarily furnished.] Letter from G. T. Fletcher. [Prut. State Normal School.] Castine, Me., Nov. 14, 1867. Rev. Dr. Tobsey—Dear Sir: I learn with regret that Mr. •The arrangement of “boxes” of which Mr. Daggett speaks, was not then adopted. Mrs. Patterson’s statement should follow Mr. and Mrs. Daggett's. 4 i ■/ ■ �50 Greene has published a book in which he reflects upon your severity towards his daughter, and accuses you of being guilty of cruelty and partiality to many students. I know very little in regard to the accusations preferred by Mr. Greene in relation so his daughter; but from what I know of your character as a gentleman and a teacher, I feel the ut- . most confidence in the ground of my belief that no just reproach can rest upon you in the matter. I have no fear- that your rep­ utation will suffer before the tribunal of thinking men. During the three terms it was my privilege to be under your instruction, your relation to the students seemed to be, to an uncommon degree, that of a kind and faithful parent, a true, teacher, and a Christian man. It has been my privilege to receive instruction from some of the best teachers in Maine and in Massachusetts; and to enjoy the acquaintance of many others who stand high upon the pub­ lic record; but in no instance have I met one who has seemed to me to combine, in himself, more of the requisite qualities of a true teacher, than yourself. That you are ever "cruel” or "partial,” is entirety at variance' with the testimony of my experience, and that of all the stu­ dents of the Seminary, with whom I have conversed. Permit me to render this expression of my regard for one whom I so highly esteem as a teacher and friend. j Statement of Miss Nellie M. Cox. [Teacher in Jamaica, N. Y.] I have known Dr. Torsey for over eight years. For four years I was a student under his instructions, and I consider him thefresi teacher I ever knew, and a most perfect disciplinarian, lie evinces such a kind interest for the welfare of his pupils, and is so mild and gentle in his administration, that he always obtains their love. Statement of Aurilla Springer. During the three years that I have been under the instruction of Dr. Torsey, never, to my knowledge, has he used undue severity. He is kind, firm and conscientious as a disciplinari­ an; confided in and loved as a teacher;—and justly so, for he is ever mindful of the best interests of the students. I I �51 Statement of Hon. JI. T. Ludden. Whilst a pupil at the Maine Wesleyan Seminary, I never dis­ covered the slightest tendency to arbitrary or harsh rule on the part of Dr. Torsey. Nor did I ever discover any favoritism or harshness on the part of Mr. Torsey towards any studeht. I have always found him a kind, noble-hearted gentleman. Jlrs. C. JI. JUUs, Langor. In a letter from Mrs. Mills, dated Dec. 21, 1867, she says:— I was a student and a member of your family more than a year; and your uniform kindness to me and interest for me, merited and ever has had my earnest gratitude; and this feeling toward you seemed almost universal. As to religious matters, I could not have been treated by my own peculiar sect (New Jerusalem) with more thoughtfulness and consideration, and have said it many times. I was left in perfect freedom, and know others felt so too. JIr. A”. O Fletcher, Augusta. Mr. F. is a teacher in the Dirigo Business College, and is a Baptist. He says:— Students iu sickness and in trouble knew Dr. Torsey was their friend, and were treated as sons and daughters. No dif­ ference could be detected between my treatment and privileges and those who belonged to the Methodist church. Letter of Jfr. John Ayer. West Waterville, Nov. 23, 1867. Mr. Torsey—Dear Sir: I am glad of tins opportunity to bear witness to your faithful instruction and proverbial impartiality, during the three years I attended school at Kents Hill. Then, as now, I was in no way connected with your church; and it has never occurred to me that I was not used as well, in every respect, as those who were. Statement of Jliss F. Augusta Dreft. [Teacher of Music.] I have been connected with the Maine Wesleyan Seminary and Female College about two years, as student and teacher; �52 and as far as I have known, Dr. Torsey, in his intercourse with students and in the discipline of the school, has ever shown much kindness. I am a member of the Congregational church, and I most cheerfully assert that in no instance have I ever known Dr. Torsey to exhibit any difference in his treatment of teacficrs or students on account of their religious principles. I? Statement of lieu. Tt. H. Howard. [Pastor of Cong. Church. Farmington.] : I I i ■ ■ i Hi I have none but the pleasantest recollections of my school life at Kents Hill in 184-8—9. I was young,—a mere boy,—my religious opinions and character quite unfounded—and naturally averse to religious duties. The influence of the school and teachers, particularly Rev. Mr. Torsey’s, was such as to commend itself to my conscience in the sight of God. That influence was always gentle and kindly—never arbitrary or sectarian. It was religious in the best sense, holding forth Christ and pressing motives to a Christian life. The discipline of the school was thorough and impartial, and, concerning myself, from a family of another re­ ligious persuasion, I never had the slightest reason to complain of distinctly Methodist influence, but always have been grateful for the decided and positive Christian atmosphere that then and there surrounded the student. Statement of Gen. C. H. Harvard. It gives me pleasure to say I have never known a teacher of youth more universally respected and beloved by his pupils than Dr. Torsey. He possessed the rare faculty of combining strict and wholesome discipline with harmless indulgence. I am surprised that any person should attempt to maintain a charge of any sectarian bias in his administration of the affairs of the school. Being myself a Congregationalist, I can testify unreservedly upon this point; and I remember no individual, in public position, who has left upon my mind au impression of a deeper and broader charity than he. Statement of M. Ellen JBrooklngs. Among the many kind teachers, whose instruction I have enI L. �53 joyed, none were ever kinder than those whom I was permitted to call such on Kents Hill. Far above all others I consider Dr. Torsey. In instruction, he not only could listen to a pu­ pil’s explanation, but with few words he often made an other­ wise perplexing lesson interesting. In discipline, he always made me wonder how he could be so just and kind, with so much to perplex him. During all the months of my stay there, I never knew anything but kindness atifhe hands of Dr. Torsey. I wish all who may misjudge him by reading Mr. Greene’s pamphlet, could know him as I have known him—one of the kindest and best of teachers. i I Statement of Iter. Janies J3. Crawford. [Principal of East Maine Conference Seminary.] I was a student at Kents Hill for five years; a part of the time a member of Dr. Torsey’s family; and I do most cheerfully testify to his uniform kindness to all his pupils. I have known personally, I think, more than a thousand stu­ dents from Kents Hill; and I never heard the charge of cruelty or tyranny made against Dr. Torsey by one of them. I never knew of any difference in the bearing of the Faculty towards boarders and self-boarders. A distinction inight have existed among the students, but I think it was never countenanced by the teachers. r Statement of A. Fltzroy Chase. Middletown, Ct., Jan. 3, 1868. My connection with the Maine Wesleyan Seminary as a stu­ dent began in the Spring of 1862, and closed in the Winter of 1865. In view of the slanders that have been published by Mr. Jonas Greene, of Peru, Me., reflecting upon the management of that Institution by Rev. H. P. Torsey, and upon his person­ al character, I desire to express my confidence in him as the best disciplinarian I have ever known—a confidence established by a knowledge of the judicious, impartial and paternal treat­ ment, which, in my judgment, he has ever exercised toward the pupils placed under his control. 1 1 �54 Statement of Charles HI. Parker. Middletown, Ct., Dec. 17, 1867. Statements having recently been made public, in a pamphlet entitled “The Croion Won but not Worn,” which reflect upon the personal character of Rev. H. P. Torsey, and also attack the system of discipline practised at the Institution of which he is President, justice demands that their falsity be exposed. During eight terms extending from March, 1861, to June, 1865, which I passed at the Hill, as a student, I had opportun­ ities to learn something of the general system of discipline, and also to observe Dr. Torsey’s conduct and bearing toward students. So far was he from being harsh or unfeeling, that no parent could have granted a request with more evident pleasure, or refused it with more considerate kindness than Dr. Torsey habitually used. The candor and frankness he displayed in his dealings with students always commanded their respect, even if he caused them disappointment. From personal recollection and observation of Dr. Torsey as an instructor, disciplinarian and friend, I have the fullest confi­ dence that he would in no degree intentionally wrong a student, but that the highest welfare of all is made his constant care. Statement of Prof. J. Perley. I have been a teacher at the Maine Wesleyan Seminary and Female College for twenty-one years. Am a member of the Baptist church. Have never known Dr. Torsey in public or private to exert any sectarian influence over his scholars. I think the teachers and scholars of other societies have always been received with unbounded charity, and never made to feel that there were any denominational lines drawn. I have been intiihately acquainted with Dr. Torsey in all his relations to the school. As teacher, guardian and friend, I know he has exercised a great amount of leniency and forbear­ ance, both in Faculty meetings and the discipline of the schol­ ars ; and though his treatment of the erring has been firm, it has been kind and considerate. I was not present at the time of the sad aflair connected with Miss M. Louise Greene; but if the charge of “cruelty” to her, in the terrible hour of trial, is just, it must have been at vari­ ance with his former treatment of her and other students. �55 Statement of Hon. Joseph T. Woodward. I was for several terms a student at the Maine Wesleyan Seminary and Female College. Neither myself nor family were Methodists. During this period I recited in the same classes with a large number of students of various religious denomina­ tions, and a considerable number connected with none; and participated in the public exercises of the school with many students who were active Methodists, many of them already clergymen of that church. Nearly all the time I was in Rev. Dr. Torsey’s classes, and intimately acquainted with him. Had favoritism existed in any degree, I believe I must have felt and detected it. Yet I have never known, either in cases of disci­ pline at recitation or in the more public exercises of the school, a single instance of partiality. Every avenue of progress was equally open to us all; and the ability of each promptly and cheerfully recognized by the Faculty. In Dr. Torsey we ever found a kind and true friend, as well as an efficient teacher; strict in the observance of necessary rules, .but courteous and kind. In public and in private he frequently urged upon the students the paramount importance of Christian character, and a true, moral and religious life; yet I have never known him to impress the necessity of adopting a special system of belief upon any. In all cases of discipline his sympathy was confidently trust­ ed; and if in error, students received at his hands not a harsh and vindictive punishment, but the kind treatment of a gener­ ous friend and judicious instructor. Statement of S. It. Bearce, Esq., Lewiston. Mr. Greene, in his book, makes allusion to me in several places, in a disrespectful manner. I have only to say in all these allusions he makes use of such language as to convey a wrong idea, and misrepresents me in the whole affair. i �66 LETTER OF MISS GREENE. [To her sister Chestina, published in Mr. Greene’s book, page 3O.J “In the cars, Wednesday, A. II. “My much loved bet deeply -wronged Sister,—In leaving you, as I have, I am sensible that there is in store for you mor­ tification and a share of my disgrace. “Dr. Torsey informed me this morning that I had better leave to-day; ‘not expulsion,’ he said, ‘we won’t call it that, but I advise you to go home.’ Practically, it amounts to the same thing, however. How I feel, God only knows; you never can; and wy bitterest agony is for the dear ones at home, on whom must fall some share in this disgrace. Satan, or some evil spirit, must have led me into this. If I know myself, it was not the true, real Louise Greene, that did this. She was trying to live an honest, womanly life; or, if she was, indeed, drifting into disgrace, she never realized it. I can feel myself guilty of but one crime,—the taking of five dollars from Miss Church. No other was alleged against me, but the having of those un­ marked articles of clothing; and, as I live, I had no intention of stealing them. For every article I took, I had lost one in the wash, and put these on in their stead, expecting, before the term was done, to find my own. There was, in some sort, a necessity for this; for instance:—I came to the college with three or four good, whole drawers,—two pairs of which were new ones,—and to-day, as I ride away, I have none. They were lost in the wash because unmarked. Was it so strange that I should put on others, also unmarked, in their stead ? I tell you this, that you may know what I have done and why" I did it. That five dollars is a mystery to me. I went on an errand into Miss Church’s room; in her stand drawer laid a partly open portmonnaie. What possessed me to take the �57 money I do not know; but I took it out. The moment they asked me about it, I confessed it. You know the skeleton key I have long had. That told against mo; but, after all, I do not think they believed I opened rooms with it, for the purpose of taking out things. I certainly never did. Now you know the whole story. It is probably traveling the Hill at this moment, with a thousand exaggerations. God pity me: I never thought to come to this. Do not tell any one anything in this. It will be useless to try to stem the tide; bend beneath it, or it will break you down. Say nothing of excuse or palliation. In my heart I feel that you will not say aught of condemnation. It is a great deal to ask; perhaps you cannot do it now; but some time will you not try to forgive me? Live down all this. It is no real disgrace to you, though it may seem so. Make friends with the teachers, and with the people of God; they will strengthen you. Here, I think, was my fault; I tried to stand on the Hill alone, and I fell. “Lqvise.” �58 EXTRACTS FROM MRS. GREENE’S LETTERS. [We give only brief extracts from two of these letters; the substance of these letters being mostly given in Mr. Greene’s book.] "Peru, Oct. 14, 1866. " Mr. Torsey—Sir: The victim of your revenge, persecution and tyranny was found dead in Auburn, yesterday.” * * "Our opinion of you is that you are a base scoundrel and a black-hearted murderer, and we, every one of us, not only con­ sider you so, but others look upon you in the same light.” * “Louise M. Greene.” "Peru, Me., May 23, 1867. "Mr. Torsey—Sir: One year ago to-day, Louise received her death-blow from you, fleeiug from your presence as from a tiger.” * * * * “While God spares your life and mine, as often as the anni­ versary of poor Louise’s death returns, I shall write to those who we honestly and firmly believe were the cause of her death. “ We still think you are a base scoundrel and black-hearted murderer; we think you willfully and purposely neglected sending to us, so that the poor distracted creature might got beyond our reach. Nothing but the influence of a rich, power­ ful and corrupt denomination can save you and those connected with you, in this inhuman tragedy, from universal condemna­ tion.” * * * * "Louise M. Greene.” �REVIEW. ■ We have now completed our presentation of proofs, in rela­ tion to matters to be considered. We have purposely omitted all comments; and in our intro­ duction, we avoided everything which might seem like prejudg­ ing the case, or prejudicing our readers in advance. If they have read Greene’s pamphlet, we think they will agree with the Counsel whom we consulted, that the pamphlet and Mrs. Greene’s letters are atrocious libels; and that Mr. and Mrs. Greene, and other persons who knowingly and "with like malice aided in preparing, publishing or circulating the pam­ phlet, ought to be indicted and punished as other criminals; and also to be compelled, in civil actions, to pay such compen­ satory and punitive damages, as the law justly imposes upon such traducers of character. But our object is not to deprive Mr. Greene of any portion of his wealth; but to furnish for the public mind an antidote to the poison he has endeavored to infuse; to expose the artifices, fraud, falsehood and malignity, with which his pamphlet has been gotten up and circulated; to show that its authors must have known perfectly well that there was no foundation what­ ever in truth for the charges made by them, and to vindicate the Seminary and those connected with it from their, assaults. It remains, carefully to consider and review the pamphlet, and the facts and proofs we have presented, bearing upon it. Who are its authors? It is put forth as the production of “Jonas Greene”; and with affected modesty, he bespeaks his “kind readers” to “overlook his awkward style and want of literature.” On comparing the style of the pamphlet with letters of Mr. �60 I ■: and Mrs. Greene, and examining other facts which have come to light, we have come to the conclusion, that, in the main, it is the joint production of Mr. and Mrs. Greene and another person whose name we omit. We do not question the right of Mr. Greene to claim its paternity; but, before the public, it is right that those who shared with him the work, should also share the glory or the shame. Where was it printed ? On each of the title pages is, "Boston”; but the name of the printer does not appear. Why not ? The omission is unusual. Was he ashamed to have his name appear as the publisher of such a production? Was he unwilling to incur the responsibil­ ity of a libeller? Or was it, in fact, printed much nearer to Peru than Bostou? and the practise of deception commenced even on the title page? CREDIBILITY OF THE PAMPHLET. But it is of little consequence, where it was printed. The proper inquiries are—Is it true? Are there any reasonable grounds for believing any of the charges contained in it? Gan any confidence be reposed in the trullfulness, honesty and integrity of the authors of this production? The spirit and temper exhibited by persons, constitute one test, commonly regarded as quite reliable, to determine whether they are candid, fair and truthful. Now, with what motives and spirit were the authors of this pamphlet evidently actuated? Mr. Greene makes no small parade of his religion; and says his "wife has belonged to that denomination” (Methodist) "about thirty years.” On page 7, ho says—"We took her, hesitatingly, to that religious institution.” Italicizing religious is a covert, mean way of insinuating and charging, that the teachers in that Seminary were irreligious and hypocritical. Page 25—"Nor will I now say that hidden motives of ven­ geance, after slumbering for months, sprang to life and exercise, to accelerate for this freedom, a joint penalty, at the first favor­ able opportunity, on her and me.” �61 !■ Here is another mean attempt to make a charge, and endeav­ or to escape the responsibility of it, by saying, he does not make it. The charge, nevertheless, is made in that sentence; and its falsity and meanness are not diminished by the mode in which it is made. “I charged him,” (Dr. Torsey ) "in the Faculty meeting, with trying to make a hypocrite of her. lie showed temper, and said, ‘Do you say we tried to influence her in religious matters?’ I told him, in substance, that I could not say, by direct language, he did so, but the old proverb said, ‘Actions speak louder than words.’” [page- 30.] "If she is now dis­ honest, you have made her so.” [p. 9.] "Dr. Torsey has a great faculty to say or write in a way that he can put any construction he chooses to the same. He well understands the art of intrigue and double-dealing.” [p. 47.] "Clothing of all description was allowed in the wash, pro­ miscuously and unmarked, from the teacher (down, or up, as you please,) to the kitchen-girls or help.” [p. 81.] "Can you think of any sect of people anywhere, civil or otherwise, where she would have fared any worse than she did at this religious institution?” [p. 93.] "She flees from this man” (Mr. Torsey) “as from a tiger.” [p. 113.] "Do the public believe their bold assertions? If so, God pity them! and parents should be cautious how they trust their children in their hands.” [p. 114.] "I do not know about such persons having any conscience.” [p. 114.] " God and those who hold the skeleton keys only know—I do not—how much their skeleton keys had to do about their finding out her real sentiments or feelings towards them, by examining her private correspondence, in her room, in her absence!” [p. 115.] "Do the teachings of Christ appear in those professed followers?” [p. 121.] “In God's name, were they not doing all they could to cha­ grin and mortify her sister in the house of the principal of this school,—to disappoint, distract and break the heart of L.?” [p. 122.] "Dr. Torsey is as liable to dissemble and deny what, he did do, as others have done to screen themselves from blame.” [p. 140.] "God being my judge, I believe he is attempting to palm oft upon me an absolute falsehood.” [p. 142.] / ■L �62 S " He discloses to «s his wicked deception most when he tries to make students and others believe he loved her, was tender of her feelings, and felt bad about her misfortunes.” [p. 143.] "The reader can never realize our abhorrence and contempt for this modern Nero.” [p. 144.] "Torscy and her other accusers on the Hill may have religion, but I pray God to give me a different kind of religion.” [p:145.] "I loathe and detest this miserable compound of intrigue and deception, and desire him to be kept out of my sight and mind, if possible. I will not attempt to call him deserved names, as I can find no terms in the English language, that will do him justice.” [p.162.] The extractsfrom Airs. Greene's letters, (page 58,) are here given to show the bitter spirit of malignity with which Mr. Greene and his wife have pursued Mr. Torsey and the Seminary. It is not to be presumed that these letters were written by Mrs. G. jvithout the knowledge and approval of her husband. If the reader will examine the dates of these letters of Mrs. G.,and bear in mind her threat of an annual outpouring of such venom upon Mr. Torsey, and consider also the malignant spirit which pervades Mr. Greene’s pamphlet, he will have no diffi­ culty in deciding as to the credibility of this strange produc­ tion. Is it not in accordance with our experience, and knowledge of human nature, that no reliance whatever can be placed in per­ sons under the influence of such a spirit? Might we not reasonably expect from such sources, just such fraud in the procurement and use of affidavits and letters, and just such perversions of statements, and direct falsehoods, as we shall recall to your notice ? WHAT WAS MR. GREENE’S REAL OBJECT ? Was it to vindicate his daughter’s reputation ? Does he show much regard for her memory in publishing her letter to her sister, in which she says, “Do not tell any one anything in this”? Can it be believed that the statements in that letter, and the letter to her class, and certain extracts from her diary, are cal­ culated and were really expected to be of any benefit to her memory ? I �G3 Do parents, whether Christian or not, when a daughter admits such facts as are admitted in those letters and extracts, and then commits suicide, seek to give publicity to the matter, out of any regard to her reputation ? Is it in accordance with our experience, that parents suffering such an affliction would have requested an interview with her teachers, and then made such an exhibition of temper as Mr. G. describes on pages 43—15, and in other parts of his pamphlet? Do persons possessing proper parental feelings, after a lapse of sufficient time for internal fires, kindled by wrath, ordinarily to burn out, publish to the world such an exhibition of bad temper as pervades that book? On the page preceding the Preface, he says his object is to circulate the pamphlet as extensively as possible; and on the last page he asks the journalists of the State “to notice the same in their journals”; and he has been pressing its sale at prices which must be highly remunerative. And also, in strange disregard of all ordinary parental instincts, he has pul the pho­ tographs of his deceased daughter into the market; and caused them to be exposedfor sale, and hawked about in railroad cars and elsewhere! Have not vindictive passion, revenge, ambition for notoriety and the lust of gain extinguished or covered up all proper re­ gard for his daughter? What are the materials (by him called “evidence”) intro­ duced? Were they honestly obtained? and have they been HONESTLY USED? On page T9, Mr. Greene gives an extract from a letter of Miss Hunton, and comments upon it, at considerable length. In her statement to us, (page 29,) she says, “Mr. Greene gives only a part of my letter. I gave him a minute descrip­ tion, not only of the manner in which they were made, the ‘peculiar stitches,’ &c., but also of the •material, having a part of it then at home. Of the different marks by which I was able to identify them, ho gives only one,—the ‘peculiar stitches’—and to this he frequently alludes in a very sneering manner.” This letter was written in reply to one from Mr. Greene to her fath­ er, asking for a description of the underslceves. I �? 64 Giving but a part of the description, suppressing the rest, and adding such comments as he did, must strike any unpreju­ diced mind as being a dishonest use of the letter, not less rep­ rehensible than direct falsehood. 11 I L On pages 63 and 61, Mr. Greene publishes a letter from Miss Perley. By referring to Miss Perley’s statement, (page 36,) it appears that the letter was not written for publication, and that she was surprised to find it published. Would a person having any proper regard for what is just and honorable, have published a letter received under such circumstances, without permission? It also appears, in the statement of Miss Perley, that Mr. Newell, who, it is believed, aided Mr. Greene in pre­ paring materials for his pamphlet, wrote to her, requesting her to send him a statement of the standing and character of Lou­ ise, so far as she knew, for the purpose of publication. She says: “I answered it, positively declining to have my testimony placed in print.” If Mr. Greene or Mr. Newell could have had any doubt about the impropriety of publishing Miss Perley’s first letter, without her permission, her letter to Mr. Newell should have dispelled any such doubt. But not only was her first letter published, but extracts from her last were published ‘ freely. ” Also, on page 62 Mr. Greene publishes two extracts of letters professing to come from members of her class. These he pre­ faces with this remark, “I have also before me a few other letters from her classmates, handed to me by the same friend.” (page 61.)—The first extract is from a letter from Miss Bowers. In this she says, “When trying to write for publication, I could not do it, and for several reasons think it not best to publish anything.” And yet, in violation of this expressed wish and purpose of the writer, he not only publishes this, but several extracts from her private letters to Mr. and Mrs. Greene—mere letters of sympathy, nbver designed for publication. Let the reader now turn to Miss Bowers’ affidavit, page 28, and read what she says upon this point. And still Mr. Greene remarks (page 119), “I have not made a quotation from a single letter marked private or confidential.” A letter which the writer positively declines to have published, �I 65 is, so far as its publication is concerned, “private and confiden­ tial.” And if a man publishes extracts from such a letter, and says, “I have not made a quotation, from a single Idler marked private or confidential,” he is not only guilty of a dishonorable act in its publication, but of falsehood. The case of Miss Abbie S. Fuller resembles that of Miss Perley and Miss Bowers. Mr. Newell had written to her, requesting a letter for publi­ cation, and she had declined. She resides in Augusta. It appears from her affidavit (page 3-1) that Mr. Greene called on her several times, to talk with her about Louise. On two of these occasions, he asked her to write to his wife, saying she was very anxious to have from her a full description of that garment of hers found in the possession of Louise. Thus urged, she complied with his request, and wrote to Mrs. Greene “a strictly private letter, never intended for publication.” She added, as would be expected, “a few words of sympathy for the mother of Louise.” And yet Mr. Greene publishes extracts from that letter (page 78), and portions of her conversation with him; and in such manner, and with such comments, as are calculated to deceive the public, and do great injustice to Miss Fuller. We will allude to but one other case, that of Miss Mira I. Reed. Iler affidavit, on pages 29-34, will be carefully read ; and in connection with pages 53-55 in Mr. Greene’s pamphlet, by those who have it. The deception practised upon that estimable young lady, as described in her affidavit, is astounding. At Mr. Greene’s house she told him she had nothing to say against Dr. Torsey or the Institution ; and did not wish to say anything which should be used against them. Mr. Greene said, “We wish to know about this simply for our own satisfaction.” There was no intimation given that her statements were to be printed. In January following (1867) he called to see her at Kents Hill; and persuaded her to take a ride with him, wishing, as he said, to talk with her about Louise. After riding about half 5 �I 66 a mile, he called at Mr. Skolfield’s and requested her to go in, though a stranger to the family. lie then took a paper from his pocket, saying he wanted her to give a sort of certificate to Louise’s character. He was in great haste and read it very rapidly. Miss Reed took the paper, but read only a few lines, the writing not being very legible, and Mr. Greene being in great haste; and without time for examination or reflection, she signed it. She, however, noticed that on different pages there were several vacant spaces, which Mr. Greene said he left for the purpose of inserting other things afterwards; and he added, “he should put the document in better language.” It seemed needful to Mr. Greene that her statement should he sworn to. He pretended he had business at Readfield Corner (where he could find a Justice of the Peace). Of course she could not well object to going. As he approached the Corner, he told her, life was uncertain, and as she was going AVest, if she should not live, the paper would be of no service to him unless she should make oath to it. She strongly objected. But on being assured by Mr. Greene that it should not be used against her, nor against the Institution, she was persuaded to make oath to it. At this very time, he and his confederates had commenced collecting materials for the pamphlet, and the assurances he gave Miss Reed were an outrageous imposition. He took all this pains, and used these deceptive artifices and assurances, for the very purpose of having her affidavit printed in his book! And what was more infamous than all else, it appears, from the account of Miss Reed, that it had been changed, when pub­ lished, so that she is made to say, in print, many things she never did say, and never would have said, because they are untrue! AATe have known of persons having been convicted and sen­ tenced to the State Prison for the crime of perjury. But we have never known any such convicted felon, whoso crime in­ volved such depth of depravity, as these transactions described by Miss Reed. AAre think that no reader can avoid the conclusion that a man who can be guilty of such transactions is utterly undeserving of belief, whether under oath or not under oath. AVe find, scattered through the pamphlet, between twenty �67 and thirty extracts from letters which Mr. Greene says he has; but he does not give the names of the writers of any of them. How many different letters there are, by how many different persons written, and by what means they were obtained, we • have no information. Nor do we know whether the extracts have been correctly made, or are altered to suit the wishes of Mr. Greene. A man who could alter the affidavit of Miss Reed, in the manner she describes, is certainly capable of alter­ ing or fabricating extracts from letters. It could be done with much less danger of detection, if the names of the writers of the real or pretended letters were not given. If the letters are genuine, and the extracts also, we do not know whether the other suppressed parts of the letters wouldnot qualify or entirely change the effect of the parts published. We see what he has doue in the case of Miss Bowers. On page 138 of his book, Mr. Greene reflects with great severity upon the course of Miss Case. lie says, “It is clear to my mind th<d this one of the leading spirits of the Faculty then knew as well as Torsey that she would be expelled.” He then says, “One other member of her class writes me June, 1867, that Miss Case,” etc. Now turn to Miss Bowers’ affidavit, page 28, and you will see what she says with reference to this extract. Mr. Greene suppresses the whole of that letter, except that short extract (and this he garbles), and then launches his in­ vectives against Miss Case in the following language: “Then her first object was to explain and clear herself. The next ob­ ject was to publish her private confession to all the class,” etc. Was ever deception more apparent ? With Miss Bowers’ letter before him, he knew he was suppressing the truth, and thereby uttering a falsehood. The suppression of truth is sometimes the most effectual way of promulgating falsehood. He who did in the case of Miss Hunton and Miss Perley, is capable of doing it in other cases, where detection would be nearly impracticable. We think there is no occasion to give any further attention to these real or pretended extracts. Besides the four persons named (Miss Hunton, Miss Perley, Miss Bowers, and Miss Fuller), Mr. Greene has introduced the names of five others. �68 On page 80 and 81, he gives the statement of D. F. Ilougliton, to show, as he says, that Mr. and Mrs. Daggett were cog­ nizant of and allowed in the gentlemen’s department, “this • loose practise." It appears from his statement that while he attended school at Kents Hill, which was in the winter and spring of 1864 and 1865, he lost in the wash, two articles of clothing which were marked with the initials of his name. A few days afterward he made it known to a fellow-student, who told him he had taken from the table, where the clothes were laid, after being washed, an article of the same kind, if not the one lost, and that H. might have it. But he found it was not his and would not take it. He adds, “But after some hesitation, I took it and went to the steward, and told him the circumstances, asked him if I should keep them until I found mine. He told me I might, and if I did not find what I had lost, or an owner to what I had, I might keep it; which I did, and wore it away." In a letter furnished us, he says he did not intend to coffvey the idea that any loose practise was approved of; that further than the fact he named, he did not know what was approved of. Mr. Houghton’s statement is not in conflict with the state­ ment of Mr. and Mrs. Daggett, and does not sustain Mr. Greene’s proposition. Mr. Greene gives, what he says, are extracts from letters of two other young ladies, on pages 75 and 76. These extracts do not help Mr. Greene, in his attack upon the Seminary. The suppressed parts, of course, would not aid him. On page 75 he quotes and italicises seven lines from a letter of Miss Sherburne. We do not know under what circumstances the letter was obtained, whether it was intended for publication, nor whether Mr. Greene has taken the same deceptive and dishonorable ad­ vantage of her as he did of Miss Perley, Miss Hunton, Miss ' Fuller and Miss Bowers; and we do not deem it of any impor­ tance to comment upon this extract. On page 61 Mr. Greene publishes in full a letter from Miss Adelaide Webb, to Mr. S. R. Newell, dated December 16th, 1866. This letter is highly creditable to the feelings and judgment �69 of an intimate friend of Louise. We think it exhibits a much better spirit, and clearer evidence of a good heart, and of sincere attachment and regard for Louise, than either of her parent’s has shown in any part of Air. Greene’s pamphlet. In that letter there is no bitterness—no calling upon God, in a light, irreverent way—no sneering at religion or religious peo­ ple—no scurility—no false charges against others—not one ivord of censure against any connected with the Seminary al Kents Hill. As Air. Greene commends this letter so highly, and publishes it entire, it is to be regretted, that he and his wife had not imbibed somewhat of its spirit. It will be noticed that this letter was in reply to one from Hr. Newell, who, it would seem, had then commenced gathering­ materials for the pamphlet. We have intended to allude at least, to all of the written evidence or statements which Air. Greene introduces into his boSk, excepting statements from his family. Does it not seem remarkable that so little occasion for censure of the teachers at Kents Hill should appear? Consider the unwearied efforts of Mr. Greene and his associates to find every disaffected person they could; the artifices he has resorted to; the fraud he has practised; the direct falsehoods inserted in Hiss Reed’s affidavit by him or by his procurement; the garbled extracts from letters, with such omissions that the writers were made by him to pro­ mulgate falsehoods; and then look it all over, and you will be surprised to find how little there is, and of how little worth. GJl OSS MISREPKESENTA. TION. The reader will doubtless remember that during the spring and summer of 1867, there appeared in a number of the papers of the State what purports to be an account of “a meeting of the citizens of the town of Peru” to take measures to “erect a monument” to perpetuate the memory of Aliss Al. Louise Greeue, on the spot where her remains were found. This was also published in the form of a circular and widely scattered through the State. The article was accompanied iu the paper from which it was taken, with editorial remarks, from which we extract the following :— �I 70 "Conceiving that the reports to which the affair gave rise in the newspapers are calculated to do injustice to the memory of Miss Greene, her friends have taken steps to establish her character, up to the time of the charges against her, by the testimony of those who had the best opportunity of observing her conduct. We subjoin a certificate prepared by the Town Clerk of Peru.” Then follows the certificate found in Greene’s book, pages 14 and 15. Also immediately preceding the circular, the editor says :— "By the following circular it will be seen that the citizens of Peru have taken steps to raise a monument to the memory of the unfortunate girl, who could die rather than sutler disgrace.” The reader, we think, will find no difficulty in arriving at the conclusion that this circular was the production of Mr. Greene, or of some one with his knowledge and consent. He is, there­ fore, responsible for it. It is obvious that the reported chair­ man of the meeting, and the first named on the "committed,” knew nothing of the circular until it appeared in print. How many of the others named were alike ignorant, is left for the reader to conjecture. To show the method to which Mr. Greene resorts to influence the public upon the subject, and to show his claim upon the confidence of the tribunal to which he appeals in his book, page 4, we present the following correspondence :— Monmouth, January 25, 1868. Capt. Samuel Holmes—Dear Sir: The following, which is taken from the Portland Transcript of March 23, 1867, will ex­ plain itself:— "At a meeting of the citizens of the town of Peru, Capt. Samuel Holmes being called to the chair, S. R. Newell, Esq., was chosen Secretary. It was voted to raise a Committee of six, whose duty shall be to solicit funds by contribution from the public, for the purpose of erecting a monument on the spot where M. Louise Greene so terribly perished, as a mark of re­ spect to her memory for her womanly accomplishments, virtues, natural as well as great acquired abilities. It is believed that the,public desire to contribute something to rear a respectable monument to mark the spot where one of their brightest orna­ ments perished. �i 71 “Rev. S. S. Wyman and Rev. Wm. Woodman, of Peru, Rev. A. Maxwell, of Sumner, Rev. R. B. Andrews, of Mechanic Falls, Rev. 0. H. Johnson, of Jay, and Rev. P. Hopkins, of Woodstock, were chosen said Committee, who are to receive the funds and direct the expenditure. “The undersigned accept the position assigned us, and will aid the enterprise. We believe the public desire to give ex­ pression to their feelings and sympathy in some way, and we would suggest that each community interested appoint a suita­ ble person, male or female, as sub-committee, to present the subject to their citizens; we would further advise that each sub-committee simply state the object for which the fund is to be raised, and receive what is voluntarily given. Let the stone be reared just in proportion as the public shall contribute. “Sub-committees will attend to their duty, and when they have closed their labors, they will forward the amount in their hands to either of the undersigned. Also, all private contribu­ tors will do the same, and, if desired, their names will be regis­ tered in a book kept for that purpose. “When the monument is completed, the public will be noti­ fied, when religious services will be held on that sacred spot, which gvill be suitably dedicated. “Classmates, students, teachers, scholars, acquaintances, strangers, one and all, are respectfully invited to send in their free offerings. Any neighborhood, school, or association can adopt their own way to collect and forward what they choose. Any sum, be it small or otherwise, will be very acceptable. S. S. Wyman, Wm. Woodsum, A. Maxwell, - Committee. . R. B. Andrews, O. H. Johnson, P. Hopkins,' Peru, January 1st, ISC1!.” Will you have the kindness to answer the following ques­ tions ? 1. Was there to your knowledge, “a meeting of the citizens of the town of Peru,” held as the extract which I send you states ? 2. If so, were you present and were you “called to the chair,” as stated in the extract ? �72 3. Did you ever know or hear of such a meeting as this ac­ count specifies, and for the purpose therein stated, until you learned it through the public press ? 4. Will you please state, as nearly as you can recollect, the conversation you held with the Rev. S. S. Wyman upon the subject ? Please answer by return mail, and grant me the privilege, if deemed necessary, to make your answer public. Truly yours, D. B. Randall. Reply. Peru, Jan. 29, 1868. Rev. D. B. Randall—Dear Sir: Yours of the 25th instant is received, and in answer to your first question, “Was there, to your knowledge, a meeting of the citizens of the town of Peru, held as the extract which I send you states?” Answer, I have no knowledge of any such meeting. Second;“If so, were you present, and were you called to the chair?” Answer, I was not present, and was not called to the chair of any such meeting. Third, “Did you ever know or hear of such a meeting as this account specifies, and for the purpose herein stated, until you learned it through the public press?” Answer, No, I do not. You wish me to state a conversation I held with Rev. Samu­ el S. Wyman, on the subject. The Rev. S. S'. Wyman called on me I think in the month of May or June last, and inquired if there had been a meeting held in which he and others had been appointed a committee to solicit subscriptions to procure a monument for Miss M. Louise Greene. I told him I knew of no such meeting. He told me he had seen an account of such meeting in the papers, and that he had had papers sent to him to circulate to obtain subscriptions for a monument. He mani­ fested a good deal of surprise at the whole proceeding. Said he had not circulated the papers, and that he should not do so. You are at liberty to make the answers herewith submitted, public if deemed best.* , Very respectfully yours, Samuel Holmes. •We respectfully commend the above to the notice of the editor of the Port­ land Transcript. �73 The public may be curious to know how much has been con­ tributed for that purpose, and what disposition has been made of it. How soon the monument is to be completed, and “when the religious services will be held on that sacred spot.” We are sorry to be unable to give any information upon these points. A. Few of the many Errors and Falsehoods in the Pam­ phlet, Exposed. Mr. Greene says on page 50 that Roscoe Smith told him that Dr. T. told him that in answer to Louise’s request to have the affair kept from the school and she stay and graduate, he told her “the school knew it, or most of them.” We have the letter of Mt. Smith to Mr. Torsey, dated Dec. 30, 1867, in which he says that Dr. Torsey did not tell him that he said this to Louise; and that he, Smith, did not so tell Greene. It also appears from Mr. Torsey’s affidavit that he did not tell her so. On page 118, Mr. Greene states he has just received a let­ ter, dated July 22d, 1867, in which the writer says he lost his wallet, containing about $700 in money; and that he had heard of a number of students who lost money and other articles; and thereupon Mr. Greene makes his characteristic comments. We have the affidavit of Mr. Chas. P. Gower, (the person alluded to,) in which he says he received in the summer of 1867, “three letters from Mr. Greene, asking many questions about losing money; whether he had lost any clothes, or knew of others who had lost money or clothes; also, whether he had had any clothes exchanged there, or knew of any one who was ill-treated by the teachers or Torsey,” &c., &c. We have two of these letters. We see here what persever­ ing efforts M"r. Greene has made to find out every one who bad be.en displeased at Kents Hill, and to ascertain everything that could be used against the Seminary. Mr. Gower “was very busy and answered the letters hurried­ ly, not supposing they would be printed or made public in any way.” He says “he did not lose about seven hundred dollars, but about seven dollars, and is quite sure he wrote Mr. Greene so.” �74 L ■ »< t \ t. 1 i L (■ i ■. Mr. Greene complains that Mr. Torsey did not permit his daughter to go home with Miss Chapman in 1864. He says they both went to Dr. T. together, to get permission for L. to go, "she carrying my general permit in her hand.” "They saw Dr. Torsey on the street, L. made known her request, and he refused to grant it,” &c. [p. 22.] Mr. Greene materially misrepresents the facts in this case. It appears from the affidavits of Mr. Torsey (page 9), and of Miss Chapman (page 43), that Miss Greene was alone when she met Mr. Torsey, once on the Seminary grounds, and soon after, on the street; and asked permission to go home with Miss Chapman; and that she had no permit from her parents, to make such a visit. In both instances, her request was denied, and the reason was given;—that the rules of the school did not allow students to ride away from the Hill without permission from parents. Later, in the evening of the same day, Miss Greene, accom­ panied by Miss Chapman, pursues Mr. Torsey to his room, after he had retired, sick and suffering from neuralgic pain, and im­ portunes him,for the third time; and replies to his refusal,with impertinence. Mr. Greene says (page 24 of his book), "No valid reason existed or was given why her request could not be granted. Was it just to deny her?” Miss Greene had no permit from her parents to make this visit, and there teas no necessity for it. There was then a valid reason for the refusal, and it was given. Even if Miss Greene had had a permit from her parents; in view of her repeated violations of rule, in this particular, she might justly have been refused at this time. The Rules of the school are mostly published in the Cata­ logue. The following additional Rules are repeated from time to time to the students: 1. Students must not visit each others rOoms, or'in any way disturb each other, in study hours. 2. Those under age must not leave the Hill to visitfriends, with­ out perniiis from Parents or Guardians. 3. Students wishing to spend money in riding or in pleasure excursions, must have permits from Parents or Guardians. The reasons for these rules are obvious. No judicious parent �75 would place a daughter at a seminary where such regulations are not enforced. Mr. Greene says : "On Wednesday morning she was told by Dr. Torsey that the school knew it.” [p. 50.] "Her confession was made Tuesday afternoon, and early next morning Dr. Torsey tells her,—‘The school knew it.’ Was it true that this matter had been published to the school of over two hundred students in so brief a time?” [p. 51.] Dr. Torsey did not tell her the school knew it. lie told her he did not know "whether any of the students knew it, but it would be difficult to have it kept a secret.” [p. 11.] Mr. Greene says that Dr. Torsey and Miss Case told him the character of Louise was "irreproachable.” Dr. Torsey states, under oath, that he never did; and so does Miss Case. Mr. Greene says that at the meeting of the Faculty, called at his request in 1866.—"Once in the course of the conversation he” (Dr. Torsey) "stamped upon the floor, thus trying to stop us and stamp us down in that way.” [p. 45.] And again, on page 114,—"Torsey, when we were accusing him of prejudice and injustice, stamped his foot on the floor, and tried to stop us with this show of authority, or to stamp us down.” Professors Robinson, Morse and Harriman, aud Miss Robin­ son, on oath, say that the statement of Mr. Greene is “utterly untrue and unfounded.” [p. 14.] And Miss Case, who was also at that meeting, testifies, "Mr. Torsey did not, to my knowledge, stamp his foot upon the floor, or in any way treat them (Mr. and Mrs. Greene) uncivilly. On the contrary, he was most gentlemanly, kind and forbearing.” [p. 16.] It appears that at that meeting Mr. and Mrs. Greene were mad; and it is not uncommon for persons in such condition to think that others are mad. Mr. Greene states, on page 33, that Mr. Chandler, the stu­ dent who went to Peru with his daughter Chestina, told him certain things; among others, that “it was the general belief on the Hill that she was deranged.” Mr. Chandler, under oath, says, "I know I never told him so. I did not see Mr. Greene at all.” [p. 48.] The statements made by Mr. aud Mrs. Greene as to the arti- �76 i I. ■ = II cles of wearing apparel lost by Louise, in the wash, we consider unworthy of credit. We refer to pages 16, 17, 19, 72 and 73 of his pamphlet, and other places, in which he claims that his daughter lost, the first term she was at the Hill, five articles, all plainly marked; also one pair of rubbers, a good umbrel­ la, $3.00, and a dollar’s worth of postage stamps;—the second term, some small articles, such as handkerchiefs and towels, and one plainly marked chemise;—third term, .one pair lace undersleeves, one flannel underskirt, marked, and two marked night-caps;—fourth term, one pair sandal rubbers;—fifth term, one pair marked ruffled drawers, some napkins and a handker­ chief;—sixth term, one pair spotted muslin undprsleeves, three pairs white woolen stockings, all she had, and all plainly marked;—seventh term, one veil, ode napkin, and other small articles;—eighth term, one new cotton skirt, and one wide silk scarf.” In fact, in every term when she boarded in the College Building, she is said to have “lost more or less of such articles as napkins, towels, veils, gloves, handkerchiefs, drawers, stock­ ings, &c., &c.” And the last term, ‘‘60 articles or more lost or missing, this term only!” Miss Greene commenced at Kents Hill, March, 1861. There are three terms a year. The sixth term commenced in Novem­ ber, 1862, the winter term, when Mr. Greene says she lost “three pairs of white woolen stockings, all she had/ She had not then commenced taking things which did not belong to her; and we find no suggestion in the pamphlet, as to what was done when her stockings were all gone. If we had not shown that the statements of Mr. and Mrs. Greene are undeserving of any credit, whether made under oath or not, the proofs that we have offered, as to the supply she had when she boarded herself, and Mrs. Merrill did her washing, the mode in which the laundry was managed, and the fact that not one word of complaint of any such losses, was made by Louise to Mrs. Daggett, nor to any one of her school­ mates, so far as we can learn, would render the above account of pretended losses, utterly incredible.* It will not be forgotten that Mr. and Mrs. Greene, according to their account, must have known of their alleged losses, as •See statement of Mrs. Patterson, page 19. �1 77 they were occurring, and yet not a word of complaint from either of them during fifteen terms 1 Another ground of complaint by Mr. Greene is that the teachers at Kents Hill, especially Dr. Torsey, were prejudiced against his daughter, and that she was ill-treated and annoyed by them. If she had lost clothes and other things, and had been treated as he pretends, he would not have kept her at the Sem­ inary; he would not have sent his other two daughters to the same school, and would not have been so desirous in the spring of 18G6, to purchase Mr. Packard’s house and become the near­ est neighbor of Dr. Torsey; and that, too, for the purpose of continuing his other daughters at that Seminary, especially in view of the unpleasant presentiments of his daughter, of which he speaks repeatedly in his book. In order to' harrow up and exasperate the feelings of his readers against the teachers at Kents Hill, he asserts that Lou­ ise, with, "as it.were, her brain on fire, walks her lonely room through that night.” (Tuesday night, 22d May.) [p. 122.] That Miss Case did all she could to accuse and convict her, and left her alone the night before she left. [p. 88.] And he at­ tempts to make his readers believe that it was known to the teachers, and especially to Miss Case, that she was alone and in great distress that night; and was designedly left alone, that she might be driven to self destruction. At that time, her intimate friend, Mary E. Chapman, was her room-mate. She asked Miss Case twice for permission to stay with Miss Hunton that night; the request was positively re­ fused, and she was directed to stay in her room. Neither Miss Case nor any other teacher knew that she was absent from her room that night, [pages 16 and 45.] Of course Miss Chapman would not have left Louise alone, if she had been in such condi­ tion as to make the act unkind. Miss Bowers testifies that she was in Louise’s room the next morning (May 23), and found her at her toilet; and saw noth­ ing that led her to infer that she had not been in bed as usual. "She told me she had slept alone during the night; and if her bed had not been occupied, I think I should have noticed it.” [p. 27.] ■ i ! �78 Miss Pike testifies that Louise, the same morning, came to Chestina’s room and went to the mirror and arranged her hair, cuffs, etc., saying, “I did not complete my toilet before start­ ing.” [p- 38.] The reader can judge from such fabrications what respect the author’s statements are entitled to. i 8 i i Skeleton Key. It appears from the pamphlet that Miss Greene had had a skeleton key about three years, with which she could open all or nearly all of the students’ rooms in the College Building. But Mr. Greene says that "it was given her years before, by a student, as a sort of keepsake; and that while having the key was charged against her as a crime, no attempt has ever been made to prove that she ever used it wrongfully.” [p. 6.] We do not find any evidence that it was so given or kept. And it is somewhat remarkable that a young 'lady, so nearly perfect as Mr. Greene represents her, should keep in a Sem­ inary of learning, as a keepsake, a skeleton key, that would open all the students’ rooms and certain other rooms in the College Building. Especially in view of the fact that the students of the Seminary are frequently and faithfully warned against ‘ keeping such keys in their possession ; and they are often told the possession of a skeleton key could be considered as reasonable evi­ dence of intended wrong doing. We do not find, however, that her having it was charged as a crime against her. Whether she was accustomed to use it wrongfully, we do not certainly know. We do know that such locks and keys were procured for the College Building, that it was believed and intended that the key of any one room should not open the lock on any other room. After keys have been used awhile, it will sometimes happen that a key somewhat worn will open another lock. But we find that the key of the room occupied by Miss Greene at the time she unlocked Miss Huntington's room, as described in her affidavit, (p. 29,) will not open the lock of No. 10. Mr. Daggett, in a letter in our possession, states that "the locks and keys of rooms Nos. 8 and 10 are the same now that they were at the time referred to by Emma Huntington in her affidavit; and No. 10 cannot be unlocked by the key of No. 8.” I �79 We do not know of any way in which Miss Greene could have opened that lock, except with her skeleton key,—which would certainly be a wrongful use of it. And we do not well see how she could have obtained certain articles belonging to other students, which were plainly marked, except from their rooms, and by the same means. The possession of such a key in spite of frequent warnings, would certainly be a constant temptation to wrong doing, and it may have been one of the principal causes that led to the sad catastrophe in the history of the young lady. It is claimed by Mr. Greene that the five dollars admitted to have been taken by Louise from Miss Church’s room, was taken under some mysterious, unaccountable influence, not amounting to theft; that she made no attempt to conceal the act; that she promptly confessed it, when, if there had been any 'real guilt, she would have refrained from confessing, and would have escaped detection. The facts in this case (as seems to be Mr. Greene’s usual course,) are, in part, suppressed, and, in part, misrepresented. Miss Church testifies (pages 22 and 23,) that she put the five dollar bill into her portmonnaie, and this into her table drawer, and then closed the drawer. It was left in that condi­ tion. She locked her door the next morning, when she went to breakfast, and found it locked when she returned. She dis­ tinctly remembers that Miss Greene did not come to breakfast that morning till after she had finished eating. She ascertained, immediately after breakfast, that the money was gone. She says it must have been taken while she was at breakfast. She informed Miss Case of the loss, and the next morning told Miss Greene. She was sewing, “and colored very deeply,— did not look up,”—was confused,—and left the conviction on Miss Church’s mind that she knew about it. Mr. Daggett testifies (pages 19 and 20),—“After Miss Greene’s equivocation about the handkerchief and other arti­ cles, I felt confident that she took the money. I first asked her, ‘Whereis that five dollar bill you took from Miss Church’s port­ monnaie ?’ She colored, hesitated and said, ‘ I have not got it.’ Feeling still more confirmed, by her appearance, that she took the money, I asked, ‘What have you done with it?’ She did not i ! �80 answer for some minutes; nor until I advised her to disclose the whole thing. At last she said, ‘I gave it to Mrs. Kent.’ I asked her if she would restore it, and she said she would, and did so the next morning.” i I Mr. Greene, in various parts of his pamphlet, asserts and charges, in effect, that early in the day of the 23d of May, and before noon, Dr. Torsey was informed that Louise had left, and must have known that she left in such condition and under such circumstances, as to have created the belief in his mind that she would probably commit suicide; and that the general belief, on the Hill, was that she would. He more than intimates that Mr. Torsey purposely drove her to distraction by his cruelty. He says that there was ample time to send to Lewiston in sea­ son to save his daughter, and endeavors to make his readers believe that a messenger would have been sent, and his daugh­ ter would have been saved, but for Mr. Torsey’s management in preventing it. On examining the affidavits of Dr. Torsey and Mr. Harriman, and other proofs we have presented, it will be found that Dr. Torsey did not know she had left until afternoon; and was not informed till a later hour, that she had gone in her poorest ap­ parel. He was told that she said she should return that day. He had no suspicion that she would commit suicide. Mr. Har­ riman advised to defer sending in any direction till it should be .seen whether she should return that afternoon in the train from Lewiston. But if Dr. Torsey had sent a team immediately upon learning she had left, it would have reached Lewiston too late. The team could not have started from the Hill earlier than one or two o’clock P. M., [See Mr. Harriman’s affidavit, page 45.] and would not have reached Lewiston earlier than seven o’clock, the distance being twenty-seven miles, and the traveling very bad. Louise left the Elm House, in Auburn, a little after four o’clock, P. M., perhaps as late as twenty minutes past four, and was not seen afterwards,—as is stated in Greene’s pam­ phlet, page 34. It thus appears that if Dr. Torsey had dispatched a team, it would have arrived at Lewiston at least two hours too late. �81 If any further proof should seem needful to show that we have not allowed too much time for the messenger to go to Lewiston, we would refer to the affidavit of Air. Chandler (p. 47), who says : “We started about six o’clock, and arrived at Air. Greene’s house about midnight.” Air. Greene says “that the distance is twenty-live miles,”—about the same as from Kents Hill to Lewiston. Air. Greene says (p. 34 of pamphlet,) “that on receiving notice from Air. Chandler and Chestina, he was terribly alarmed as to her fate,—made all haste to proceed to Lewiston, and soon was ready to start.” But he did not arrive at Lewiston, the distance being thirty-five miles, till about ten o’clock the next morning; having been, according to his account, nearly ten hours traveling thirty-five miles. And yet, page 139 of his pamphlet, he allows but “about three hours” to drive a team from Kents Hill to Lewiston, a distance of twenty-seven miles I The parents undoubtedly believed that Louise had gone to her uncle’s at Auburn, where he would naturally call on his way to Lewiston. Hence the perfect coolness with which they received the news of her departure, and hence the reason that Air. Greene made no haste to pursue his erring and “distracted” daughter. It is claimed, by Air. Greene, that there was a gross violation of propriety and of law, in going into his daughter’s room, and examining the articles which had been taken by her; that she was accused, tried, condemned and virtually expelled, in a most cruel and outrageous manner; that there should have been a regular trial, with counsel, etc. The Building in which her room was, did not belong to her, any more than a man’s house belongs to a child who occupies . one of its rooms. And the teachers had the same moral and legal right to enter her room, without legal process—even if she had objected—as a parent would have to enter a room in his own house, occupied by a child. But Louise made no objection. Her room was visited by her express consent; and every article that was examined, was, on request, produced by her; and not one was taken, excepting those she admitted were not hers. She was not expelled—and was treated with a degree of leu6 �82 iency which, we think, has rarely, if ever, been surpassed in such cases. Here was a young lady, about twenty-two years old, in whose possession a large number of articles were found, belonging to other students, which had mysteriously disappeared. Some of them were plainly marked. One article had been marked, by Louise, with her own name. A skeleton key was found in her possession,—which she admitted she had had for some two or three years—that would unlock all the students’ rooms in the College Building, and some other rooms. She admitted she had taken five dollars from Miss Church’s room, and no excuse or palliation whatever was made or pretended for this act. No intimation had been given by her parents, or by any other per­ son, that there was any tendency, in Louise, to mental or moral insanity. • Now, in determining whether the teachers conducted mildly and with great forbearance, or rashly and with great cruelty,— we are to consider the facts as they then existed, and the knowl­ edge and information the teachers then possessed. Suppose the Faculty had done just as Mr. Greene appears to think they ought to have done. If they had smoothed the matter over— justified or excused her taking so many articles of clothing, and having the skeleton key—if they had assured her that stealthily • going into another’s room and taking money—was a trivial matter, which could be hushed up and kept secret—and that she could stay and graduate with the highest honors—-just as though her conduct had been irreproachable—and if it had been possible to keep the matter secret, and such a reprehensible course bad been pursued,—who in the community, that has the slightest regard to the distinction between virtue and vice, or to truth, honesty arid uprightness, would not have despised the teachers in that Seminary, and‘have ceased to have any respect for their impartiality or integrity. Subsequent events, unusual, unexpected, and which the teachers had no ground for anticipating, are not to be regarded, in determining whether they acted properly. There are many wise "prophets of the past.” Suppose Louise had not committed suicide—and other acts of misconduct had subsequently come to light, how many would have condemned the teachers for not having expelled her at once? �83 Yet Mr. Greene declares that his daughter fled from Dr. Torsey "as from a tiger.” Could a charge be more unfounded and wicked? Contradicted as the father is, by the dying testimony of his child, for whose memory he professes much love, he nev­ ertheless insists on spreading the defamation, with the most untiring persistency. He can see and understand why this daughter should flee from her teachers, as from persons intent on her ruin! Can he see as clearly, and explain to the public, why in her flight she did not seek a father's protection against these wicked people, who he contends were pursuing her? In many parts of his pamphlet, Mr. Greene endeavors to cre­ ate, in the public mind, the belief that the funds given by the State to this Seminary, have been perverted from their legiti­ mate use—that the expenses of students there arc exhorbitantly high—and that the teachers and other officials connected with the Seminary must have become enriched, and are bigoted and tyrannical. The proofs we have presented conclusively show that Miss Greene—(as well as other students)—was treated with great kindness; .and that every one of Mr. Greene's chargesis utterly without the least foundation in truth—and that the exact opposite of such charges is the real truth. The expenses of students at Kents Hill are considerably less than at most other institutions of similar grade. The highest price ever charged for board, in the winter term, including use of furnished room, washing, fuel and lights, is $4.00 per week. The price is usually much lower, the price varying from term to term, according to the cost of materials and labor. The profits of the Boarding House have been only sufficient to make the needful repairs, and make good the waste. The price of tuition in the College course is $7.00 per term* of thirteen weeks; in the Seminary course, $6.00 per term. Tuition in Music, Penmanship, Book-keeping and ornamental branches, is extra, and as low as at any other similar institution. A majority of the students board themselves, and thereby considerably reduce their expenses. It will be seen that the advantages of this Institution, like *Thc tuition in the College course while Miss Greene was in the Institution was $6.00 per term. �84 n most colleges and seminaries, are afforded to students at a price much less than the cost. Every student is, in part, a beneficiary. Mr. Greene speaks of the large amount he has paid to the Seminary, “ in former times, when my purse was open to the claims of that Institution” (page 99 of his pamphlet); intima­ ting that he has contributed liberally to its funds,—but if he has ever contributed a dollar to the Institution as a donation, the fact has not come to our knowledge. The compensation paid to the teachers has always been mod­ erate—the aggregate amount of salaries last year was $4455.06, divided among eight teachers,—the salary of Mr. Torsey, the President, being $941.76. This is largely in advance from for­ mer years. Some of the teachers have families, and find their salaries hardly sufficient to meet the demands of a very frugal living. They remain at the Institution at a pecuniary sacrifice, from their regard for the Institution, and for the cause of learn­ ing. There are many charges and insinuations scattered through Mr. Greene’s pamphlet, which we have not noticed in this Re­ view. We deem it unnecessary. They are all answered in the proofs presented. Alleged Insanity of Miss Greene. In many parts of the pamphlet, Mr. Greene makes statements, and introduces the statements of others, as to the state of her health and of her mind at different periods of her life. We are fearfully and wonderfully made. Notwithstanding the many books that have been written upon mental and moral philosophy, very little is really known in regard to the opera­ tions of the mind. There are often hereditary or other tenden­ cies to suicide or other crimes, so strong as nearly or quite to take away moral accountability. And there is often such method in insanity as to make it very difficult to determine whether one is really sane or not. It appears that before Louise came to Kents Hill she lost a very dear friend. Who that fi-iend was is not stated by Mr. Greene, nor does it appear what was the actual or expected relationship between them. It does appear that her mind then received a severe shock; and that she made an ineffectual at­ tempt to commit suicide. We think there can be no reasonable | �85 doubt that Mr. and Mrs. Greene knew this fact—as they did other facts, transpiring from time to time, which they now ad­ duce as proofs of her tendency to insanity. It was plainly their duty to communicate to her teachers these facts, or, at least, some of them, that they might be ena­ bled to treat so delicate a case with especial care. But no such intimation was given to the teachers by either of them;—and if there is any occasion to regret that a different course was not taken with Louise (regarding her liability to suicide), her pa­ rents alone are blameworthy. 3Iiss Greene’s Letter. Mr. Greene has seen fit to publish two letters written by his daughter, one to the class, the other to her sister Chestina, the day she left, and after she had taken the cars; probably writ­ ten at Auburn, at the hotel where she spent several hours. They are the last letters, and the only ones, it is believed, she wrote after leaving the school. On the closest examination of those letters—which are substantially the same—giving the cause of her trouble and of her leaving, the impartial reader will fail to perceive that she charges the slightest blame on her teachers, or gives an intimation that she had been wronged or injured by any one connected with the Seminary. But, on the contrary, it is most apparent that she viewed the teachers as kind, Christian people, on whom she could and did recom­ mend her young sister, left at Kents Hill, to rely for protection and “strength.” The letter to her sister is found in Mr. Greene’s pamphlet, page 39. (See, also, page 56 of this Reply.) No one can read this letter without feeling the deepest sym­ pathy for its unhappy author. But it can impart no lustre to her memory, or give consolation to afflicted friends, to charge innocent persons with the great crime of maliciously conspiring to ruin her. With what heart could a father give publicity to this letter which was written only for the eye of the sister to whom it was addressed, and by the grossest perversion of its contents, make his deceased daughter bear false and damaging testimony against her teachers, on whom he wishes to fasten the responsibility of her tragical death. “My much loved but deeply wronged sister.” Who had wronged her sister? To whom did she refer when she addressed �86 those words to Chcstina ? Had she allusion to Dr. Torsey or any of her teachers whom she had just left ? Remember, this was a private letter, intended to be seen only by her sister. She could speak plainly, without restraint. If she had been wronged by the teachers, would she not noiv declare it to Chestiria, in justice to herself and in justice to this confiding sister, who was still under the charge of these people ? Surely she would; she could not have failed to do so. But not an intimation escapes her in either letter published, that she held the teachers, or any one connected with the Seminary, responsible in any degree, for the unfortunate position in which she views herself. She sought, as was natural, to palliate her offences to her sister by giving the most favorable construction to her own unfortunate acts; yet she held herself alone responsible for the consequences to herself, and to her "deeply wronged sister.” Hence, hav­ ing related to her sister in this private letter “the whole story,” she appeals to Chestina to forgive her, in the following touch­ ing language : “It is a great deal to ask ; perhaps you cannot do it now; but some time will you not try to forgive me ?” “Dr. Torsey informed me this morning that I had better leave to-day; 'not expulsion,’he said, ‘we won’t call it that, but I advise you to go home.”’ This extract agrees materially with Dr. Torsey’s statement of what transpired at the interview he had with Miss Greene the morning she left. By request, she met Dr. Torsey in the parlor at the College. Both were deeply troubled by what had transpired, and the anxious in­ quiry was, “What can be done?” Miss Greene said if the matter was known to the school, she could not stay. Knowing, as Dr. Torsey did, the impracticability of keeping it secret, he dare not assure her it would not be known to the school. Find­ ing her determined to leave, he agreed to arrange for her to go home that day. He’kindly assured her, “We won’t call it ex­ pulsion,” and that he would be her friend in the matter. Miss Chapman, the room-mate of Louise, testifies that she saw Dr. Torsey when he left the parlor, at the close of this interview; that he appeared deeply affected—had been weeping. Do these facts justify the oft-repeated charge made by Mr. Greene, that Louise was driven from the school, the victim of Dr. Torsey’s prejudice and malice? Could a father have done more, or ad­ vised differently under the circumstances? Hud Miss Greene �87 followed the advice of Mr. Torsey, and returned home to her parents, and been received by them as Christian parents would receive an erring child, there “would have been a future” for her. How sad the reflection, that a child, in the hour of deepest affliction, dare not approach her parents and open her heart to thepi I How terrible that lack of confidence in paternal kind­ ness and love, that should determine her to disregard the advice of her teacher and true friend, and seek death, solitary, in that dark forest, rather than meet her parents and tell them all that had transpired; invoke their counsel and aid, and, if need be, their pardon. This is a painfully suggestive lesson to parents,—so to train and educate their children, by precept and by example, that in their severest trials they may, with unbounded confidence, seek a parent’s advice, a father’s home and protection. "To me it appears that some party or parties other than her­ self are culpable and responsible before God, if not before human laws, for this sad and afflicting occurrence.” (Mr. Greene’s pamphlet, page 4.) Could the father pen those words, and make them public? Could he arraign those teachers—whose Christian character had stood the test of long years of toil and public scrutiny—upon the charge of the murder of his daughter, and not feel the question pressed upon him—Are you sure that you are not of the “party or parties, who' are culpable and re­ sponsible before God, if not before human laws, for this sad and afflicting occurrence” ? The subject is too painful to pursue ; but the father, who is charging this great crime on others, in the spirit which pervades his pamphlet, cannot reasonably feel that this important question of self-examination is unkindly sug­ gested. “ Make friends with the teachers and with the people of God; they will strengthen.you. Here I think was my fault: I tried to stand alone on the Hill, and I fell.” We ask the reader to give this closing paragraph a careful consideration, and decide to whom she referred as “ the people of God.” Were they her teachers, or did she refer to persons not connected with the Seminary ? We are examining the last written words of this, young lady. Whatever liberty the father of the deceased may have taken with this testimony in pervert- t �3 88 ii ■ ! ing its plainest meaning, we have no purpose to accomplish that would justify our following such example. When these words were written, Louise evidently believed that her sister would continue a student at the Hill. Hence, in her letter to her class, she asks them to be kind to that sis­ ter; and hence her advice to Chestina, to "make friends with the teachers and the people of God ; they will strengthen you.” Louise had been a professor of religion ; she knew that her teachers, Dr. Torsey, Prof. Robinson, Miss Case, Miss Robin­ son, Profs. Morse and Harriman, and the steward and matron, Mr. an,d Mrs. Daggett, were the leading members of the little church at Kents Hill. She had listened to Dr. Torsey and Profs. Robinson and Morse, in church and in chapel, as minis­ ters of the gospel, and had been accustomed to meet them all as "the people of God.” Can the candid reader doubt that she referred her sister to the same individuals when she used.the terms "teachers,” and “people of God,” “they will strengthen you” ? Who will strengthen yon ? Mr. Greene says, page 40 : “She does not say she believed her teachers—her accusers and judges—to be such people. She did not mean to say that of Dr. T., I do not believe.” Mr. Greene has an undoubted right to his own opinion of the teachers, and in a proper manner to express that opinion. But it is very objectionable, it is wicked, it is cruelty to the memory of his daughter to pervert and fal­ sify her last words, written to a sister she tenderly loved, and ardently desired to direct aright, and make those words bear false testimony against persons who had never, so far as the evi­ dence in this case discloses, done an intentional wrong to the deceased young lady, uiio, in her last hours, spoke of them as “thepeople of God.” If Miss Greene viewed her teachers, especially Dr. Torsey, in the light her father would have the public view them, on what hypothesis can we account for the fact that she was will­ ing to leave a young sister in the charge of such wicked men and women, and not warn that sister of her danger ? Would she in that, her last letter, have used other than the plainest language of condemnation and warning? Could she die, and not write her father, and tell him how she had been wronged and persecuted by those people, and implore that father to hasten al once to the rescue of that young and “much loved sister,” before �89 she, too, should fall a victim to their cruelty and malice? She wrote no word of the kind, she gave no intimation of danger, she expressed no want of confidence in the motives and the in­ tegrity of her teachers. But, on the contrary, she did show that her confidence was strong and unabated, by urging her sister to go to these teachers as “ God’s peoplefor strength and protec­ tion. i I r i Z �The .Maine Wesleyan Seminary. Its Character, Administration and Success. This is an Institution of a grade intermediate between an academy and a college; its course of study embracing most of the studies in the usual college course.. It is a Methodist Insti­ tution, as its name imports; having been endowed and cared for mostly by persons connected with that denomination. The whole amount thus far received by this Institution from the State, not including the balance of timber on one-half town­ ship of land, is less than $12,000. The unsold timber above referred to is estimated by the late land agent to be worth from $2000 to $3000 ; while the donations by individuals, mostly Methodists, including recent subscriptions towards a new building,'amount, at least, to $80,000 1 The school has been conducted upon the broadest principles of Christian liberality. Other religious denominations are rep­ resented in the Board of Trustees, and in the Board of Instruc­ tion. Mr. Perley, the teacher of penmanship and book-keeping for the past twenty-three years, is a worthy member of the Baptist church. Most of the ladies employed as teachers of instrumental mu­ sic have not been Methodists,—having been employed, in sev­ eral instances, in preference to Methodist ladies who applied for the place, because their qualifications were considered superior. The students are treated with strict impartiality; all receiv­ ing equal privileges. Seldom in the history of the Institution, have any complaints of denominational favoritism been heard; and then, as the Trustees believe, without foundation. From its commencement the Seminary has been regarded with great popular' favor; and by general consent has been t �[T 91 considered one of the most useful institutions of learning in the country. Its number of students has been largely in excess of any other school in the State—some terms reaching to nearly three hundred. Its numerous alumni are scattered throughout the country; many of them occupying positions of distinguished usefulness; and, so far as we know, with but few exceptions, cherishing kind feelings towards their alma mater. In the year 1859, a college course for young ladies was estab­ lished, which has become a useful aud interesting feature of the school. In the year 1860, a large and elegant building was erected and furnished, at a cost of about forty thousand dollars. This building was designed principally as a Boarding House. In its appointments and management, the Trustees believe it to be unsurpassed by any other establishment of the kind in the country. The following' extract from an account of this Institution, published in the Maine Farmer, by Walter Wells, Esq., who delivered a course of normal lectures before the school in the fall of 1860, and was a boarder in the College Boarding House, is but one of many favorable notices of this establishment that might be given. “The buildings are ample in proportions, simple in style, compact in finish, elegant in appearance and perfectly adapted to the end for which they were built.” “The boarding arrangements are excellent ; the table neatly and tastefully laid, the food simple, substantial, abundant, well prepared and properly served.” “One half of the pupils in this school are religious persons: the atmosphere of the whole place breathes with religious influ­ ences. The like of it I have uever seen before. This condition is sedulously sustained; the culture of the heart goes hand in hand with the culture of the head. I hesitate not to say that not a single Institution in the land is or can be more thoroughly deserving of the patronage, the best wishes and the friendly and substantial oflices of every friend of education and relig­ ion.” The great success of this Institution has been mainly owing to its thorough instruction and discipline,—the jileasitiil relations �92 of the students with their teachers,—its strong moral and Christian influence,—and more recently to the admirable accommodations of the Boarding House. In these respects we believe the school has no superior. It is very seldom that complaints against the management of the school have reached the Trustees from any source. Cases of discipline requiring expulsion or other extreme measures, (which have but rarely occurred,) so far as we have been able to judge, have been managed with great prudence and lenity. In so large a school, offenses against order will occur, of a nature often difficult to correct. Should mistakes in adminis­ tration be sometimes committed, it should not be deemed a matter of surprise. In this respect, however, we challenge a comparison between the management of this Institution, and that of any other of similar grade in the country. t> ’ During the twenty-four years that Mr. Torsey has been at the head of the school, no serious outbreak of insubordination has occurred. By vigilance and skill on the part of the teachers—the grand secret of successful school discipline—mischief has usually been foreseen and prevented. Disorderly and vicious students have but little love for disci­ pline, nor for those whose duty it is to enforce it; and the exercise of discipline often rankles in the heart of the offender for years, and in most cases gives serious offense to parents. It would be strange if some of the seven thousand students who have been under the care of Mr. Torsey, should not carry with them ill-will and resentment; and strange if a person intent upon revenge, could not, by industrious search, gather up plen­ ty of anonymous censures, from disorderly and disaffected stu­ dents. If the Trustees of the Seminary believed Mr. Torsey and others concerned in the management of the school to be guilty of the wicked prejudice, neglect and cruelly charged against them by Mr. Greene, it would be their duty immediately to dismiss them from their office. But in their opinion his charges against them are wholly unfounded. They are fully convinced that the unfortunate young lady was treated with great forbearance and lenity, and that her sad fate was brought upon herself by her i �r 93 own act; and we think these views are in harmony with the general verdict of the public. The Boarding House for the last three years has been under the care of Orrin Daggett, Esq., Steward, and bis wife as Mat­ ron. Mr. Daggett was formerly sheriff of Franklin County, and is well known as a correct, thorough business man. So far as we can judge, the business of this establishment has been managed in a correct and satisfactory manner. We believe Mr. Daggett and wife to be persons of unques­ tionable integrity; aud that their statements in this case are entitled to the utmost confidence. Notwithstanding the persistent efforts of Mr. Greene and his confederates to damage the reputation of the school, it has con­ tinued to prosper beyond any former period of its history. Its friends are now contemplating the erection of a new and elegant building, to accommodate the increasing number of students; and they trust that this Institution will continue for ages to dispense its benefits to the youth of our State and country, and to offer a “safe and pleasant home” to all who may wish to enjoy its privileges. �1 • t 94 KO T E. ■ i u i Since page 69, etc., of this book went to press, we have re­ ceived a letter from Rev. S. S. Wyman, of Peru. Wishing to publish nothing but what is strictly true, we insert the follow­ ing. Under date of February 1st, 1868, a letter was addressed to Rev. S. S. Wyman, containing an extract from the circular on the above page, accompanied by the following : "Will you have the kindness to answer the following ques­ tions 1 1. Was there not, to your knowledge, such ‘a meeting of the citizens of the town of Peru heldand, if so, were you present ? 2. Did you or not communicate for publication, or issue in circular form, the document, the extracts from which I herewith send you ? Or, did you or not authorize any one to attach your name to such a document and publish it, or cause it to be published ? 3. Did you or not ever know or hear of such a meeting and document, until you saw it in print ? If so, please state the circumstances and facts in the case. Will you have the kindness to answer the above questions by return mail?” The above was directed to’Peru, Me. Receiving no reply, a similar letter, under date of February 13th or 14th, was ad­ dressed to him at "West Peru.” The following is the reply : "Peru, Feb. 20th, 1868. Dear Sir: I received your letter requesting me to answer the questions concerning the meeting in Peru. I was consulted about the propriety of such a committee, and consented to be one. I did not know when the meeting was. Yours, in haste, S. S. Wyman.” �I 95 Will the reader carefully compare the above with Capt. Holmes’ letter, and also the circular ? We do not understand why -Mr. Wyman did not see fit to answer the questions proposed to him more fully, and also state when "he was consulted about the propriety of such a commit­ tee, and consented to be one.” We have learned that some'others, whose names are attached to that circular, were asked if they were willing to serve on such a committee; but they knew nothing of the "meeting” or circular until it appeared injprint. 4 �a I ft ERRATA. Page 16—11th line from bottom, for “circumstances,” read circumstance. “ 16—4th line from bottom, for “ Herriman,” read Harriman. “ 20—19th line from top, for “ Sherborne,” read Sherburne. “ 24—18th line from bottom, for “ 1367,” read 18G7. a 32—11th line from top, for “affecting,” read afflicting. a 50—14th line from bottom, for “Nellie,” read Hellie. <c 60—17th line from top, after word “consequence,” and before word “where,” insert—who are its authors, oi—. a 63—9th line from bottom, for “29,” read 41. 1 i 1 1 �> *■ I. LIBEL BEFITTED: j b A EPLY I i. TO ■IB L1 GREENE’S LRIPHLET, II' ;' I h ; II7' I I; i, BY THE TRUSTEES Ob' THE II ’ '■' i i IfY • i• r B - i r' L A1 i MAINE WESLEYAN SEMINARY, ' [’ I. KENTS I-IITJ I--. I i:i ;; ■! y / RIf LEWTgTOX: . • PRINTED AT THE JOURNAL OITICE, I.tSBON STREET. 1868. Ii u I rd or EL1« � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Greene, Louise Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Libel Refuted: a Reply to Greene's Pamphlet, 1868 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource The Trustees of Maine Wesleyan Seminary Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1868 https://archives.kentshill.org/files/original/6/20/Collection_LouiseGreene_THeDolefulDeath.pdf 6cbd236790d7fe1274108ba9bcf158a7 PDF Text Text The Lugubrious Tale and Doleful Death of M. Louise Greene An Alleged “Martyr to the Prejudice and Caprice of Man,” or “The Crown Won, but Not Worn. ” �t* �The Lugubrious Tale and Doleful Death of M. Louise Greene ■ An Alleged “Martyr to the Prejudice and Caprice of Man,” or “ The Crown Won, but Not Worn.” By George C. Wing, Jr. (Excerpt from Sprague’s Journal of Maine History Vol. 13, No. 1) ��THE LUGUBRIOUS TALE AND DOLEFUL DEATH OF M. LOUISE GREENE, AN ALLEGED “MARTYR TO THE PREJUDICE AND CAPRICE OF MAN,” OR “THE CROWN WON, BUT NOT WORN” On the westerly slope of Mount Gile, formerly more sweetly called'“White Oak Hill” in Auburn, Maine, stands a granite monument which bears the following inscriptions: jmOUISf QRIEME.1 ' dE.2 2 yrs. I . dau.of I ces tfiL.M.CrcenpJ I . of Pern Me. I student of9 five years at 1 ■iZenZs HiTLa yrtemLer of fhpl IColleye graduating class of I IZ&66, who perished here in| pZory. within two weeks of 'graduation. martyr to the prejudice and caprice of man. 3 �1 . £ ■ *J _ *--■--------- L . _______ ._• ' *' - —' kSSs cpirlrl ft-ctve4^4^^ hand I-j |/;j h.to di.e.r ■ •'-V The Registry of Deeds for Androscoggin County, Book 53, Page 57, shows a conveyance November 9, 1866, by Ira Beale of Auburn, to Jonas Greene of Peru, in consideration of five dollars, of a parcel of land in Auburn . . . “it being a small piece of woodland” “Commencing on the southwest side of the Old County Road which leads from Vickery’s Mills to North Plaines in said Auburn at a point on said road where a line running at a right angle in a westerly course where it will pass one rod east of the center of the rock where Miss M. Louise Greene died to a point one-half rod beyond said rock; Thence at a right angle in a northerly direction two rods; Thence at a right angle in an easterly direction to the road; Thence down said road two rods to the bounds first men­ tioned, containing about ten square rods, be the same more or less.” The old County Road mentioned in the description of the Beale to Greene deed is now no longer traveled, the woodland yet exists, the monument stands alone, unkept and a bit grue­ some in the forest. The rambler in the woods may stumble upon the site of the monument but its melancholy inscriptions will have no meaning to the casual visitor, beyond, the mere chiseled record of a tragedy of long ago. A reading of the 4 �inscriptions thereon may challenge a lover of the recondite to ascertain whether M. Louise Greene was “A Martyr to the Prejudice and Caprice of Man.” The story of M. Louise Greene involves the honor of a recognized institution of learning, the passionate love of a father for a daughter, his equally passionate hatred of a school and its head, and the lamentable fact that the daughter by herself admitted conduct and guilt? became amenable to the discipline of the school and its head, neither of which would put the stamp of approval on such conduct as M. Louise Greene admitted to be hers. The history of the death of M. Louise Greene is found in two pamphlets: (1) “The Crown Won but Not Worn” or “M. Louise Greene, a Student of Five Years at Kents Hill, Maine,” by Jonas Greene, Bos­ ton, 1867. “Libel Refuted and Reply to Greene’s Pam­ phlet, by the Trustees of the Maine Wesleyan Seminary, Kents Hill.” Lewiston Journal, 1868. The files of the Lewiston Journal show under date of May 29, 1866, a “local” as to a missing young woman. An edi­ torial under date of June 2, 1866, was entitled “Missing, a Sad Case.” June 9, 1866, appeared a “local” as to the pur­ chase of poison by the missing woman* June 10, 1866, ap­ peared a “local” on a general search. June 11, 1866, appeared a “local” that nothing had been discovered as a result of the search. June 13, 1866, appeared a card of thanks to citizens for assistance in the search. Such was the hue and cry to find M. Louise Greene. Her body was found at the spot where the monument was after­ ward erected, October 13, 1866, and she is buried in East Peru Cemetery and her headstone bears the inscription “A Martyr to the Prejudice and Caprice of Man,” “In Our Father’s House the Wicked Cease from Troubling and the Weary are at Rest.” In the Greene pamphlet, “The Crown Won, but Not Worn,” Jonas Greene states briefly the history of the tragedy. “The reading portion of the community, generally, in Maine, and thousands out of this State, have heard of the sad tragedy which tran­ spired at Auburn, near Lewiston, not long since: how M. Louise Greene, a student at the Female College at Kents Hill, Me., left that institution in a wretched state of mind, on the 23rd day of May, 18G6, travelled to Lewiston, was seen weeping in Auburn, purchased poison, and mys­ teriously disappeared; how her father, for many weary and anxious 5 �days and weeks, searched in and around Lewiston, for his lost child; how he employed detectives, circulated handbills and photographs all over the State; while the kind and sympathizing people of Lewiston, Auburn, Lisbon and other places generously assisted him in many ways, and by hundreds, in searching the wood, the canals, and river to no purpose; and how her bleached remains were accidentally discovered in a lonely spot in the forest, in Auburn, in October- following.” What was the cause of the wretched state of mind of M. Louise Greene, May 23, 1866? It seems that M. Louise Greene entered the Maine Wes­ leyan Seminary at Kents Hill in March 1861. After a pre­ paratory course of two years she entered the Female College Department of that institution and continued a student until May 23, 1866. During the latter part of her course she had been the source of annoyance to the faculty of the institution in that she had frequently broken the rule about leaving “the Hill” without permission. Assuming M. Louise Greene was a woman of proud and high spirit, there is nothing to criticise overmuch on such conduct except that she did not conform to the rules of the institution in which she was a student. In April 1865 Dr. H. ''?? Torsey, the head of the school, had an interview with her in which he remonstrated with her about her attitude towards the rules of the school and its discipline. So matters passed until May 1866. Miss Greene left the school a Wednesday, May 23, 1866. Monday evening previous Dr. Torsey was informed that M. Louise Greene had been taking articles of clothing not belonging to her and the Doctor also learned that Miss Greene had taken some money. On the Wednesday Miss Greene left the school Dr. Torsey had an interview with her. She spoke of having taken clothing before, and said some­ thing about intending to return it at the close of the term. As to the money she said, “a devil tempted me to take it.” As a result of the interview Miss Greene said she would leave the school. She was twenty-two years of age. It was sug­ gested by Miss Greene that she would go to her uncle’s home in Lewiston and write her father to meet her there. Dr. Torsey urged her to go to her parents and she promised to go to them. Dr. Torsey suggested that she start soon after dinner. Learning that Miss Greene had made her departure in her everyday clothing and had gone to Lewiston instead of to her parents in Peru, Dr. Torsey sent a student with Miss Greene’s sister to the father at Peru and charged the sister to explain all. The preceptress of the school, Miss Frances S. Case, made 6 �:/ v' ■ . ' ' - 1 ■ ■’v\ '* - 1 L- .- • ■. <?■ r?i' L- Ki i -:■ ■ . MH ■■ '"-V 7 ■ • ■ ' ■ ' �an affidavit printed in the reply to the Greene pamphlet, in which she stated in an interview with Miss Greene at which a Mr. and Mrs. Daggett, the steward and stewardess of the institution, were present, that Miss Greene confessed she took $5 from a Miss Church’s room, that she had taken clothing which did not belong to her and that she intended to return the clothing at the end of the term. It also appeared from this affidavit that Miss Greene possessed a skeleton key. As to the skeleton key it appears from the Greene pamphlet that Miss Greene had possessed this key for about three years. That Miss Greene used the key is evident from the affidavit of Miss Emma C. Huntington printed in the trustees’ pam­ phlet, who says that while sitting locked in her room in the spring of 1865 a knock was heard at her door. She made no answer or movement. Immediately she heard a key put into the lock and someone turning the key. She arose, looked to see what was about to happen, saw the door open and Miss M. Louise Greene entered the room. “She said her key would fit one of the doors nearby and thought she would try it in mine.” The state of mind of this unfortunate woman then on the morning of Wednesday, May 23, 1866, was that she was charged by the authorities of the school with theft, that she confessed to the theft, that she had to meet her parents with this accusation, that she was of age, that she was to leave the school of her own accord and unhonored with its certifi­ cate of graduation. The case against M. Louise Greene con­ sists of three charges: (1) The possession of a skeleton key. As to this no great wrong can be ascribed. (2) The posses­ sion of clothing not hers, but this can be explained by a lax method of sorting clothing in the wash. (3) The theft of five dollars in money which Miss Greene confessed she took. The unfortunate woman wrote in her unhappy state, two letters, one to her sister and one to her classmates, and these letters are here printed. Letter of Miss Greene to her sister Chestina, pzMished in Mr. Greene’s book, page 39, and in the Trustees’ pamphlet, page 56. “In the cars, Wednesday, A. M. “MY MUCH LOVED BUT DEEPLY WRONGED SISTER,—In leav­ ing you, as I have, I am sensible that there is in store for you morti­ fication and a share of my disgrace. “Dr. Torsey informed me this morning that I had better leave to-day; ‘not expulsion,’ he said, ‘we won’t call it that, but I advise you to go home.’ Practically, it amounts to the same thing, however. How I feel, God only knows; you never can; and my bitterest agony is for the dear ones at home, on whom must fall some share in this disgrace. 8 �Satan, or some evil spirit, must have led me into this. If I know my­ self, it was not the true, real Louise Greene, that did this. She was trying to live an honest, womanly life; or, if she was, indeed, drifting into disgrace, she never realized it. I can feel myself guilty of but one crime,—the taking of five dollars from Miss Church. No other was alleged against me, but the having of those unmarked articles of cloth­ ing; and, as I live, I had no intention of stealing them. For- every article I took, I had lost one in the wash, and put these on in their stead, expecting, before the term was done, to find my own. There was, in some sort, a necessity for this; for instance:—I came to college with three or four good, whole drawers,—two pairs of which were new ones, —and to-day, as I ride away, I have none. They were lost in the wash because unmarked. Was it so strange that I should put on others, also unmarked, in their stead? I tell you this, that you may know what I have done, and why I did it. That five dollars is a mystery to me. I went on an errand into Miss Church’s room; in her stand drawer laid a partly open porte-monnaie. What possessed me to take the money I do not know; but I took it out. The moment they asked me about it I confessed it. You know the skeleton key I have long had. That told against me; but, after all, I do not think they believed I open rooms with it, for the purpose of taking out things. I certainly never did. Now you know the whole story. It is probably travelling the Hill at this moment with a thousand exaggerations. God pity me! I never thought to come to this. Do not tell any one anything in this. It will be use­ less to try to stem the tide; bend beneath it, or it will break you down. Say nothing of excuse or palliation. In my heart I feel that you will not say aught of condemnation. It is a great deal to ask; perhaps you cannot do it now; but some time will you not try to forgive me? Live down all this. It is no real disgrace to you, though it may seem so. Make friends with the teachers, and with the people of God; they will strengthen you. Here I think was my fault; I tried to stand on the Hill alone, and I fell. “LOUISE.” The letter of Miss Greene to her class, printed in the Greene pamphlet, page 35, and not printed in the Trustees’ pamphlet. “At a Way Station, in the cars. “FOR THE CLASS—SCHOOLMATES—Once my own darlings (for I have no right to claim you now), I would rathei- die by slow torture than write you this letter. But I feel it a duty. Who wrongs himself, wrongs his friends. God forgive me! but I believe there is no soul on earth that stands nearer the gates of utter despair than mine does at this moment. I have always said, ‘A man who will steal will lie, will do anything bad.’ “Perhaps you will feel so; but, oh! do hear my story. Do not believe that through all these past years spent with you I have been acting a lie. As I live, I never touched a cent of money that was not my own, except this once. They tried to make me account for all the little things that have been missed through the term; but I could not. I have not had them. A skeleton key, given me years ago, I had, that looked as though I might have used it wrongfully. God knows my heart! I never did. One other thing I did,—I have been in the habit of doing. When I came to the college I brought many unmarked clothes, some of them new ones. When I missed things from the wash, I took others (un­ marked ones) from the table, and used them. They put this with that, 9 �I and altogether it did look bad. But if my own garments had not come by the close of the term, I should have left these where I got them,— in the wash. Now you know all. My distress is bitter enough; but the shame that I bring upon you,—upon the home friends,—I cannot express it. O my darlings! my darlings! I thought the parting would be hard enough two weeks from now; but this—I cannot even call you mine now! The greatest favor I can ask is, drop me from your remem­ brance and some time—you cannot do it now, I know; but do, won’t you some time forgive me? Forgive me; forget me; pray do! I ask it in the name of all who have sinned and suffered,—in the name of my own bitter anguish,-—in the name of all that I have been, or hoped to be TO you and WITH you. I do not know what tempted me. I went out to Miss Church’s room one evening, without any such thought in my heart. She was gone. Her table-drawer was open; her porte-monnaie, open too. Some satan, hidden in my heart, said, Take it; and before I could think, I stood again in 27. When it was done, I would fain have replaced it; but could not without discovery. The only thing I have to be glad of is, that I did not deny when asked. Everything that was asked me I told the truth about, as near as I could in my distracted state of mind. This storm has only been gathering since yesterday. I tried to read my Bible last night, but could not. I don’t believe I shall ever pray again, except to say, Father, forgive me. And He will not hear. How, then, can I expect your pardon! If I could have had an opportunity to retrieve the past at the Hill,—if this thing had not been made public property and common talk,—maybe there might have been a future for me; but now—I think maybe I am not exactly as I used to be while I write this; for my head whirls, and I cannot seem to think,—to say what I am trying to say. Did you love me any? Do you love me any now? It seems as though my heart must have some assurance of this, or it will burst; and yet I know it cannot be. I could not go to see you this morning; I did not dare; and yet I could have died for one friendly hand-grasp, and thought it happiness to die. Will some of you call Mary Chapman into your room and read her this? that is, if you think best. What I write here I put into your hands. I am not capable of saying what should be done with it. Decide for me. Act as you would have others do, if it were possible for you to be in this place. I can hear even now the thousand buzzing rumors flying over the Hill. 0 my God! what am I that I should have been left to do this thing? Dear girls, it may seem presumptuous in me now to ask a favor; but if you could only find it in your hearts to be kind to my sister,—my poor sister Ches.;—oh! if I could only prevent her from being punished for my sins, I would bear my own bitterness alone. “I do not know what will become of me. If I get home, do not do anything with this letter; if not, will you please send it to my mother before term closes? O mother! my mother! If it were your mother, girls, what should you say? what would you do? “Mr. Schwagerl said to me this morning, one sentence, ‘Remember your Saviour.’ I have been saying it over all the way here. I thank him for saying that always. Mary Chapman, you tell him so; but I don’t know. The Saviour is an iron door, I think, to me—shut, bolted.. I never realised before that my life was drifting into this downward current. I cannot think it was. I came to the top of a great precipice,, did I not? and because I had been trying to walk alone on Kent’s Hill,. I fell. Well if it had destroyed life with character; but it did not. “I keep writing and writing because I can’t say the last word; but I must. * I 10 ■ �“I have read this over, or tried to, and it is not what I would say. I cannot write more; I cannot write again. I cannot even ask you to write to me. What could you say? I don’t want you to. “My darlings! my darlings! this good-by is a thousand times more bitter than was the laying away of my dead. “Addies, Lydias, Sarahs, Mary and Abby,—how good your names look to me! You have all been good to me. “Good-by. “LOUISE.” Out of it all comes the bald truth, that M. Louise Greene was a self-confessed pilferer of money, that she was of age, that she left Kents Hill of her own accord, that she agreed to return to her parents, that she went to Lewiston, instead of to Peru where her parents lived. Immediately on learning of the departure of his daughter M. Louise Greene from the school at Kents Hill, Jonas Greene sought to find her. He became embroiled in a bitter contro­ versy with the institution and its head, Dr. H. P. Torsey. He charged Dr. Torsey with cruelty, with responsibility for the death of his daughter, with belittling her piety and refusing his help in the difficulties in which she found herself. In his pamphlet, “The Crown Won but Not Worn,” he sets forth in language at times scurrilous his version of the sad affair. This pamphlet is a statement of the life of M. Louise Greene and her accomplishments. It contains certificates of her character and her worth by her neighbors and friends. It argues the loss of clothing was a responsibility of the school. It describes the relations of M. Louise Greene as to the dis­ cipline of the school. It impugns the methods of those having in charge the school. It sets forth the last letters of his daughter. It quotes affidavits of her classmates as to her amiable qualities. It quotes her accomplishments in literary subjects. The pamphlet is replete with invective charging prejudice, misunderstanding and gross cruelty toward M. Louise Greene on the part of the Maine Wesleyan Seminary and its officers and teachers. It is particularly bitter in its arraignment of Dr. Torsey, and closes with these words: . “In view of all that has transpired on the Hill, and the course Torsey has pursued towards Louise while under his care and since she died, his disposition shown to, and the treatment of her friends, I must say, I loathe and detest this miserable compound of intrigue and deception, and desire him to be kept out of my sight and mind if possible. I will not attempt to call him deserved names, as I can And no terms in the English language that will do him justice.” To this pamphlet the Maine Wesleyan Seminary made reply in the pamphlet “Libel Refuted: A Reply to Greene’s Pam11 �phlet.” This reply is a dignified statement of the connection of M. Louise Greene with Kents Hill. It bears resolutions of confidence on the part of the trustees in Dr. Torsey. It contains affidavits as to the treatment of Miss Greene in her last days at the school by the authorities. It shows conclu­ sively that Miss Greene left the school of her own accord, that pilfering was proved against her, that no prejudice or ill will was shown towards her. There are various affidavits which show Dr. Torsey was an impartial disciplinarian and an ex­ cellent teacher. It takes up each complaint of Mr. Greene and makes fair and candid answer to them. It bears two extracts from letters of Mrs. Greene to Dr. Torsey which show the temper of the Greene family. These extracts are printed on page 58 of the pamphlet and are here set forth: “Peru, Oct. 14, 1866. “Mr. Torsey—Sir: The victim of your revenge, persecution and tyranny was found dead in Auburn, yesterday, . . . “Our opinion of you is that you are a base scoundrel and a black­ hearted murderer, and we, every one of us, not only consider you so, but others look upon you in the same light. ... “LOUISE M. GREENE.” I “Peru, Me., May 23, 1867. “Mr. Torsey—Sir: One year ago to-day, Louise received her death­ blow from you, fleeing from your presence as from a tiger. . . . “While God spares your life and mine, as often as the anniversary of poor Louise’s death returns, I shall write to those who we honestly and firmly believe were the cause of her death. “We still think you are a base scoundrel and black-hearted murderer; we think you willfully and purposely neglected sending to us, so that the poor distracted creature might get beyond our reach. Nothing but the influence of a rich, powerful and corrupt denomination can save you and those connected with you, in this inhuman tragedy, from universal condemnation. . . . “LOUISE M. GREENE.” The inscription on the granite monument on an Auburn hillside states that M. Louise Greene was “A Martyr to the Prejudice and Caprice of Man.” The same sentiment is cut in the monument which marks her last resting place in Peru. More than half a century has passed since this controversy arose which blackened the memory of an unfortunate woman and injured the reputation of an institution of learning for youth. Time is a great healer. The controversy is all but forgot­ ten. The parties who participated therein are for the most part dead and the bitterness of the attack of Jonas Greene on the Maine Wesleyan Seminary and its trustees and its teachers is all but lost in the years, but the monument and 12 �the two pamphlets remain; the one with its assertions as to the prejudice and caprice of man, the other with its written records of the sad affair. A perusal of the pamphlets may lead one to think Miss Greene’s offenses might have been condoned and her face saved, but the fact stands forth that she admitted her guilt and the conclusion must obtain if she was the victim of the prejudice and caprice of man, that preju­ dice and caprice is best expressed in the passionate and vin­ dictive conduct of her father and can not be found in the officers and teachers of the Maine Wesleyan Seminary. If her father was the passionate, vindictive man his pamphlet shows him to be, M. Louise Greene knew she had to meet that condition when she went forth from Maine Wesleyan Semi­ nary in disgrace May 23, 1866, and fear of her father and consciousness of her guilt led her to commit the lamentable act of suicide rather than to face her parent. In that sense alone was she “A Martyr to the Prejudice and Caprice of Man.” The effort of Jonas Greene to injure and defame the reputation of a school and its head by cutting in enduring granite an assertion of the martyrdom of his daughter finds no justification other than in his own prejudiced and capri­ cious spirit, which warped his judgment and embittered his heart. George C. Wing, Jr. 13 �The Lugubrious TaUe and Doleful! Death of ML Louise Greene An Alleged “Martyr to the Prejudice and Caprice of Man,” or “The Crown Won, but Not Worn.” i i � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Greene, Louise Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource The Lugubrious Tale and Doleful Death of M. Louise Greene Description An account of the resource Except from Sprague's Journal of Maine History Vol.13, No. 1 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Wing, George C. Jr. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource pdf Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource text Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived On Saturday, February 20,1926 The Lewiston Journal Illustrated Magazine Section published this work in its entirety: on an entire page of the newspaper. https://archives.kentshill.org/files/original/6/23/Collection_LouiseGreene_Rejoinder1867.pdf f94c0b78fc760209acc660fc72f615fc PDF Text Text ’’'crsnhm x / i / I II I F ' J millS Dr. To’ sey, whom I have arraigned before the bar of the public as doing, under prejudice,'great wrong to my child, is the motive power which runs that Institution on Kent’s Hill." He does not meet me openly before the public and answer my complaints against ■ him, but takes shelter behind the Trustees. While, nominally, this committee of three, of the Trustees, make the Reply, yet I know enough about lawyers and their ministers being employed in the work, to believe that it is the combined effort of this Faculty and Trustees, with the aid of many of their ministers and leading men through the State. Would it not have appeared more manly for that Faculty to have made their own deftwee ? But thjs is Dr. T. style — to keep his own paws out of the tire as long as he can, so that he can say, “ I havemot done this, that, or the other thing.” This committee in th -r reply say: 11 The Trustees have twi " sought to have a fair aud^ borough investigation, in the presence and with the concurrence of ;ter. Greene, for the purpose of determining in a satisfactory manner1' ''ether the.teachers or any other person culpable.” Their first / tempt to investigate this affair is fully explained in the “ Croy/J Won ”— on pages 132 to 135. See my objections there in flip*11 “But as the propos?^ was declined by Mr. Greene, on the ground that the committee was appointed by the trustees from their own members, the plan was abandoned.” I now desire the reader and- parent to note carefully, their record as given in their reply—which record I had seen before I published my book. p I1 h. 1. I Vf c •. Ii'/ I* p t U REJOINDER. ! -fl A I 1 “ Copy from Record of Trustees, Annual Meeting, June 5, 1867. —In accordance with a request of Dr. Torsey, it was voted to make a thorough investigation of the administration of the Faculty in the case of Miss M. Louise Greene, now deceased. (Messrs. Torsey and Robinson being both excused from" acting in the investigation, at ■H H / 1 .. /" �V 1 A REJOINDER TO THE REPLY ' 4 their own request, and A. P. Morrill appointed chairman and J. J, Pony secretary). To this end, witnesses were examined at length, after which the subject was quite fully discussed by different mem­ bers of the Board. Rev. S. Allen then offered the following pream­ ble and resolution: \ “ Whereas, certain reports have been published and industriously \ circulated during the past year, in which the administration of the school, and particularly the conduct of Rev. II. P. Torsey, the Pres- ident, in the case of the late Miss M. Louise Greene, has been severely censured, although no complaints have been made to the Trustees, by the parties professing to have been aggrieved; and whereas, such reports are damaging in their tendency, and are cal­ culated to mislead the public mind ; therefore, “ Resolved—First: That after a careful and patient hearing of the facts of the case, the Trustees find no ground for censure against II. P. Torsey, or any other person concerned in the management of the Institution, in the case of the late Miss M. Louise Greene; that so far from having been “expelled,” Miss Greene left the Institution of her own accord, without the knowledgei of the teachers, and action in in her her case; case; am and .that jn the before the Faculty Faculty had had taken taken action pursued in the sad case was judgment of the Trustees, the course extremely lenient and kind. vum. .: That the Trustees! ' iJLstill have undiminished “ Resolved—Second ability and lundly dis;fiition of Rev. H. P. Torconfidence in the : soy, in the discharge of the difficult anciejsponsible duties of the station he has filled for twenty-three yeai^Kith success unsurpassed by that of any other teacher within our kiMwledge. “ Resolved—Third: That the M. W. ScSmary and Female Col-- o lege was never more deserving of the confidl of the public than and that the continued prosperity of the school, at the present time ; a—---- . notwithstanding the damaging reports above referred to, is a gratify­ ing popular endorsement of the administration of the Institution. “Attest: John J. Perry, Secretary pro tern." In their Reply they go on to say that, “ During the session Mr. Torsey informed the Trustees that he desired them to investigate his administration, in the ease of Miss Greene. Accordingly, an even­ ing session was agreed upon for this purpose; aud Mr. Knight, who was still in the neighborhood, was invited to bo present. lie accord­ ingly came in, and remained till the close of the investigation, at a h on the rent’s hill tragedy. 5 late hour of See on page 135, “ Crown Won,” more ■auu uuur or the rue night. night."” See . about this investigation. Mr. Knight now tells me that it was about seven o’clock when the Trustees went into session, aud that an hour, at least, was spent in attending to other business—about the pur­ chase or sale of real estate connected with the Institution, and the taxes on some wood land which they thought they ought not to pay. Between ten and eleven, Mr. K. says, this “ careful and patient hearing of the facts in the case”—the words in their preamble — this investigation closed, which was about an hour before the exer­ cises in the chapel broke up—two and a-half or three liour^ given to this investigation, from which they made the aforesaid record, in which they say the Trustees find no ground for censure against H. P. Torsey or any other person concerned in the management of the Institution. . .4 . ' ’1 i V ■J 1 }f MR. KNIGHT’S STATEMENT. On the morning of the sixth of June, 1867, Miss Mira I. Reed stated to me that Dr. Torsey having ascertained that she had received a letter from Mr. Greene, came to her boarding place aud desired to see it; and then with her consent carried it away. And I positively deny that I was in any way employed to prevent Miss Reed from testifying in the ease of Miss Greene, in the hearing before the Trustees; aud I also stated that no blame could be attached to the teachers, according to the testimony then and there given. Peru, March 21, 186S. A. M. Knight. VI - i They suppress, in the Reply, the last eight words of Mr. Knight as above, which greatly misrepresents him aud deceives the public. Sec at the bottom of page 131. “Crown Won,” what was pub­ lished in the papers in regard to this pretended thorough investiga­ tion, in June, 1866, in several journals of this State. The reader -V II can now see where these published accounts came from, aud the way Dr. T. and the Faculty were cleared- from all blame. The careful aud patient investigation, of oue whole short evening in June — a wonderful length of time to hear the evidence, discuss this sad case, aud make out the preamble and the resolves 1 — to make up their deliberate, sound judgment, and put on record, there to remain for all time, this wonderful decision and wicked statement, that no complaint had been made to the Trustees by the parties professing to have been aggrieved 1 (See preamble before the resolves.) Why ■I A •J �I A REJOINDER TO THE REPLY ON THE KENT’S HILL TRAGEDY. this bitter complaint of Torscy, and my letter to Robinson, two of the Trustees, if no complaint had been made by us to them ? M ith the publication of that pretended investigation of that committee of students, May 6,1867 (see “ Crown Won,” pages 127-8-9, for full explanations, — with this record, published to the world, exoner­ ating the faculty from all blame, and the difficulty I encountered to get my statements before the public, as explained on page 144, “ Crown Won ”— with all their efforts to blame Louise, and to clear all those who dealt with her from blame — I would ask any parent, What less would you have doue under like circumstances than to publish such a book ? Please answer this question satisfactorily to yourselves before you condemn ine. When all this had gone before the public — the result of those ex-partc investigations — and I had replied through my book, then they show for the first time some signs of fairness, when on the 14th of November, 1867, the trustees at a meeting held at Lewiston authorize William Deering, of Port­ land, one of the trustees, to write me to join them in a reference, who wrote me, Nov. 15, 1867, and appended the following resolve, case, your child, how much less would you have been likely to have said than I have, in a case so sad, if it was clear to your mind that it was prejudice that destroyed your child. Your proposition is respectfully declined. Yours, respectfully, fl 7 Jonas Greene.” The public may judge how I must feel about this show of fairness at this late day, after all I have showed had been done to try to clear this Faculty, and to disgrace the memory of Louise. See what has been attempted and done, as shown on pages 88-94, “ Crown Won.” It did seem to me to be too late, and they had gone too far in spread­ ing their misrepresentations over the State against the deceased. I and the good people of the State may judge what is meant in that resolve by “ honorable legal gentlemen, to whom the whole matter may be referred.” The public will, with all the twisting, turn­ ing and maneuvering of this Faculty, and some of the Trustees, in pursuing me at Lewiston, while there for the remains of my child —see pages 130—31, “Crown Won”—and their persistent efforts to circumscribe my influence, to annoy and perplex me. What satis­ faction I should have received from such a reference I am unable to judge. Have all the claims of justice aud humanity, the moral and religious obligations, fled from the managers of this Institution ? Are there no responsibilities resting upon them but legal ones in this sad case 1 Now comes in the Reply, the affidavit of Torsey; aud if I had nothing but the conversation we had with him, aud others of the Faculty, and those who surround him, to rely upon in my defence, against him whom I believe to be unscrupulous, I should despair of getting him to admit one single thing which he said or did with Louise, or said to us, which makes against him. But, thanks to an over-ruling Providence, who in a measure holds the destinies of us all in his hands, I have enough of his aud her written statements, which I think will satisfy the public that all of his sworn statements in the Reply cannot be true. The reader can see in the “ Crown Won,” pp. 22-27, the whole explanation of his denial to let her go home with Mary Chapman, in August, 1864. See all of the correspondence between her and myself, between myself and Torsey; and when I wrote him she would leave his school unless some recon­ ciliation could be had, he was in a place where, if he had any good . reason for refusing her, and he had anything against her for viola- passed at the said trustees’ meeting: “Resolved—~That William Deering, of Portland, be authorized to present to Mr. Greene the following proposition, viz; that Hons. W. Davis, E. Shepley, W. G. Barrows, or such other disinterested persons as may be agreed upon, be requested to nominate a reference, con­ sisting of disinterested and honorable legal gentlemen, to whom the whole matter, together with all the testimony and facts in the case, may be referred, and whose decision in the case shall be final, and whose opinion, together with the testimony, shall be laid before the community in such a manner as said reference may determine.” To this I replied. November 20, 1867, as follows: “ Mr. Deering,—Dear Sir,—Yours of the 15th inst. came to hand last evening, and in reply permit me to say that as you (the trustees) have put on record in the book containing the records of the Institution, what purports to be a thorough investigation of the circumstances and death of my daughter, the substance of the same having been published to the world, from which decision I have appealed to the public and to the Ruler of the Universe for the just........................... ice of my course, by the decision of an intelligent public and the Judge of All I am ’willing _ to stand or fall. And, sir, were this your 1 ft �8 A REJOINDER TO THE REPLY ON THE KENT’S HILL TRAGEDY. tions of rules or any bad conduct, he would have made use of it and given it to me in excuse for his rude conduct to her. In that long letter of Louise in August, 1864, giving a particular account of this affair, she says, “ Preserve this letter, and if you doubt any part of it I am willing to read it myself before you to Dr. Torsey. It is only to-night that I saw him, and I’ve taken particular pains to write down what was said, as near as possible, word for word.” And now when I give quotations from Dr. Torsey’s sworn statement in the Reply, which contradict Louise’s statements in this letter, which I shall give word for word in quotations to disprove his statement, the public may judge, under all the circumstances, whether his recollection, after the lapse of four and a-half years, is more reliable as to what was said and done, when it is for his selfish interest to tell it as he chooses, than her’s, which was written in the very hour in which it transpired, to her parents, with the assurance that she would read it to them in the presence of Torsey. From Torsey’s affidavit—“At the time Miss Greene met me on the Seminary grounds, and desired permission to leave the Hill and spend the night and the next day with Mary Chapman, I asked her if she had a permit from her father. She said she had not.” From Louise’s letter—“ So when she came I went to Dr. Torsey for leave to go home with her, carrying the general permission you had given me, and on the strength of which he had heretofore granted my request.” He (Torsey) says—“A short time afterwards she met me again on the street, and again importuned me.” She (Louise) gives a minute and particular history of her asking him, when, where, and all about it, and says, all this occupied about three miuutes; we were talking on the sidewalk.” Here is the'length and only time she importuned him (as shown by this letter written at the time), except the second time, at his house. She says she made the request to him once on the sidewalk, and stopped about three minutes, and then went to Miss Robinson, and in about a half-hour again went to his house. Torsey says in his affidavit—“ This refusal of favors referred exclusively to her going to Mr. Chapman’s, and was not on account of any difficulty between Mr. C. and myself, for we were on the most friendly terms, but because she had been there three times without permission.” August 29,1864, Dr. T. wrote me and said, “ Once I gave per­ mission to Louise to go to the Corner to visit, and once she went without permission. Last Friday she asked to go again and spend the night. I told her we should give fewer leaves of absence this term; and after I had retired for the night she came again. I answered her in the same manner and in the same words as before.” Now I submit those two statements to the public—one written to me at the time, when he would have availed himself of any excuse or reason possible against Louise. He then put her offence, only once of going to the Corner without leave. (See on page 26, “ Crown Won,” how this is explained.) Now he swears it was three times. He then says nothing about his neuralgic pain in his eyes and head; now he would seem to make that as an excuse. If all was so smooth and pleasant with Mr. Chapman, then why did Mary leave his school ? Mr. Chapman has once given me a different version of this affair. She says in this long letter, “ I was advised to go home with Mary C., but thought it not best.” For the truth of this statement I will say that on the 7th of November, 1866, Mary Chapman told me and my wife that she advised her to go, and said she ought to have gone. I am willing to put Louise’s record, made the very day of the conversation in Miss Robinson’s room, April 11, 1865 (see pp. 28-9 of “Crown Won”), against Torsey’s statement, made from recollec­ tion, in 1868, in the Reply. Read both, and judge which is true. Again Torsey says—“ The Monday evening before Louise left. Miss Case called on me and informed me that Miss Greene had been taking articles of clothing not belonging to her, and that Mrs. Dag­ gett and herself were investigating the matter. I requested her to do it quietly, and to say nothing to any one about the matter. I had also learned Miss Greene had taken money.” Mark well, that Torsey has here sworn that on Monday evening, which was the 21st of May, before any investigation was had, and before Miss Case and Mrs. Daggett had been into Louisa’s room at all, to see what they could fiud,,and before any one had accused Louise of taking the money, —for it is known to everybody there and elsewhere who knows any­ thing about her confession, which was on Tuesday, the 22d, that she made that confession, not to Dr. Torsey, but to Mr. Daggett and his wife and Miss Case, and Torsey could not have known anything about her taking the money,—yet he on oath has certified that he had also learned that Miss Greene had taken money. i j 9 �■■ J i I! 10 A REJOINDER TO THE REPLY on the rent’s hill tragedy. His admission here that he knew all about her being accused, and that the investigation was to go on, and he taking no measures to notify her parents, makes his case look worse and worse. And can I believe him when he says, “ Had she not determined to leave, the ease would have been presented to the Faculty for final settlement. In the investigation and settlement her parents would have been allowed to take a part” ? He says, On Wednesday morning, at the request of the Faculty, I called to converse with her.’’ Who believes that they had any intention of notifying; me of her trouble? that they It does not appear, by the course they were pursuing, ]_ intended any such thing. In the Reply, Torsey says, referring to his conversation with Louise‘the morning she left, “After she determined to go home, she said she would go to her sister’s room and make arrangements with her.” Again he says, in another paragraph, “Nor did I say, if she went to Lewiston she must make arrangements with Chestina.” See. how he contradicts the last two assertions, in a letter written to me May 27, 1866, four days after Louise left, when all was fresh in his mind: “ She named going by the way of Lewiston, or writing you to meet her there, but did not insist upon it any further than merely mentioning it; finally agreeing, as I understood her, to make no arrangements herself, but allow Chestina to make them.” As I have said in the “ Crown Won,” does this not look as if he knew she was not capable of taking care of herself?” Again he says, “She thought she had better leave that day.” Hoar her, in that letter to her sister, written the day she left, contradict this last statement of his: “ Dr. Torsey informed me this morning that I had better leave to-day.” See this letter in full, p. 39, “ Crown Won.” She does not say she thought she had better leave, but soon adds, “ How I feel, God only knows.” See on page 117 of “ Crown Won,” about his kind treatment of students. In view of the foregoing statements and contradictions of Torsey, and all of his twisting and turning, as shown in my pamphlet of ’ 162 pages, I am not at all surprised that he should deny the truth of my book, and declare it grossly false under oath—that is but a small offence compared to what I believe him guilty of. He has a right to his opinions, and I to mine, but the public will judge im­ partially. One other point. If Mr. and Mrs. Daggett and Miss Case said nothing to Louise about the school knowing it, and as they say the 11 class knew nothing about it until the morning she left, and the stu­ dents none of them knew it, how did she know the school knew it, and it was common talk and public property on the Hill, before she left? If Dr. Torsey did not tell her, for no one else talked with her, as she writes in her class letter, who did inform her? If I could have had an opportunity to retrieve the past at the Hill, who did prevent her from having a chance to retrieve the past at the Hill? Who had a long talk with her just before she left, and just before she wrote that letter? Will the public believe Torsey did not tell her the school knew it, and that she had better leave that day ? See pp. 37-8, “ Crown Won,” for further explanations. Torsey, in the Reply, testifies—“ I then determined to send some one to Lewiston to look after her. I spoke to B. Harriman to go with his team; but after consulting with others I concluded to ascertain first by the return train whether she had stopped at Lew­ iston.” Miss M. I. Reed says, p. 54, “ Crown Won,” that Mr. Harriman agreed to go to Lewiston after Louise with Chestina, and she told him she would get Chestina ready in fifteen minutes. Miss Reed, in her recantation affidavit does not deny this, nor does Mr. Harriman. With those statements of Torsey’s, as above, aud the positive agree­ ment of Mr. Harriman to go to Lewiston after her, who will doubt the truth of my logic on pages 90, 138-9, “ Crown Won” ? I will leave the public to judge of the truth of Torsey’s state­ ments—he being the implicated party, aud testifying in his own defence—and his denial “ That I told her that the school kuew it ” ; and R. Smith’s denial that he told me that Torsey told him so is shown to be false by the following affidavit: “ In the month of August or September, 1866, I heard Roscoe Smith tell Jonas Greene, of Peru, that Dr. Torsey told him (Smith) that in answer to Louise’s request to have this affair kept from the school, and she be permitted to stay and graduate, ho told her that it would be impossible, for the school knew it. “ Wm. S. Walker.” ■“ Oxford ss., March 21, 1868.—Personally appeared before me William S. Walker, the above-named, and made oath that the above statement by him made and signed, is true. “ Wm. Woodsum, Jr., Trial Justice.” In reply to the affidavits of F. A. Robinson, J. L. Morse, D. G. I i �12 ih 13 A REJOINDER TO THE REPLY ON THE KENT’S HILL TRAGEDY. Harriman, and Miss P. B. Robinson, and notwithstanding their accu­ sations against Miss Greene and myself, and their denials of the facts as stated in the “ Crown Won,” in regard to that conversation in the Faculty meeting, I affirm it to be true, as stated by us. Why it escaped their notice that Torsey stamped his right foot upon the floor so hard as to jar the room, is more than I can tell—unless they were so accustomed to his outbursts of passion and show of authority as not to notice it. Torsey does not deny it; Miss Case says, “ he did not, to my knowledge.” II "Hnrly deuv. pronounce---as false, O.euy, and auu pronounce utterlyjr deny, and this crimination ? The object that Torsey said, “What avails ’’ ”all ‘ t__ .... should be the finding of Louise. How can we aid you in this now should be the finding of Louise. How can we — power to assist you.” matter ? Wc are ready to do anything in our word in those statements. The only thing There is not a w ...----of....truth ..... close, ----- , when it appeared __ I as though he Torsey did say, near the near the i—he did say, “ What do you want us to wanted to get rid of usreference to Louise in cconnection _____ ' with 1,: thisdo?”—making no remark. to this D. G. Harriman. And now I wish to put one question -------------------conversation down to its How dares he to make oath to all this - x------. ]ctlow close, when he and all that were present L that he left the room and and house more than an 1hour --------2 _a-half ” before this Faculty meet- sey’s part of the house first, that morning they came and searched the room; and I can tell you the way—I remember particularly. I went down to the college to practice. There Mira told me that Miss Case, and Mrs. Daggett had gone up to my room and wished to see me alone. I immediately started back to my room and overtook them. They said they were going up to my room to see me. We walked along till we got to the house. They opened the front gate and went into the front door. I went into the side gate and hur­ ried into my room, picked up some things laying about the room, and changed mg dress before they eame in. I was just fastening my dress, with trembling fingers, when I heard them coming. I remem­ ber this distinctly, and what dress I put on—it was that slate-colored one, -like Estella’s gymnastic dress.” Yet Mrs. Daggett has on oath denied this fact. Chestiua further writes me that she had heard Louise speak against Torsey several times. “ Louise did advise me to enter the Seminary Course, as I should be put forward more, and be required to read before the school; and in many ways it would be better for me. ‘ And you will not be obliged to stay; you can leave any time.’ ” Then was it true, what Mrs. Daggett declares on oath? Mrs. Daggett is quite ready in her sworn statement to charge me with making “ additions, omissions, changes and exaggerations, in my book, which are untrue.” as to herself and Mr. Daggett. She further says, “ I never saw in the wash sueh garments as Mrs. Greene describes in her statement.” I wish to ask her if she does the washing, or has personal knowledge of every article those sixty girls put into the wash ? And is she trying to dispute Mrs. Greene in regard to the articles Louise had at that term ? It may be as well for Mrs. Daggett to explain to me, and perhaps the public would like to know, how she camp in possession of Louise’s Adclphiun pin, plainly marked with Louise’s name, which she kept, with several other articles of Louise’s, for more than four months—after we had written them that various articles of Louise’s were missing. See “ Crown Won,” pp. 112-13, when and how they were obtained. I here re-assert, and will say I do positively know, that the only article named by Mrs. Daggett, in her statement of May 30, 18G6, as found in Louise’s possession, which was marked, was an old linen handkerchief with holes iu it. Sarah E. Dow says—“I think it incredible that she could have lost so many clothes iu eleven weeks as she is represented to have lost during her last term.” I do not know how Miss Dow should I i ing closed ? Miss Case admits much in her affidavit which others have denied, which goes to show what Louise said—“ I think she said she took the clothing from necessity, as all her’s had been lost, and intended to restore them at the close of the term.” She further says, “ Upon being questioned she confessed she took the five dollars.” And I here again say Mr. Daggett did tell me she (Louise) confessed she took the five dollars, not denying a word. Mrs. Daggett states under oath that, “ We did not go into Dr. Torsey's part of the house; nor did he have anything to do, directly or indirectly, with the investigation in regard to the clothing or money.” Now hear what Mr. Torsey says on oath—“ The Mondayevening before Louise left Miss Case called on me and informed me that Miss Greene had been taking articles of clothing not belonging, to her; and that Mrs. Daggett and herself were investigating the matter. I requested her to do it quietly, and to say nothing to any­ one about the matter. I had also learned that Miss Greene had taken some money.” Chestina writes from Virginia, March 31, 1868, and says—“ Miss Case and Mrs. Daggett did go into Dr. Tor- & & i Ar-/.'.. I �REJOINDER TO THE REPLY ON THE KENT’S HILL TRAGEDY. know anything about Louise’s under-clothes, except such as she bor­ she did write me. And further, she has given, in her affidavit, for what she wrote me what another student did write me in June, 1867, and from which I did make the extract on page 138, “ Crown Won”—from which Miss Bowers, in her zeal to implicate me and clear them, has mistaken this for her own language. I have both letters before me, and know what I write. rowed of her to wear. In answer to Eliza C. Bowers’s very singular affidavit, I feel com­ pelled to make a thorough rejoinder, and will ask the careful perusal by the public of all the facts here produced. Miss Bowers says “ I further say that Dr. Torsey was impartial and kind in his treat­ ment of the students under his care. There was scarcely a student who did not think thus of him, and who did not love and respect him as a teacher and friend. I never knew him to make any dis­ tinction among the students under his care, or to show any partiality on account of any religious or sectarian views of any student. I have never intended, in anything I have written or said, to cast any blame upon the Faculty, in their treatment of my lamented ciassnlate, M. Louise Greene; but sincerely believe they desired and intended to exercise justice and kindness towards her in this matter. Mr. Greene has given in his book several extracts from my private letters to him and Sirs. Greene, and S. R. Newell (not, however, giving my name), in answer to letters addressed to mo, proposing numerous questions about the affair connected with my unfortunate classmate; also about the Faculty, especially Dr. Torsey, and Miss Case, the Preceptress. These extracts are published without my knowledge and consent, and in violation of the confidence which I placed in Mr. Greene. These extracts make me say what I did not intend to say. and what the letters do not say. Were the whole letters published ? ” These charges against me compel me in self-defence to publish six of her letters, four to Mrs. Greene and two to Mr. Newell, in full, as they arc all bearing upon this sad ease; and more than all from which I have made a single quotation in my book ; and the public will see that none of them are marked “ private” or “confidential.” And all can judge with what truthfulness these charges are made against me. Miss Bowers further says—“ The extract on page 138 was in answer to a letter of Mr. Greene, dated June 22, 1867.” Then she quotes from what I wrote her. Then she gives what sho says is the substance of her reply to me; and further says, “ I am confirmed in this by a friend of mine, to whom I read my letter to Mr. Greene.” I will inform Miss Bowers, her friend and the public, that I did not in my book quote a single extract or word from this letter of Miss Bowers. Thus she and her friend are very much mistaken in what 15 MISS BOWERS’S LETTERS. I j I ! Belgrade, Sept. 24, 1866. My dear Mrs. Greene,—I was very glad to receive a letter from you, setting my fears at rest in regard to your feelings toward us. I did not believe you thought hardly of us, but I wanted to know from your own lips. We all truly sympathised and suffered with you. I never felt so badly in my life, except when my mother died, and that was a very different grief. I am just now excited by the rumor that Louise is at her uncle’s, in Petersburg, Va. I cannot believe it, it is such good news. The way the story goes is this: A gentleman travelling South met a Miss Greene, from Maine, at your husband’s brother's, and conversed with her. He described her, and the description agreed with dear Louise’s appearance. Knowing you would know if it is true, by this time, as Ches, was gone there. I write you immediately—hoping, yet scarcely daring to hope, it may prove true. If you have heard from Ches., if you will, please write me immediately, I am so anxious to know. I can think of nothing else than perhaps Louise is alive, well, and with friends. So will you please take for an excuse for my not writing you a letter; but be assured, I feel the deepest sympathy and regard for you. and wish to be numbered among your friends for Louise’s sake. If this rumor should prove true. I shall write her a sisterly letter, as of old. Nothing that has occurred will malm the slightest difference in my feelings. But I dare not think of this ; I dare not hope the rumor is true. Write me soon, and believe me, with love, Truly your friend, Eliza Bowers. Belgrade, Oct. 14, 1866. Mr Dear Mrs. Greene,—I received your letter containing the sad news to-night. I’ve never ceased to hope till to-night that Lou­ ise was still living. I knew not till now how strong those hopes were. How terrible ! that her poor body has lain there all this time. I am so glad sho is found; yet the uncertainty, with hope, was �r\ li A REJOINDER TO THE REPLY almost better. I wish I could be with you, to pay my last tribute of love and respect to dear Louise’s body, even. But 1 fear it is not possible, though I thought at first I must and would be there. I think, if I remember, there is no way to go in one day, by cars or stage; and I am much too far away to come with a team. I can say truly I shall be there in spirit, as will all the class. I’ve written them all this eve., except Miss Forsett; and I judged you had writ­ ten her, or would before this, and I’d just sent a letter to her this morn. I am very glad to say that none of the class, to my know­ ledge, said they would not graduate with Louise. I think I should have known it if they had. Truly, I never said or thought so. The rumor must be classed with a thousand others, false like that one, with no foundation whatever, saving the imagination of some gossip­ ping persons. I have not words to express my sympathy with you, or my own sorrow, which is very deep; but I Scarcely dare speak of it when I think of your deeper grief. We can only pray, knowing Jesus suffered too, and can and does pity our suffering. Louise is at rest now. I can only hope she is better off than she would be if tossed on the billows of this troubled life. If you can, I wish you would write me all about how you found her, and how long you think she had lain there. It seems as if I must see her, even as she must be. I cannot realize that it is our own Louise that we loved so much that I am writing of. It is too dreadful .to think of. If I had only spoken to Louise of this that morning; but how could we? We would believe nothing of it until she was gone. So we talked to her until she went away, as if our hearts were not full of bitter anguish. When we knew the truth, we believed her good and true, but only suddenly tempted. No ope of the class but feels so, and would have then received her with open arms if we only could have had the opportunity. If -Louise could only have known how we suffered that she left us so. Addie Webb and I called for her Wednesday morning, to go to breakfast. We went down to the hall together, and that was the last time I saw her. I was longing then to throw my arms about her and tell her of my love, but could not • —how could we then? We were almost crazy ourselves. I wish I could see you and talk of these things; sometime I hope I shall Good bye/ I shall think of you hourly all this sad’ week," and'Y’ll not forget you when I pray. hour. Jesus only can give support in this ON THE KENT’S HILL TRAGEDY. J I ( f,- I . 17 Belgrade, Dec. 11,1866. Mr Dear Mrs. Greene,—I should have written you before, but my pen seems almost palsied. I can speak no words of consolation to you; yet I feel, 0! so much, for you—and my own grief is not light. I began a letter for Ches.; but I could not write what I wished, so I threw it aside. I suppose she is in Virginia. Is she not? I regret so much now that I did not go to your place; but I did not know how you would feel about it. It is so dreadful that Louise should die so 1 It is su mysterious ! Did you ever see the poem Louise wrote for the public Adelphian last spring ? It now seems prophetic of her fate. I ask myself every day, Why is it so? I dare not judge the teachers of intentional wrong—though that some great wrong has been done I think none can deny. In regard to what you ask me, if the others you named would have been treated so, I know not what to say. There certainly ought to have been no difference. There seems to mo a fatality about it—about everything connected with that last term. We can never understand with mortal powers; but I trust sometime all things will be clear, and we shall sec all things in their true light. I would like some of Louise’s hair very much. I have a picture of her which I would not part with for money. It is very, strange where so many of Louise’s things are. Louise’s room was open after she went away till you came for her things ; yet it scarcely seems that any of the girls would go there and take anything; though there are things taken as supposed every term by the help, and were last term at the close of the term. I have in my possession two napkins which belong to Louise. I forgot them when you came for her things, and they’ve lain in my trunk ever since. I’ve intended to send them to you, but have neglected, or waited for an opportunity. I see you arc to erect a monument over Louise’s place of death. I shall visit the spot, I hope, but only with such bitter feelings of distress for her fate. Louise teas very much loved by the students, and with but very few exceptions. I think no one will deny that. I always loved her, even before I knew her well; and since I’ve known her intimately I’ve counted her among my dearest friends. Louise was a true friend, and had the kindest, most sympathising heart of any S*11,,1 kne"; We llor wlilcu/u ! or sorrow. I shall never forget the last time I was sick there. She sat up with me. I was so nervous I was almost crazy. She bathed my head and petted me till I was perfectly calm. I should always remember B �18 ■ Before I give her letters to Mr. Newell, perhaps I should explain why her class was written to for such a statement of her character, as they understood it, prior to the accusations against her. It was because Mrs. Daggett had, in November, 1866, admitted to us that she did accuse Louise in that investigation of being an “ habitual thief”; and gave us to understand that the students did not think well of Louise; and very unfavorable reports were continually reaching us, as coming from the Faculty, against Louise’s previous character. i • ON THE KENT’S HILL TRAGEDY. her with the kindest gratitude for that alone, if for no other cause. Her life was full of sympathy and care for those around her. Write me again, if you consider this worthy your time. I shall ever be happy to hear from you for Louise’s sake, and hope some time to see you. Remember me in love and sympathy to your family. E. 0. Bowers. Affectionately, . b A REJOINDER TO THE REPLY Belgrade, Dec. 17, 1866. Mr. Newell,—Your communication is just received. I shall be most happy to do as you wish, for Miss Greene was a very dear friend, and one highly esteemed by me. I wish time to consult other members of the class. How soon do you wish to publish this ? It will be a week or more before I can hear from the mem­ bers of the class, as we are widely separated. If you will wait this time you ’ll oblige, Very respectfully, Eliza C. Bowres. ■ II V L . Belgrade, Dec. 28, 1866. Mr. Newell,—I scarcely know what to say to you after writing my former letter. I was unable to consult the class, we were so far separated, so we might act together. I thought then I could as easily speak to the public of Miss Greene as to you, or any one in private. But when trying to write for publication I could not do it, and for several reasons think it best not to publish anything. I regarded her character as above reproach until this last act; this I could say, but it has been said continually to the public, We all know she ought to have been saved; but we, as it were, were para­ lyzed with grief, and did not act, as we now regret so much. 1 have written Mrs. Greene more fully. Very respectfully, E. C. Bowers. ! 1 ij 1; I i 19 Belgrade, Dec. 28,1866. Mr Dear Mrs. Greene,—You probably know of the letter we as members of dear Louise’s class have received from Mr. Newell, of your town. I thought immediately it would be a pleasant task, and wrote Mr. Newell that I could and would do so most gladly, but wished to consult the class. I have been unable to consult the class so we can act together. I have tried to write; and I could write of Louise’s character with much pleasure; but when I came to say, until this last act, I could not write it for the public to criticise. I know Louise took that money from her letter; but I believe that for a moment she was under an influence she could not resist, and therefore not guilty of an intentional error. The cold eyes of indif­ ferent people cannot feel thus. I think of Louise’s last request, to forget her; and cannot feel to bring her before the public again, which were she living she would shrink from, most of anything. Her letter I prize highly. I believe every word of it, and have not the slightest feeling but love and kindness for her memory. If it would do Louise any good I would do anything right. I cannot think you will misunderstand my motives in thinking it not best for me to publish a statement of this. I do not know where you were intending to have this published, or in what form, but suppose in the State papers. Please let me hear from you again soon; and believe me truly your friend, E. 0. Bowers. These letters show her to have the best opinion of Louise, and her desire to have the class consulted and act together. But there must have been some power behind this naturally truthful and kindhearted young lady to have prevented her, as her letters show, from giving Mr. Newell a first-rate statement of Louise’s standing up to the time of her trouble. None of her class were requested to say a word about that last act, or to blame anybody therefor. Who has advised, assisted, and obtained from her the very flattering state­ ments in her affidavit, as to Torsey’s love for and justice to his students, his impartiality and kindness to theifi, and how she knows that, is more than I know. And as to her belief that the Faculty ■desired and intended to exercise justice and kindness towards Louise, seems to be somewhat doubted by her letters. And what has led her to make such statements as to what she wrote me, and the unfair extracts she accuses me of making from her letters, I do not know. But one thing I do know, that Miss Bowers’s home is in ♦ \ �I r r I ' li". 20 A REJOINDER TO THE REPLY ON THE KENT'S HILL TRAGEDY. Monmouth, the present residence of Rev. D. B. Randall, who is one of the authors of the Reply to my book, and he is also one of the Trustees of that Seminary and College. il In regard to Miss A. S. Fuller’s affidavit: I did not call several times in the winter of 1867, to talk with her about Louise. Only once I called and' talked with het. She then told me what I state in my pamphlet, on page 78. The second time I called I met her and another lady just out on the sidewalk. She stepped into the entry. I then told her I only called to say that Mrs. Greene desired to have her write and give her a descrip­ tion of the garment, as it was said it was plainly marked. (Mrs. F. had told me that it was not-.) She agreed to do so. We went immediately out. The lady waited outside for her. I called again for this letter; am confident I did not stop at all then These are the only times I called on her. There was no urging at all about getting that letter; and why she should so-state I cannot tell, nor why she says that was a strictly private letter. There is no-, such request or intimation in the same. If this classmate regrets that a “ word in season was not uttered byour class to save her,” or to go to her the night before she left and utter words of sympathy and consolation, how can she say that 111 have always thought that the Faculty did everything they could have done to- save her” 2 If a word from her class would have saved her, would not tho same from the Faculty have been as likely to*have accomplished the. same ? There is not a person living who shall read all the facts in this sadcase but who would see and believe that if the female portion of that Faculty had gone to Louise in a kind and friendly way, that night or the morning she left, and spoken words in kindness and sympathy, they would have saved her. Why is it that this class­ mate shows so ■willing a disposition to clear the Faculty’from al! blame, and then represents the largeness of Louise's faults, and closes with the assertion that she committed “ suicide ” 2 That is unknown to any person. As this assertion is made by other parties, I will here state that when her remains were found, though very much decayed, they were in no way disturbed. She lay' nearly straight, with her right foot crossed and resting on the lelt, with her shawl on, close up around her neck; the left hand laying on her breast, close up to the crossing of the shawl. It had the appearance of holding the shawl close together under her neck in her last . i) j H li i ■i 21 moments. This hand was not gloved. The other hand was thrown back under her head,. as persons are accustomed to do in such position, to rest the head upon, especially if they have no pillow, •or to ease the head from a hard substance. Her hat and reticule ■were set close up under the large projecting rock under which she partly lay, she laying her head a little from the rock, on a small mossy knoll, thus giving room for her hat and reticule between her head and the rock. Her feet and legs lay closer to the rock. Her •water-proof had been taken off, and appeared to have been spread over her when she lay down. The wind had blown or slipped it over towards the rock. It there lay nearly the whole length of her; near the top a handkerchief had gone into the fold with it. Her head and shoulders had slipped off this mossy knoll further from the rock, which caused the head and shoulders to turn on to the right side. Her hand was under her cheek, where it was so much decayed that some of her teeth and finger nails were left in the decayed matter when her remains were removed. Three weeks after, Mrs. Greene and I found several teeth, and a finger ring, with some finger bones, in the space of the size of a hand, covered with •a putrid mass and leaves. This hand had a kid glove on, mostly decayed. The other glove was in her reticule. In her reticule were found a common ink-bottle, pen, pencil, note paper, a few envelopes, some other small articles, and a small memoranda. There was not a word written or anything there found to give any explana­ tion of her fate. Dr. Harris, who assisted in removing her remains, says there was no evidence how or from what cause she died. He thinks she did not take the poison, which it is believed she purchased at a shop in Lewiston. He gave me several good reasons why he thought so. If she died from the effects of poison, how could she lay so apparently quiet, straight, smooth, with her hands and feet in thqt position, just as calm to all appearance as if she had lain down to sleep. So all testify who saw her. I have thought that she lay­ down tired, exhausted, broken-hearted and ehilled to death. How long she was there before she died, no one knows. That she did commit suicide, no person is authorised to say. Aud whoever says that shows a disposition and would, in my opinion, exaggerate every circumstance possible against her. In 11. Ella Pike’s affidavit— I find her very ready to say that “ Louise would evade the rules whenever she could without detection. Her general character was �22 A REJOINDER TO THE REPLY that of a sly, cunning person.” These are bold assertions, for one who had roomed near her but a portion of one term. She never boarded in the College, while Louise was there thirteen terms. She was not in her class, and had but a slight acquaintance with Louise. While in the “ Reply,” Miss Perley, who Was one of her class, and had known her intimately for three years, says : “As to my opinion of the character of Louise I can truly say I knew nothing against her. I never knew any violation of rules on her part. As to her veracity, I never questioned it. Of her possession of a skeleton key I had no knowledge. Of Louise as a classmate I loved her truly, and at her death I was a sincere mourner.” Feeling compelled to publish Miss Bowers’s letters (another classmate of Louise), which brings out a strong re-endorsement of Louise’s good character, her great love for her, and fear of the sad results which followed—and no doubt but what at the time that feeling was largely shared by all of her class, as well as all others on tho Hill—with the long personal knowledge and intimate acquaintance that ’ Misses Perley, Bowers and Webb (three of her classmates) had with Louise, and their endorsement of her general good character, the public cannot fail to see why students of slight acquaintance should show such dispo­ sition to defame her “ general character.” Let those who wish to know what those students who knew her intimately for the three years say of Louise’s character, turn to and read, pp. 61-3, “ Crown Won,” what there is said of our departed child. Miss Pike says—“ On the morning Louise left she came to Chestina’s room, where I was studying alone.” (How came she in other girls’ rooms in their absence ?) She goes on to tell such inconsist­ encies, and what all the subsequent acts of Louise do not sustain, and shows such a disposition to make out so bad a string of state­ ments against her, and make so favorable a case for Torsey, and so conflicting with Chestina’s and Miss Reed’s sworn statements, in this long extract of what she has chosen to get up against the dead to please the living, that I put but little confidence in anything she has stated. I shall let her pass by, reminding her that she could find some violations of rules nearer home, if she should try. Does, she remember, in the absence of Dr. Torsey. in May, 1866, of any riding, hunting and fishing excursions made by students, in which her brother took a part, with my team, in the absence of MrsGreene and Louise, May 12, 1866, and the threat she made to tell Dr. Torsey if they did not catch her any fish, and other small acts- of disobedience? ON THE KENT’S HILL TRAGEDY. 23 In Miss N. E. Hunton’s statement she says— “ I gave him a minute description of the undersleeves, not onljof the manner in which they were made, the peculiar stitches, etc., but also of the material of which they were made, and of the differ­ ent marks by which I was able to identify them.” What a charge this student brings against me, and what is the offense ? What are the different marks she gave me, by which she could identify them ? Let her letter answer. “ The above mentioned articles were of my own make, and consequently the stitches were somewhat peculiar; moreover, the garment consisted of a part of a dress I had worn in my younger days.” This is every word of description given me in that letter, which I now have before me. And no other mark was given me in that letter but the peculiar stitches, and no description as to how they were made is given whatever. The reader sees how false are her accusation and statement of what she wrote me. There was no other mark whatever given me but what appeared in the “Crown Won.” A person who will make such a false statement about what she had written me, I will not believe a word she says about Louise speaking in Torsey’s praise, or anything else of what she pretends to know of Louise’s feelings. I In regard to Mrs. H. E. Merrill’s statement of the amount of washing done for my girls in the fall term of 1865, it is false, so far as Estelle is named. She was not there that term. And as to the amount of clothing washed by her, if she means the public to understand that was all the clothing the girls had washed while there, she is much mistaken. The girls used to do more or less of their washing each week; and while Mrs. Greene was there, about four weeks, while two of them were sick with fever, she washed some things every day; and several times bundles were sent home to wash, and other articles taken back. As we had to make three trips home during those four weeks, she could not know much about their clothing. This shows a foolish yet labored effort to make out something in their favor. The statements of other persons and stu­ dents as to the amount of clothing she had. and not hearing her complain of losing clothing, etc., and Mrs. Patterson’s statement from recollection after the lapse of six or seven years, about what Louise lost or how abundant her wardrobe was, and the assurance that “ Mrs. Greene’s statement of her daughters’ losses is not cor­ rect,”—this attempt to contradict Mrs. Greene, the mother of Louise, �24 A REJOINDER TO THE REPLY in regard to her statement about the loss of clothing, the mother who furnished all, who knew all about the making, marking, wash­ ing, ironing, packing and unpacking, six times a year, to take to and. from that school for five years,—yes, I repeat, those students, stewardess, and others, who could know but little about her under­ garments, to attempt to contradict the statement of the mother’s own positive knowledge of facts that must be fully known in such a case to every mother sending a daughter far away into a college to board, among so many students—and no person who knows Mrs. Greene and the fact that she had free access, year in and year out, to my store of goods of almost every description, but knows that she would not send her eldest daughter to such a place without ample under­ garments. Mrs. Greene says such garments of Louise were abundant at every term she was there. Such attempts by this Faculty to work up something to offset our statement of her losses, our positive knowledge of the facts we state, may satisfy their friends; but the public at large will see through their labored efforts—their access to and the favorites by whom they are surrounded, and the motives of the members of this denomination and those whom they can influ­ ence, to over-state every little thing in favor of them and against Louise and her friends—to put much confidence in this effort, and thousand other things worked up and stated in the Reply. ON THE KENT’S HILL TRAGEDY. is Mr. Packard’s affidavit— In regard to my going to his place to purchase his house, I can inform him that he is entirely mistaken. I did not go there to pur­ chase it. I went to carry articles to my girls who were occupying a room in his house. He then for the first time told me he was about to leave the State, and should sell his stand if he Could. I had learned that Torsey had made him a standing offer of 82500 before I talked with Mr. Packard. I knew this was said to be a good house, and desired to look it all over, thinking some day I might want to purchase or build a like one. He showed me the same, stated his price, which was 82700, and his reason for selling, etc. I made him no offer whatever. But I then thought he would make use of the circumstance of my being there and looking it over, to help him sell it to Torsey. He (Torsey) would not like to have me so near to him. perhaps remembering my plain letter to him a year and a-half before. And I havo good reason to believe (as Torsey was seen talk­ ing with Mr. Packard that morning, before this looking over the house y $ I 25 took place) that he (Packard) made the most out of it, to make Torsey believe I was there to purchase, and help him get his price, the other 8200. While I was gone two or three hours to the Corner on business. Torsey closed the bargain at 82700. And the representations of Mr. Packard to Torsey at that time may have something to do with the production of this affidavit, which bears evidence of haste or carelessness. One gross mistake for a man of his business capacities to state under oath—“ Early in the spring of 1866 I determined to sell there and remove from the State.” Now I would like to have Dr. Torsey, from the date of his deed from Mr. Packard to him of the sale of this stand, inform Mr. Packard that in the spring of 1866, he (Packard) had no such property to sell on Kent’s Hill; that his deed of the same was given on or about 24th of January, 1866; and that Mr. Packard had, long before the spring of 1866, ceased to be a resident of this State. I will inform Mr. Packard that I was not disappointed when in a few hours I returned and found the bargain closed and the deed made to Torsey. It is easily seen that there was no necessity for such haste if Packard believed I would purchase the same. If not, Torsey would take it, why this haste ? Was it not, when he got Dr. Torsey up to his price, that he feared, when I returned, Torsey would find out that I did not want to purchase, and had made him no offer whatever, and then Torsey would back out from his offer. He (Packard) understood what he was about. Dr. Torsey’s fear that I should live too near him, or his desire to get the stand, prompted him to give the other §200. I was pleased to think how my presence there at that time had helped Mr. Packard to sell his stand at his own price, and to see the maneouvering of Torsey. My silence is grossly misconstrued in Mr. Packard’s affidavit. It is very strange that while Mary E. Chapman could not remem­ ber to tell us, in November, 1866, scarcely a thing about what was or was not in their room when Louise left, or but little about the whole affair, that more than a year later she makes so long and minute a statement as appears in her affidavit. And her Statement that she had “ never received any but the kindest treatment from Dr. Torsey,’’ is so much at variance with what she has heretofore told and written, that I can but remind her how and why it was that she left that school, close at. home, and went miles away, to Westbrook, two terms, and with what she said to induce Louise to �26 PI i i h i i ’ Si A BEJOINDER TO THE REPLY ON THE KENT’S HILL TRAGEDY. go with her, and afterwards wrote her, makes her present state­ ment look incredible to us, especially when again she says, “ I never knew nor believed that Dr. Torsey made any difference in his treatment of students on account of their religious opinions.” This does not agree with what her father told us in Nov., 1866, and why she went to Westbrook.. He also told me, at his barn, this same time, that he felt bad to think Mary left her alone that night, and it was because Mary and some other girl, or girls, were talking about Lou­ ise, and how bad she would feel. Some of them said they should be afraid she would do some act of violence to herself or room-mate; and he said as Mary was of a nervous temperament, she was afraid to go back to her that night (which was the night before she left). Mary says in her affidavit, after telling how she had gone, “ I then feared that she might commit suicide. This fear was caused by the fact that Louise had told me that once before she had attempted to com­ mit suicide. She also added, ‘ If any great calamity ever happens to me, I think I shall commit suicide.’ She told me these things confidentially.” And again this room-mate of Louise says, “ I did not stay with Louise the night before she left, but had no permission from any teacher to be absent from my room. On the contrary, I twice asked Miss Case for permission to stay with Miss Hunton that night; but she positively refused to grant my request, and told me that I must stay in my room.” Miss Case swears, “ I did not advise Mary Chapman not to remain with her that night, and did not know that she did not intend to remain with her.” How are these state­ ments reconciled ? And how does it look for the room-mate, after what she has stated about Louise telling of intentional suicide, and against express orders to leave her alone, after the talk with other girls about her doing acts of violence, and remain away from her and give no warning to others to look after her ?—their “ dear sister,” as she afterwards wrote me, and one that had been a sister to her, as she said of Louise. And why this long statement, so favorable to them and against her ? With her own admission of breaking the express orders of the Preceptress, she seems to be in good standing with this Faculty. She may have learnt that “ acquiescence in the opinions and decisions of the Faculty would cover a multitude of sins. On the other hand, Louise had learned that they would notice little things done by her that they would not in others. While Miss Case refused her reasonable request to go up to see her mother see p. 90, “ Crown Won”—she obeyed. As to Miss Chap- man, she has betrayed the confidence of her departed friend, and as it looks to us, to gratify the malice of Louise’s enemies. We feel justified in quoting from a letter of her’s, written to Louise from Westbrook, Sept. 30th, 1864, in which she describes an offence com­ mitted by her and other students, for which they were summoned before the Faculty: “They talked, but not as they do at Kent’s Hill, far different. Their talk did not consist in threats, but he talked to us as well as a parent could have done. They spoke to us very kindly and dismissed us. They talked spendidly. I wish you could have heard them.” I ft 8 1 27 Notwithstanding all that B. W. Harriman has stated in his affida­ vit, and “ the falsity of these extracts,” pp. 90, 133-9, of my pamphlet, as he says, yet I affirm they are true; and he not only said that, but another time, as I met him on the street, I said, “ I am sorry that you did not go to Lewiston after her; I think if you had you would have found her at the Elm House and saved her.” He said, “ I think so.” Why, if he remembers all about Torsey’s asking him “ if he would take a team and go in pursuit of Louise,” as stated in his affidavit, did he not tell us that on the night of the 29th of May, 1S66, when Mrs. Greene and I stopped over night at his house, when he appeared to be willing to give us all the informa­ tion he could ? He told us no such thing. And when I asked him, on the 26th day of January, 1867, why he did not go to Lewiston after her, he did not then say a word about Torsey’s request, as above, or name Dr. Torsey at all, until I asked him how soon he saw Torsey after he returned from the depot. And when he said some one suggested waiting until the return train, to ascertain if she stopped at Lewiston, I asked him if it was Torsey, or what he did say. He said he “ did not remember who it was or what Torsey did say.” Yet when called upon by this Faculty or their friends, he, like many others, can remember everything desired so minutely that it is surprising to all who read their Reply. His statement that the “ travelling at that time was very bad,” is not true, as I positively know by going to Lewiston the next morning. And the reason that Mr. Chandler was so long coming here that night was because he lost his way after dark. I know it was first-rate travelling for that season of the year. And those over-strained statements are seen in this affidavit all through. If, as he says, she told him she was going to Lewiston, and the reason for going, and would return that night, an �r on the rent’s hill tragedy. A REJOINDER TO THE REPLY 28 said page, the reader will see I there state no such thing. I do not connect Mr. Chandler with what I say Chestina told me. Then I say, :1 Mr. Chandler said,” &c. An attempt of this commitme to falsify facts through Mr. Chandler. she appeared all right, why did, he “ ask the ticket agent for what place she had bought a ticket”? And why did he tell me, six days after that, “he thought he ought to get on to the train and go to see what became of her”? Torsey had written me, May 27, 1866, that he thought our fears were groundless as to the course Louise had pursued. He tells Chestina and Miss Reed he has no fears of her, etc., the day she left. With all this from Torsey, Mr. Harriman testifies in the hearing before the Trustees, June 5, 186/, “ After he (Torsey) found she had left under such circumstances, he urged that we had better start immediately after her.” In the Reply he says, “ I soon met Dr. Torsey, who asked me if I would take a team and go in pursuit of- Louise.” A wonderful fact and strong state­ ment!—enough to spoil the whole, in view of Torsey’s own state­ ments to us, and what he had written. I know he is wickedly trying to deceive the public; and if others could know as well as I do the influences by which he is surrounded, they could better judge why it is done. I't / I, Louisa M. Greene, hereby testify and declare on oath that I did not tell Mr. Chandler on the morning of May 24th, 1866, at my house, that ‘ I am sorry’ Louise has done as she has. but hope the matter can be so arranged that she can go back and graduate at the end of the term.’ [Go back in twelve days and graduate, how improbable.] I further say that this statement is false, as I do • know from the fact that Chestina had already told me that Torsey had told her it would not be best for her to go on to the stage and graduate; and against his wish I knew it would be impossible for her to do so. But this I did say, I hoped it would come out right. He remarked he hoped so, but feared it would not; said it was the general belief bn the Hill, if she had taken money and clothing as represented, that she was crazy and she would make way with her­ self. As soon as he retired Mr. Greene was called, and our worst fears were excited he and Chestina was off as soon as possible. “ Louisa M. Greene.” Oxford, ss., May 5th, 1868.—Personally appeared the abovenamed Louisa M. Greene, and made oath that the above statement by her subscribed is true. “ Before me, Jonas Greene, Justice of the Peace.” 1 i” .1 Tu . .1 • T 1 T- i , _ _ Mr. Chandler states on oath, and asserts what I have said on page 33 in my pamphlet, about what I said he1 me. told By reference to .... ----------------- 29 I ; 1 i! ■ , ■ This committee, a majority of whom are Methodist clergymen, who go about preaching and proclaiming the gospel of Christ to fallen man, who profess to be his followers, they would have you believe they embodied all that was great, good, noble and righteous here below—perfect patterns to follow! In their Reply they com­ mence by charging me with making “garbled extracts from anonymous letters.” I brand this charge as false, and defy then to produce the proof. And I will here repeat what I have said in my book, that I have not in the same made a single extract from anv letter marked private or confidential, notwithstanding the commit­ tee’s charge of “ falsehood " against me. Yet with this charge of “ garbled extracts ’’ scarcely dry from their pen they do the same thing, by publishing extracts of Mrs. Greene’s letters to Dr. Torsey. Why did they not publish the whole of those letters, which would have put a very different phase on them ? Why follow (as they would say) this wicked practice which they denounce in me ? They say, “ Mr. Greene makes no small parade of his religion." I brand this charge as false, and will appeal to every reader of the “ Crown Won ” for the truth of the same. I have not set myself up as a pattern of piety, or attempted to force my opinions upon the public ; but did say (see preface of “ Crown "Won ’’) : “ :To err is human.’ If I am in error, after giving the facts aud circumstances on which I base my opinion,—if the public shall decide that I have no cause,—I stand corrected.” (See the whole of said preface.) They find fault with the “spirit aud temper exhibited” in my book, If true, how much worse spirit and vindictiveness have their committee exhibited all through their Reply. Think of the loss of our child, and look at their special pleadings against me, judge and say, ye parents of Maine, who has the greatest cause to complain. I will quote from the editorial of a city paper: “ The spirit of Mr. Greene’s pamphlet we could not endorse, though the natural feelings of a parent afford some palliation and excuse. The spirit of this reply finds no sympathy with us, in so far as it attempts to put the worst construction upon every act of the unfortunate girl. Her dying confession to her sister, published in both pamphlets, tells the truth, we have no doubt. By �J 1 ii 30* A REJOINDER TO THE' REPLY ON THE KENT’S HILL TRAGEDY. that let her be judged. Those who have not sinned more may con­ demn; but how few the number.” From an editorial of another paper, when speaking of those letters written by Dr. Torsey to Mr. Greene, after his daughter left, I make the following extract: “ These letters are in terms so insulting to Mr. Greene, so destitute of common courtesy and wanting in dignity, and so deficient of every lineament of Christian charity and forbearance, that all we wish to know of a man in order to form an estimate of his true character is to know that he wrote those letters.” I think they will be ashamed of their charge of falsehood against me in Miss Bowers’s, Reed and Hunton cases. Also they state and put forth as a fact that “ the tuition in the College course, while Miss Greene was in the Institution, was $6 per term.” The following copy from her bills, as paid by me, will nail this falsehood right here : Kent’s Hill, Nov. 4, 1864. M. L. Greene— To Maine Wesleyan Seminary and Female College, Dr. To 11 weeks board (§3.25), $35.75; lamp chim­ ney, 15; incidentals, 25, §36 15 Tuition, $7.00; books, §8.11, 15 11 I' i $51 26 Winter Term, Feb. 24, 1865— Tuition, Incidentals, 25; books and stationery, $6.71, Twelve weeks board, $4 per week, •June 5, 1865— Tuition, $7,00; Chemistry, §1, Incid., 25; books, &c., §5.90; catalogue, &o., 66, Board, 12 weeks, $45 ; sheets of music, 40, $7 00 6 96 48 00 $61 96 $8 00 6 81 45 40 §60 21 Nov. 9, 1865 — Tuition, $7.00; incidentals, 25, books, $5.96, (She boarded herself.) May 25,1866, Spring term— Tuition, $7.00; incidentals, 25, Painting, $10.00; materials, $4.86; books, &c., $8.80, Besides board bill, which I paid but took no §18 21 $7 25 23 16 $30 41 receipt for. I I 31 This Committee speak sneeringly of the amount I have paid to this Seminary. If such bills are computed three times per annum, for five years, and a part of that time for two other girls, it will amount to more than they can wink out of sight. Add to this their begging bills for meeting house purposes, and presents to teachers, and various projects to coax and draw money out of those 100 to 250 students, with incidentals, amount to a large sum yearly, which goes to build up that Institution, and fill the pockets of those who run it. Those little pickings are by the force of circumstances wrung out of many a student who cannot well afford to contribute, and would not if they could well avoid it. They are shrewd beg­ gars and ten cent figurers up there. (See catalogue price of board.) Those who are there less than eleven weeks per term, ten cents addi­ tional will be charged per week. (See tuition and incidental fees per term.) “ Students who remain less than six weeks will be charged ten cents per week additional tuition.” “No deduction for the first or last week of the term.” “ Books and stationery are kept at the Seminary, and will be sold at reasonable prices.” Those rea­ sonable terms I found to be from twenty to forty per cent, profit on books, stationery, slates, pencils, pens, diaries, and a hundred little notions which they furnish students. On those sales the profit amounts to no small sum yearly, which comes out of those 200 or more students, or thdse who send them there. I had in the fall of 1865 three daughters boarding themselves; and while the two youngest were sick with a fever, Mrs. Greene went there to take care of them, and stopped about four weeks. Being crowded for room, Louise watched part of the nights with the sick, and part of the time she took her meals and lodging at the College, for about two weeks, for which she paid her board while there, the usual price. It is known to all how inconvenient it is to take care of tho sick away from home; and many little extras can be procured at home that cannot conveniently be obtained elsewhere; and neigh-" borly assistance relieves much at such times. Mrs. Greene tells me that during the whole sickness, not one of that Faculty ever called to offer or know if she desired any assistance whatever, or sent the least thing (except a bunch of grapes), and from no source was there anything sent them. Whether this was because they were self-boarders, or their prejudice against Louise, I do not know. Al­ though I had paid them for Louise’s board about five hundred dollars, and had received no deduction for her absence on business, �- V 32 A REJOINDER TO THE REPLY I to visit, or at camp-meetings, during this five years, they did not from the college send in a single article ’ to those sick ‘ 1 girls;■ and —J some broth, and Mrs. Greene could not once, when the girl desired just then get it elsewhere, she sent to the College for a pound or two of fresh beef, which they took pay for. Whether they will deny this, as they have other facts which were said to us and transpired before us, at the College, anl in that Faculty meeting, is yet to be seen. They are truths. ■ In 1863, when Widow Knight, of our town, went there to see about sending her daughter to that Institution (the daughter after­ ward did go awhile), Louise invited her to stop over night. They charged Louise seventy-five cents for Mrs. Knight’s horse-keeping that night. Mrs. Knight on finding it out refunded it. This I know by reference to her receipted bill for that term. And these are what she meant in her letter to us in 1861—“ All he has done is to drain father’s pockets, and give me what justice demands he should give the meanest student”—see p. 26, “ Crown Won.” Mrs. Greene had no one to call on to assist her through this sick­ ness but Louise; and she, with all her studies and sohool duties to perform, had to run round for and get the necessary things for their wants, assist her mother, and watch with the sick ones a part of the time. The whole tenor of this Reply, and those of this Faculty, and other fear or favor seeking witnesses who testify to her appearance and actions before she left the Hill and on her way to the depot, are so over-stated, and show her to be, if true, so hard and unfeeling, ' beyond all precedent, that it looks so barefaced and bad, that no rea­ sonable person can believe them,—when those words, “ Heart break­ ing; .dearly beloved, adieu!” were written just as she left the College—and all sho wrote in those two letters—and her weeping appearance at the Elm House, and on the road to her couch of dehth,—are in and of themselves a complete refutation of this wicked, damnable testimony against her,—and with all the evidence given to the public of her previous good character, honesty and truthfulness from a child, as known to all. We, her parents, are not bound to believe all that her accusers say they said and did with her, and what she first admitted and requested and shew them, and what they say she afterward and immediately denied or equivocated about. By her whole life we have a right to judge what she would be likely to say and do in that hour of trial—especially when it is 1 u i i s I p on the rent’s hill tragedy. 33 for the selfish interest of this whole pack to say what they do to attempt to clear themselves from blame. This may go down some people’s throats; but I will not and am not bound to take the dose. Torsey does not deny his stamping, his prejudice, and many other things. I charge him with wrong doing. He does make a sort of sweeping denial of the statements, and says they are “grossly false,” as made up in my pamphlet, of fragments of different sen­ tences as to convey false impressions. He dare not particularize what wrong I had done in quoting from his letters, as I have them to produce. He chooses to get others to testify for him, and not to burn his own fingers. And as it is attempted and labored hard in the Reply to show that she thought well of Torsey, and would have the public infer from it that he (Torsey) was particularly kind to her for a long time before she left, I feel compelled to state that I have positive proof from her writing, and other evidence, that she had good reason to and did dislike Torsey continually the whole of the last year and a-half she was under him; and that about one year before her departure she wrote a long letter to us, explaining anew all the annoyances she was receiving at his hands, her wish and desire to leave that school and go elsewhere, where she could be treated fairly. She makes mention of the fact of writing the letter, and what it was-about, and on the whole she concluded not to send it to us; so we never saw the same. Torsey’s dislike of Louise and prejudice against her are so well known, and are so clearly shown in my pamphlet, that he dare not, ■and it would be useless for him, to deny it. He said, when I charged him in that Faculty meeting with prejudice against her, that he and Louise had made up. Now I appeal to any candid mind, was not that virtually admitting his prejudice. Hr. Torsey does not deny his lecture, as described in Louise’s diary—see “ Crown Won,” p. 28. The admission of this one fact should con* vince all that the other circumstances as described in her diary and •other writings were enacted there as described by her. It is not strange to me that such numbers of certificates so favor­ able to Dr. Torsey and his associates have been worked up through the influence of this denomination, which I am told by one of their ministers is so large and powerful, reaching all over the State, that it would be useless for* mo or oue family to contend with it. I ■believe that I know something about their crushing process, as felt C �■ 34 A REJOINDER TO THE REPLY ON THE KENT’S HILL TRAGEDY. jh and described by my poor dying girl to her sister in that letter where she says, “ It will be useless to try to stem the tide; bend beneath it or it will break you down; say nothing of excuse or pallia­ tion.” I am aware that this breaking-down process is going on to crush and break down me and my family. And for what? Because I dare say what I know and believe. But I will charge Dr. Torsey and his associates, while on earth I stay, and if need be at Jehovah’s Bar, with dealing under prejudice, which sent our child from their presence broken-hearted to an untimely death, when they could have saved her. This Committee speak of consulting counsel in regard to my book. If I am rightly informed, they have had an attorney employed for a long time in getting’ up the Reply. This mountain of influence has labored long and hard to produce the same. And the public may think that some of their language and phrases are more suitable for pothouse politicians than for a choice committee, the majority of which is composed of minis­ ters. Covert accusations against me and family, such as “ libel,” « falsehoods,” “ sentenced to the State Prison for the crime of per­ jury,” “depth of depravity,” “such convicted felon,” “utterly undeserving of belief, whether under oath or not under oath,” “promulgating falsehood”! All choice language, coming from those who profess to love God and man! But this is not the first time in the history of this denomination that such a crushing process has been carried on. And, as it were, heaven and earth were moved to clear a big villain who was proved to have been seen going to and from a haystack in a field where the remains of Miss Sarah M. Cornell were found the next morning hung to a stake, in 1832, in the town of Tiverton, near Pall River, Mass. I have the pamphlet of 191 pages beside me, of that trial, in which can be seen the mighty effort made to break down the deceased's written testimony against that Rev. E. K. Avery, who was one of the leading clergymen of the Methodist’ denomination. Not only to destroy her written testimony, and the influence of her friends. The whole New England States were ransacked to obtain funds and witnesses, who, it was believed, were suborned, to testify against her previous character, and to clear him. No time or money were spared to disgrace her memory and acquit him, whom the public more generally believed guilty after his acquittal than before. We know something about this wicked affair, as Mrs. Greene lived at that time in the vicinity, with a leading Methodist family, where I I I I 35 she heard and saw much of their plots and schemes to clear him and of their own private opinion of his guilt. Yet publicly they would loudly proclaim their opinion of his innocence. The most cruel acts on record have been committed in the name and under the garb of religion. And ’the most wiexed, cruel and bloody wars recorded in ancient and modern history have been pros­ ecuted under the same name and for the same purpose. The most cruel tyrants and despots of the Old World shield themselves under the same garb. And a man, sect, or government which fight under that cloak are the most to be dreaded and feared. I think Dr. Torsey’s prejudice is so clearly shown in my pamphlet, and his dis­ position to annoy students who doubt the justice of his decisions mid do not acquiesce in his opinions, it is not necessary to pursue it here; but will mention that on one occasion this desire to control did find vent, and was brought to bear upon one Andrew Walsh, a teacher in that school (a gentleman of splendid educational acquire­ ments), for voting in 1855, as he was of different polities from the managers of that school. Yet he chose to exercise his right of suf• frage, and did go to the polls and vote, which brought down the displeasure of the refined and over-wise would-be rulers and judges of what a student or teacher on Kent’s Hill should think, say or do while under their supervision and instruction, at this fountain of all morals, as' they would have you understand. At early dawn, Sep­ tember 11, 1855, near the church on Kent’s Hill, on a tree, hung the form in effigy of this learned teacher, Andrew Walsh, who could fluently speak a dozen or more different languages. To show their malignity and disgrace Mr. Walsh, there were about a half-dozen different devices, written placards, attached to his arms, feet and body, a mean and contemptible affair, all of which was published at that time. I have the evidence and published account, establish­ ing all I have said in relation to this disgraceful affair, and know whereof I speak. For days after this act took place, no signs of disapprobation were seen or any means taken by Dr. Torsey to disap­ prove or condemn the act. Not until some of the oldest students had drawn up a paper and were circulating it for signatures, to con­ demn this transaction, and an account for publication had been sent off, did Torsey move to ferret out the actor or condemn the act. His forbearance and kindness to students might uot be much helped by consulting some students—the one who said all the notice he had of his expulsion was just ten minutes to pick up his things �36 A REJOINDER TO THE REPLY ON TEE KENT’S HILL TRAGEDY. and leave the Hill. And a young man by the name of Lord might think when he claimed to be sick that pulling him out of bed and jerking him about his room, by Dr. Torsey, was no very kind act to I him. spent much argument, under a mistake, or This Committee have to what room I claim the wrong of entering without design, as authority—see “Crown Won,” p. 121, all about it. They had better pick their flint and try again before they make so long an> argument on false premises. Yet they claim her (Louise’s} room was at their disposal the same, and “did not belong to her any more than a man’s house belongs to a child who occupies one of its rooms ; and the teacher has the same moral and legal right to enter her room as a parent would have to enter a room in his own house occupied by a child.” If this logic# is true, how can they escape universal condemnation for not eaercising parental care and protec­ tion over those who occupy such rooms ? They find fault and would have the public blame me for publishing Louise’s letter to her sister, when the class letter (which is about the same} which this commit­ tee know that letter was written to her class, with a request for them to do with it as they would like for others to do in like circumstances to them. “ Decide for me," she says. That letter was copied and. sent in many directions. And that committee of students did copy the worst sentence, “ garbled extract,” from the same, in their whitewashing report, and ask all the newspapers of the State to pub­ lish it to the world. And when in my pamphlet I give a fair aecount of both sides, all they charge her with and their excuses for so deal­ ing with her, and with her. own written statement, which was givento the public by her class, through that letter. And to free myself from the liability of any unlairness, so that the public should have all the facts before them, I publish both letters, while they in their Reply publish only one—an unfair attempt by this Committee to mystify the fair course I have pursued in this heart-rending affair. Another charge they bring against me is the sale of my book at highly remunerating prices.” A grave charge, in the face of the fact that they are selling their book for as high if not higher price, according to the amount of reading which it contains ; while they have the advantage in selling theirs, through their circuit preachers all over the State, as has been the case with such reports as they choose to send out from Kent’s Hill, instead of paid agents, as in my case, to sell my book. ■ 37 11 Who are its authors ?” “ And where was it printed ? These are the slurs thrown out against me, which I care but little about. But so far as its author is concerned, I will say that no attorney or .clergyman prepared or saw a single sentence of the “ Crown Won " before it was published. And the same is true of this Rejoinder. As to where it was printed, I will say it was printed at a responsible house, who when properly called upon will state all the facts desired, and where I thought the office would not be besieged by Methodist ministers. They try to make a false impression upon the reader where they refer to where I say she lost at the sixth term three pairs of white woolen stockings—oil she had. Just add, of woolen stockings. I did not say but what she had cotton ones, which she always had, and there was not a term when she did not have more than three pairs of stockings with her. It may answer this Committee’s purpose to try to satisfy their special friends, to say that “ the statements of Mr. o-and Mrs. Greene are undeserving of any credit, whether made under oath or not,” in relation to the amount of clothing our daughter had when she went to the College to board; but it will not go down with the mass of thinking people. They will believe that her mother did know what her daughter took with her, eleven weeks -before she was sent away. She does know that, and also what she carried to her during those eleven weeks. And we do know that from Louise’s ample stock of common under-clothing, which has been returned to us or accounted for, there was but one pair of drawers so old and worn out that they could not be worn. The .remaining articles are so few that it is a heart-sickening sight to look al. 1 wish my readers could see them, so that they could ■appreciate what a miserable and wicked attempt there has been made, by drumming up outside testimony, to discredit our positive knowledge of what we state. In addition to ell that Louise has written us, and what she told her mother in October, 1865, about her fears that she would not be .allowed to graduate, Miss Reed says that Louise came up to where she and Ches, boarded, about two weeks before she left,'and said (while speaking of the short time before the term would close, and of the end of her school life), u Do you see anything now that will prevent me from graduating?” She (Miss Reed) replied, “No, unless you are sick; and then you can substitute painting." Thus showing a fear up to .the last that she would not be permitted to graduate. �38 f A REJOINDER TO THE REPLY ON THE KENT’S HILL TRAGEDY. The careful reader of the “Crown Won” will see that many of the complaints and points I make against the whole management of this sad ease are not answered in the Reply. And one great fact the public must see. That they pursued in accusing, searching (even to her body) and lecturing, until they broke her down, and sent her heart-broken away, which caused her death, without noti­ fying her parents. He failed to fulfil his moral obligation, and to extend to her parental care and protection. And, without cause, his writing those insulting letters to me in June and July, 1866. The haughty, overbearing manner in which he met me in Lewiston (the first time I saw him after it was known Louise was dead), while I, with a sad and aching heart, was there for her remains. Again, the Sth of November, soon after her burial, when Mrs. Greene and I were on the Hill to see if we could get any satisfaction in regard to their treatment of her who they then knew was lost to us forever. Before this, as many know, various slanderous reports had gone from the Hill, as to the cause,* and where she had gone—all false, as the sad result proved. After passing Dr. Torsey’s house and going towards the College, and as I was putting up my horse at Mr. Adams’, which was near the College, where we were going, and as Mrs. Greene stood waiting on the side of the street, Mr. Torsey came down in a lordly manner—he was talking to a young lady in a lively tone—and just as he passed Mrs. Greene, and as I was approaching her, he, as it appeared to us, to show his disposition, and careless indifference for our presence and feeling, gave a loud laugh. His whole appearance and bearing was haughty, and as much as to say, “ I care not for your presence, your sorrow or disappointment—it does not affect me. I am lord of all I survey; from the centre all over Kent’s Hill there’s none my right to dispute. You may stop or pass along.” In view of all that has transpired on Kent’s Hill, and this won­ derful Reply, I am constrained to exclaim, “ How fearfully and won­ derfully (self-righteous some people are) made. People often become so self-righteous, so tenacious of power, of denominational pride and self-will, as nearly or quite to take away moral accountability: and it is often very difficult to determine whether their ravings and maledmtmns proceed from a sane or an insane mind,-therefore their sayings should be received with great caution. “Whether those who claim the right and do use skeleton keys, use them wrongfully we do not certainly know.” We do not .know of any way how such articles as laelts, buckles, bosom-pins, napkins, and many other articles could disappear from Louise’s trunk, We do not see how certain articles belonging to Louise, which were plainly marked, came into the possession, and why they were retained months by one of her accusers. The public will see what any one may expect from the managers of this “safe and pleasant home,” if they dare say that they do'not believe them perfect in ail things. The covert and mean insinua­ tions against their old student, now she cannot answer for herself, their great effort to put the worst possible construction upon every act of her’s, getting positive affirmations from those who once were in doubt about things—even the rattling of a door, the late appear­ ance at the breakfast table, are set down to Louise as vicious acts, while it is well known that it is an act of everyday occurrence for students to come to breakfast late in the College. Also their labored attempt to make the public believe that we are perjurers, liars, devoid of parental affections, mad, crazy, unfeeling, and proper sub­ jects for the State Prison. Parents cannot fail to see the safety of that “ pleasant home.” I think'every intelligent reader will agree with me when I say that I would as soon trust myself or property in the hands of high­ way robbers as with a set of men who will tell me “ it is not their object to deprive me of any portion of my wealth,” and then go on to stigmatise my character and that of my family. I would not believe them if they said that “ under oath or not under oath.” It may answer the purpose of this Committee to try to put a gag into our mouths, and to stop us from expressing our opinion of Dr. Toraey, or any one who dealt with our girl, aud call these opinions (as in the case of Mrs- Greene’s letters to Dr. Torsey) atrocious libels. The public will see by dates that Dr. Torsey’s insulting let­ ters to me were written a long time before Mrs. Greene wrote him. And her letters .were written him on account of his insinuations against her and her dead girl, which if this Committee and the pub­ lic understood as well as Dr. Torsey must, they would better account for some things therein written. If this Committee will publish the whole of Mrs. Greene’s letters to Dr. Torsey, they will brand their own assertion as false, “ that the substance of these letters are given io Mr. Green.’. book," K“"™« I the illtao.. of h-’ <“>«'«■ 39 ,1“. c“‘ "‘d'fre""c0 ”,h which many look upon the. wrong. eomm.tiod upon others, they �40 A REJOINDER TO THE REPLY ON THE KENT’S HILL TRAGEDY. counsel patience and forbearance. Yet those same persons, when a like wrong is committed upon them, no matter who are the perpetra­ tors, will show the greatest resentment, and will not care who is hit. Those pious savans are hard to please. They ridicule me in their characteristic style as representing my daughter “so nearly perfect,” and again in mock solemnity bewail my lack of “ paternal kindness and love.” For the perfectness of Louise’s character I respectfully refer them to the letters of her classmates, the numerous letters I have from other students, and her townsme:',. Contradictcry testimony of Kent’s Hill witnesses— Mrs. Daggett on oath says—“ We did not go into Dr. Torsey’s part of the house, nor did he have anything to do, directly or indi­ rectly, with the investigation in regard to the clothing or money.” Dr. Torsey declares on oath—“The Monday evening before Louise left Miss Case called on me and informed me that Miss Greene had been taking articles of clothing not belonging to her, and that Mrs. Daggett and herself were investigating the matter. I requested her to do it quietly, and to say nothing to any one about the matter. . I had also learned that Miss Greene had taken some mohey.” Dr. Torsey swears that he knew about the matter and gave directions, ’ while Mrs. Daggett swears that he did not. Which swears false is more than I can tell. And how Torsey knew about her taking money Monday evening, before her confession on Tuesday, is passing strange, if there was not preconcerted action among her accusers. See also Mrs. Daggett’s denial of going into Dr. Torsey’s part of the house before entering Chestina and Miss Reed’s room. See Chestina s sworn statement, p. 56, “ Crown Won,” and her letter to me of March 31, 1868, where she explains how she knows she went into, and when they came to her room. Again, look at the inconsistency of B. W. Harriman’s sworn states ment and what Dr. Torsey wrote me. Harriman says, “When I got back from the depot I soon met Dr. Torsey, who asked me if I would take a team and go in pursuit of Louise.” The day after Chestina and I had been on the Hill, the 26th, and found those two letters, which, with all other circumstances, had caused me to express great fears on the Hill of her destruction, and I then believed that most of hei class and other students had the same fears, or they would not have shown by their tears and anxious looks, such signs of grief as they did. My fears must have reached Torsey’s ears, as I did not / 41 see him. Torsey writes me, May 27, 1.866, “I do not think your fears of the course Louise has taken can be well founded.” s * He three days later tells us in that Faculty meeting he had no such fears. He tells Miss Reed the day she left, “ he had no fears of that.” He also tells Chestina, “ Oh, no; I do not fear that.” * See her affidavit on page 57, “ Crown Won.” Now with all these asser­ tions of Dr. Torsey, and the fact that no team was sent after Louise, who will believe that he asked Harriman as soon as he saw him, “ if he would take a team and go in pursuit of Louise”?—especially when I have this same Harriman’s testimony before the Trustees. June 5, 1867, wherein he says of Dr. Torsey, “ After he found she had left under such circumstances, he urged that we had better start immediately after her.” Which is true—Dr. Torsey asking him to take a team and go, or his urging him to start immediately? Who believes all this, if Dr. Torsey had asked and urged, but what he would have gone ?—if he had been so anxious, but what some one would have been started immediately ? If this is not overstrained testimony, then I am no judge. I think they can prove most any­ thing they choose. I have all the testimony before the Trustees’ meeting of June 5, which is very positive, and is worth preserving. Our assertion of favoritism is proved true by this Committee in their seeming approval of Mary Chapman’s disobedience of the pos­ itive orders of the preceptress. The labored exertions of this Rev.’ J. W. Hathaway, to back Mr. Houghton down in a simple statement of facts, must be convincing to all what they have done to get others to do. Having obtained from a student a copy of one of Louise’s exhibi­ tion pieces, the one mentioned as lost in the “ Crown M on,” I will give it to the public, and ask my readers to judge of this, and with all of her other productions, as published in the “ Crown M on, whether Louise’s opinions were well founded that Torsey s prejudice had and would prevent her from receiving any prize or reward for the best composition, book-keeping, painting, or anything else, while she remained a student under him. She had striven hard to excel in some of these branches. She had been a student there longer than most of the others. She bad, long before she left, become satisfied that it was useless for her to try, after she had so well learned Ins prejudice. She has a record in her diary, saying (after her attemp to obtain it in book-keeping), “It is no use for me to try. I shall never obtain a prize here. Oh, dear! how hard I have tried. But �A REJOINDER TO THE REPLY on the Kent’s hill tragedy. I did not care so much on my own account as on father s, as I think it would have pleased him.” She was generally acknowledged to be as good a writer as there was on the Hill; and it was believed by many that justice would have given her the prize in composition, painting and book-keeping, during her stay there. If the prize pieces, etc., could be placed beside her’s, the public could better judge whether justice was done her in those cases. I believe that they have a way to manage so as to have their rewards turn up where it will best gratify their wishes, or make to their pecuniary advantage — a sort of project to increase the number of students there. life. Let the boy well win his spurs, for please God, the day shall be his, and the honor shall rest with him.” Who that has perused the pages which recall those deeds of valor, those romantic adven­ tures, those tournaments, where all brave knights might try their prowess, and where glove, ribbon or jewel from the hand of lady love was the chief incentive to exertion and reward of success,— who, I repeat, has not regretted their departure, and mourned in his heart that the days of chivalry were past. Bold baron and belted knight have vanished from the scene of action, and their deeds are as the recollection of an half-forgotten dream. Yet who shall dare to say that the Spirit of Chivalry is not living, moving, breathing among us at the present time. Better than lady fair is love of coun­ try, purer than ambition’s fire is the hope of a nation’s freedom. Nay, we do wrong to compare the two; for the first wild flashing-up of a rude spirit of honor, in those dark ages, was to the present lifeor-death struggle for freedom what the lurid glare of a meteor is to the calm, steady light of the sun. Our heroes are everywhere. 42 r ANCIENT AND MODERN CHIVALRY. i How often have I longed to welcome back the days of ancient chivalry. How often through the long vista of departed years have I gazed back upon the first faint gleam of that chivalric spirit which broadened and brightened till its enthusiastic spirit lit up all Europe and the Holy Land I Peter the Hermit, poor and untitled, who, moved almost to mad­ ness by the injuries of his brethren at Jerusalem, raised to frenzy the hearts of nearly six millions of his people, and hurled them like the surging waves of ocean upon the shores of Palestine. Boemond, Prince of Tarendum, who, at the first unfurling of the red-cross banner dashed his armor in pieces with his battle-axe. and from it made crosses for his soldiery; and with him Tancred, called noblest of the Christian chivalry, of whom historians have dis­ coursed and poets sung. These are but few of the many who left home and heritage to die in a foreign land. Even the children, with scrip and staff, prepared to journey eastward. Like all other human institutions, chivalry presents a new aspect in every page of tho book of history. Sometimes it is severe and stern, sometimes light and gay; but the qualities of valor, courtesy and enthusiasm shine out at every period of its existence. At the battle of Cressy, where Edward tho Black Prince fought for his knightly spurs, word was brought to his father, Edward III., that his son, then a boy of fourteen, was surrounded on all sides by the enemy and needed succor. “Is ho dead, or overthrown, or so wounded that ho cannot continue to fight ?” asked the king When told that his son still lived, he added, “ Go back to those who sent you, and tell them to ask no aid from me, so long as my son be in 43 By the widening Mississippi, On the prairies of the West, Where the broad Potomac rushes, Union troops for battle thirst. They fight not for a shadow, the gay phantasm of ambition has not lured them from the quiet of home pleasures, but wives and mothers have said to them, “ Go I for our country needs you more than I.” God bless them 1 With the echo of ringing bells and booming can­ non, proclaiming the glad news of victory for truth and right against treason and rebellion, still sounding in our ears, who will not with me say, All hail to Modern Chivalry! Who will believe, if she had been fairly dealt with, she would not have received some reward of merit during those five years ? Her writing brings to light some things which were unknown to us while she was living. . ’ Persons invested with much power become tyranical and capri­ cious, almost of necessity, and the self-dependence of those under them is much impaired by relying on'favor, hypocrisy and fawning, playing on the weaknesses of those autocrats, and not studying, by patient diligence and integrity, to deserve and reap their due reward. However strange it may appear, yet it is a self-evident truth, that disobedience thrives on severe examples. A elose observer cannot Z �44 ON THE EENT’S HILL TRAGEDY. A REJOINDER TO THE REPLY fail to see that an aspect of external obedience is maintained by severe discipline, which veils much of the real effect from superfi­ cial observation. The good conduct which insures the granting of ’favors, may consist in betraying a friend, or in some other way crushing out or blunting that nice sense of honor which is so desira­ ble in every person, and which should be the part of education to cultivate and strengthen. It might be as interesting to some portion of the reading public, who know the limited education of this H. P. Torsey, for this Com­ mittee to explain how, where, and by what means he has received some of his titles, as it is for them to ridicule me for the want of a better education. They perhaps might be as profitably employed to sustain the reputation and credit of this Institution, by explaining some things which have transpired on the Hill before Louise went there, as they are in stigmatising her character and abusing her friends. If the veil could be lifted, perhaps the public might see that some of their managers have not made a very nice “ distinction between vice and virtue.” How far that veil will yet be attempted to be lifted, depends upon the action of others. Tell me, ye wise Committee, is there no deception, or false pretenses, for the Trustees, of whom you are a part, to proclaim to the world by titles that your Principal is possessed of every literary qualification desired, and ask the parents of this State to send their sons and daughters to an Institution whose head teacher and president is so.deficient in the languages. This Committee have the unblushing effrontery to accuse us of a lack of love and care for our child. They had better cast the beam out of their own eye, etc. They speak of love and care. What love was shown Louise, and what care for her? I refer them to her class letter. That letter ought to'be engraved with a pen of steel upon their hardened hearts—" I could have died for one friendly hand grasp, and thought it happiness to die.” Think of this, kind reader how came she to pen these, her dying words, if there was any friendly hand offered, kindness or sympathy shown her; neg­ lected and cruelly deserted by those “ people of God, the leading members of the little church at Kent’s Hill.” It is not surprising that they feel compelled to publish to the world that they are the “people of God.” This Committee s unfeeling and,contemptible slur about the spot where Louise’s remains were found, is no more than we ought to < 45 expect. Her life and character seemed to be invested with no sacredness in their estimation ; therefore it is not strange that they appear to be divested of the common feelings of humanity. This is in keeping with the whole treatment we have received from those managers of that Institution. Yet there is to be a monument erected, and the spot suitably dedicated, of which the public will have due notice, and no favors will be asked of this Committee. They also have spun out (in their closing special pleading) a long argument to try to create the belief that we are hard with and unfeeling towards our children. This will not take with our child­ ren, or with those who know us. And to show the love, confidence and respect Louise had in and for her mother, I will quote a little from her diary : “ January 20, 1866—Such a nice old day with my mother ; had her all to myself this P. M., only the girls kept run­ ning in.” “21st—Mother was quite sick all last night. ' My precious mother 1 All that I have aud all that I am, under God, I owe to my mother. Even Sarah spoke of the great change in her since G. H”. died. And I am powerless to help.” “ March 27,1866 —Coming up from the College, found Ches, and mother had come.” “ 28th—I have devoted this day to my mother—a pleasant duty.” “ 29th—Came from the Packard house by seven, just before mother started for home. The day began with wind and snow, but ended in a drenching rain. Did I do wrong to detain her yesterday • M ill the public believe that she in her right mind would have feared to have gone to that mother whom she always spoke so kindly of and loved so dearly. That mother who Louise knew loved her most ten­ derly, and would have done anything in her power to have assisted her under any and all circumstances. This Committee, in the Reply, have endeavored to create the belief that Louise had not lost articles of clothing; that she had not complained of losing any. Yet they are contradicted by thenown witnesses. Miss Case says, “I think she said she took the clothin" from necessity, as all hen’s had been lost, and intended to restore°t at the close of the term ” None who should see what was left aud returned to us, would doubt the “ necessity. Mr.. Dagge testifies before the Trustees, June 5, 1867 (I have a copy dt all that testimony), and among other things says, “She said she had also lost articles of clothing, and had endeavored to keep her clothing ood - Then is it true, as stated in the Reply, that Louise made no Lplainl of losing clothing ! !•«> ““ �A REJOINDER TO THE REPLY ON THE KENT’S HILL TRAGEDY, ing members of the little church at Kent’s Hill,” tell me who took the money, the postage stamps, books and clothing, from Louise, before they further pursue and testify to disgrace her memory, and In reply to Mira I. Reed’s recantation al” ' .ffidavit, and with what she has declared was said at my house, and what v.____ " UUI was said and done at Readfield when she gave me her affidavit—how she could and she did make this statement, is more than I can tell, .J why shall make my statement just how this affidavit of her’s wasI given to me, and all the material facts connected therewith, then produce the evidence I have to corroborate the same, and with the circum­ stances and means for remembering the facts, and let the people judge who tells the truth. In the fall of I860 I learned by reports that Miss Reed had made some statements in regard to Louise leav­ ing, and particularly in regard to Torsey’s admissions as to that conversation he had with Louise, and being desirous to get the facts in this sad case, I wrote her at Roxbury. She soon after called at my house and explained, and said, “As she was coming down so soon, she thought she would call and tell me, as she had not time to answer my letter (or words to that effect). When she, her brother, my wife and other members of my family, were seated, I asked her to tell me all about what Torsey said and did on the day Louise left. Seating myself at a table, with pencil and paper, I carefully took down her statement, which was nearly verbatim as it appeared in my pamphlet. She gave the statement freely, without hesitation, in full, and did not appear as though she desired to hold back any­ thing, and she never asked a single question what I intended to do with it. I had no occasion to repeat my questions or to urge her in the least. And it is very remarkable, if as she says in the Reply, <• I did not answer his letter, because I did not wish him to have any writing signed by me, I fearing that he might use it against the Institution at Kent’s Hill,” that she of her own accord should call here and tell us so freely what she did. Had she written she need have stated only the /acts. And here is where the trouble is, the facts are against Torsey, hence their great efforts to suppress or break them. down. She gave me no occasion for, nor did I tell her, “You need not fear; this will not be used to injure you. She again says I said, “ This is a matter of great interest to us, and we wish to know all about this, swyffy for our otrn satisfaction.” The former part of this sentence is correct (and who would not want to ?) ; but I positively deny saying the latter, “ Simply for our own satisfaction” When she got through, I said, “ If you could stop I should hke to rewrite this with pen.and ink, and get you to sign it But knowing they were in a hurry, and they could not well do so, 46 ’ try to break down all who dare to defend her, I think it very strange that Miss Huntington should, as she states in her affidavit, after locking herself into her room, take out her key and hang it up in her room. Now for what reason would she do that, if she desired to be alone and quiet while, as she says, she was studying ? She would simply take they key inside, turn it, and let it remain in the door, as it would not be but a short time before she would want to open it again; and it looks very strange when any one knocked at her dpor that she should not answer or go to the door. How did she know but it was some of the teachers ? And who, if knocking at a door in that manner, would stand a minute or two before they would knock again ? The most usual course would o be timmediately repeat the raps, and the occupant would reply in some way. It is also strange that she makes no allusion to this to Louise, until she is dead and could make no answer for herself. And it is still more strange that at this late day she can so distinctly • remember, in the absence of her room-mate, what she had done with her key. “ My room-mate’s key was also hanging up in my room.” A little too positive, I should think. As I have shown, p. 83, “ Crown Won,” that Miss Church was not accusing any one, I will give here an extract from a letter of her’s to me of August, 1867, in which she says : “ I communicated my suspicion to none but my sister and one other, till requested to do so by my superiors.’' She also says in this letter she lost the money “ Thursday evening or Friday morning.” Here is another strong proof that some of her superiors (she docs not say who) were seeking, requesting some, to implicate this old student, who'had but a few more days to remain with them; and as Miss Church writes me she went home Tuesday morning, this request of her superiors must have been made before the investigation and the searching of Louise things, as her confession was that day after Miss Church had gone. In most all of the statements and affidavits of students, Mr. and Mrs. Daggett, in the “ Reply,” there are admissions of mixim>- and losing of more or less articles of clothing, and that Louise said she took them from necessity, and intended to return them when she found her’s, or leave them at the end of the term. ‘t 1 7 47 �48 A REJOINDER TO THE REPLY only mentioned it. They said they could not stop any longer, as they intended to go through that night. Having received several letters from Miss Reed, speaking well of Louise's character and standing on the Hill, I wrote in the first part of her affidavit a short recommendation and explanation. And then from the minutes I had taken at my house, wrote out the affidavit, leaving several blank spaces where I thought she might wish to explain further, or where I thought I might not fully understand how she meaut to state .or explain. Soon after she was at our house, when I took those min­ utes, it came to us that she had told other persons in our town, where she had visited, about the same she had told us. I remarked to Mrs. Greene that if sho had told others what she had us, it would in some way reach Torsey’s ears at Kent’s Hill, and Miss Reed would have to suffer for it. He would in some way annoy her, or would get her to recant her statements about his admissions to her, what he said to Louise, and she (Louise) desired to have done. He would get her pledged by words or by writing so that we could not obtain the facts. I knew this man so. well that it would not do to have him know that Miss Reed had informed or given me the facts as she did at my house. This is why and the only reason that I was so cautious about having it known in Readfield, what my business ’ was when I went there and obtained that affidavit. And why I did not have that writing finished and read in the presence of the Skolfield family, in the kitchen, was for fear that some neighbor or , student from the Hill would drop in upon us, and report to Torsey, or to some of the parties interested on the Hill. For the same reason I did not request the Justice before whom she appeared to make oath, to read it, or to inform him of its contents, was because he was a stranger to me, and might disclose the same, as I then thought it would be to her great injury to have it known while she was a student there. tin Saturday, January 26th, 186", I-went to Kent’s Hill with my team, and called on Miss Reed and asked her if she would like to take a ride with me, as I desired to talk with her. And as she, her brother, and Miss Springer, were boarding themselves, it brought the matter so fresh to my mind, when I used to go there when my girls were there, with the long struggle-Louise had with books and tutors there, and the wicked management with her, without notice to me, and her final destruction. And those students, referring to those things, and of my coming with and after her during those “five ON THE KENT’S HILL TRAGEDY. 49 years. It was not strange that I did at the mention of those things shed tears. Those tears ought not to make against me. nor be con­ strued as an effort to induce her to go with me (if she so intended it), in the Reply; it is wicked beyond measure. She showed no signs of holding back and not going. I said, as it was Saturday (no school) and work-day with them, “ Perhaps you have so much work to do you cannot go.’ She said, “ We have not much to do.” Miss Springer gave her to understand she could do the work, and in a very short time she was ready to go. As we left I said to Miss Springer, “ We shall not return till after dinner.” I had told Mr. Skoficld that if she came with me, to give us the sitting-room, with a fire in it, for the reason before explained. I had informed him for what I was going after her, and said she might not come. I think there was something said to her by me when I asked her to take a ride, about going as far as the Corner. After arriving at Mr. Skofield’s and having the horse put into the barn, as I intended to stop there until after dinner, and after getting seated I told her what I wanted, and went on to read what I had written, and said, “ If I have not got it written as you understand it you will tell me. and I will make it as it should be.” Part of those blank spaces was filled and part was not. Some of them were crowded and some partly filled, just as her statement and explanations required. They remain so to-day. The filling, out was done with very pale, poor,— what I call frozen ink. It bothered mo to write with it very much; before 1 finished I warmed it quite warm and shook it up, and it did a little better toward the last. When 1 had finished reading and filling it I re-read it through; then gave it to her to read, and told her I wanted her to sign it, and go before a Justice and make oath to it. As she was reading it to herself, and when I thought she had got to those largest filled-up places, and thinking the pale ink and some close filling up would bother her to read it, I asked her if she could read it all, and said, •' If you cannot make it all out I will assist you.” She said she could read it all; and when she had finished reading it she went to the table and signed it, with the same ink and pen that 1 had filled it out. I did not hurry her. We took dinner there, and talked some time with the family; then took her to the Corner, before Justice Bean, who asked her some questions, administered the oath and made the affidavit. As we left the office, Miss Reed said to me, if I was not in a hurry, or could wait, she would like to see her friend (aunt, I think she said), a D �50 A REJOINDER TO THE REPLY on the rent’s hill tragedy. while.- I told her I could wait, and would take her there. She said, “ It is but a little distance, and I will walk.” I said, “ Very well,” and unhitched my horse, led him to her friend’s house, hitched him, and went in; stopped as long as she seemed desirous to stop—about half an hour, I should judge. I then took her back to the Hill. She did not, at my house or at Readfield, ask me what I wanted this for, or what I was going to do with it, or in any way during the whole transaction ask a single favor or assurance from me as to keeping it from the parties interested or the public. I thought very strange of it at the time. I did once, and only once, of my own accord, say to her that, “Nothing you have said or done shall be known while you are a student there.” I was not in great haste while at Mr. Skofield’s, and did not read the certificate rapidly. She did have time to read it as long and as thoroughly as she chose, and the writing is a plain hand, except some of the filling, which was there done with that pale ink, as the original will show. The vacant spaces she speaks of can now be seen on the same. I did not tell her “ I left these spaces for the purpose of inserting other things afterwards.” If I had inserted other things, as she insinuates, those blank spaces would be filled, as also the bottom line, above her sig­ nature, would be filled, where there is more than one whole line above her signature now blank. I never told her, “ I will put this document in better language.” But I did say to her, about the time she was to sign it, I wished I had time to re-write it and put it in better shape (meaning, of course, before it was signed and sworn to, it should be done, if at all). She must have so understood it at that time. She did tell us at our house that Miss Bowers said, •‘Won’t you go and see Dr. Torsey; I think you will do best with him.” Could not Miss Bowers have gone to Dr. Torsey as well as Miss Reed. There was some reason why she did not besides that given by Miss Reed. She did say, and I took down at our house her exact words, that Dr. Torsey, “ in that first conversation in our room told us that he had never suspected Louise of any dishonesty in that direction.” Alb the main points in her affidavit, in “Crown Won,” were taken down by me at our house, as she admits in the Reply; and the public will judge whether I, from my notes taken down at tlie time, have not the means of knowing what she did tell us better than she and her brother have from recollection one year afterwards, as stated in said Reply. I did not ask her to say anything against 51 __ , or seho°l- I only asked her to state what she knew ie facts without any reference as to who it would hurt or I e She gaye me what I then and do now believe was true. , e<^/>re SOme ^ings Miss Reed did state at our house not given in he “Crown Won,” which I will here state. Mrs. Greene and I recollect them well. One was when T— told Ches, and I, and when I cited her going in her poorest clothing. He said that looked like going into the factory to work, or running away. She (Miss Reed) said that made her mad clear through.” She said two students went into Louise’s room the night before she left, after Mary Chap­ man had left her. and stopped awhile; and when they were about to leave, Louise said, “ Girls, do n’t leave me alone.” Mira said that seemed the hardest of ail. She said she ought not to have been left alone, and if she had known it she should have gone to her if it had been in the middle of the night. She also spoke of the carelessness of students about clothing, and related incidents. Said one time Mary Chapman went down to a party, or public gathering, at the Corner. She by mistake wore another student's cloak. It was there lost, and Mary’s father had to pay for it. Also, she said a lady stu­ dent, told Miss Robinson that she had found a handherebief in her possession with another student’s name marked on it, and they might accuse her of stealing it, as they did Louise. She said she lost, after Louise had left, a large music book in the College building, from the room where she practised. Mrs. Greene did not say in that conver­ sation at our house, when I took Miss Reed’s testimony down — and she utterly denies of saying, “ For we already know enough against them back of this, without your testimony.” The absurdity of this statement is seen at once, as we were then trying to get more inform­ ation. Sho also denies saying “ You need n’t try to shield him,” for we did not think they were trying to, and she had no occasion to say that. Miss Reed did say, after all she had told us, and as she was about leaving the house, “ I do not wish to say anything that will hurt Dr. Torsey or the Institution.” This was in the fall of 1866, and in January, 1867. She gave me her affidavit (after she had graduated from the Seminary, and was no longer a student there). I received in reply to one I had written her, a letter from which I make the following extracts: “ Belgrade, July 4,1867. “ I do not know as Dr. Torsey knew that you wrote me before, but i �■■■■ V 52 1. ii A REJOINDER TO THE REPLY some were condemning me, thinking I was coming out against the Institution, and I had not said anything against it. You know that I never did to you. Ben. Harriman said he thought I was in league with you, informing you of all their proceedings, and injuring the Institution all I could. I have always been a friend to Louise, but I am not to judge those who dealt with her, and never have. There were some girls in my room when I received your letter, and I spoke of it to them. Your letter proved that I was not doing more than I pretended. I have been in a bad place, and have kept as quiet as possible; but I did not escape the tongues of slanderers. My neu­ trality only excited suspicion. That letter you wrote me made my case clear, and of course could not injure you. I do not wish to say or do anything to injure the Institution, and do not think you wish me to. Those questions you asked me, and answers you have written down are only the plain facts.” The reader will see although Torsey did not know of her affidavit, yet a suspicion had sprung up against her (hence hiswatching for and obtaining my letter), and she felt a pressure or prejudice before she graduated. What she “was pretending” to do I do not know, when she says, “I have been in a bad place,” etc., “I did not escape the tongues of slanderers.” Who they were shedoes not fully say, but clearly indicates one of them. One question —What were their “proceedings” on the Hill,for which they would be justified, or choose, to annoy or slander any student for informing, any person they chose. (Kent’s Hill fear, favoritism or mental insubordination, I would call it.) Her “neutrality” would not answer their purpose; they were not willing for her to state facts of what she knew. “ I do not wish to say or do anything to injure the Institution, and do not think you wish me to.” Then she assured me long before I published my book, “ Those questions asked mo and answers you have written down are only the facts." After this, what was my surprise to see in the Reply her affidavit. The public can judge when the evidence is before them : “This is to certify that on the 28th of November, 1866, at our house in Peru, Mira I. Reed, of Roxbury, in couversing about the sad affair—of what she knew about M. Louise Greene leaving Kent’sHill, and her subsequent death, told in substance the same as ON THE KENT’S HILL TRAGEDY. 53 appeared in her affidavit in the pamphlet entitled ‘ Crown Won,’ ■and I would so testify under oath. I<• i J j ■k if “ Peru, Dec. 26. 1867.” Eveline A. Knight, aged 22 years. Knowing that JUiss Miss Peed u.uvwing tnat Reed and her brother came direct from 8. R. Newell, Esq., when they called on us in 1866, when she gave me her statement;— Mr. Newell then lived in town, but now is Regis­ ter of Deeds of this county, and resides at Paris; — not having seen him or any member of his family since December last, I wrote him to know if he and Miss Gammon would give me a sworn statement of what Miss Reed did state at his house in regard to what appears in her affidavit in the “ Crowfl Won.” From each I received the following statements. This is all Mr. Newell has in any way to do with this Rejoinder: Paris, April 20,1868. Friend Greene, —Your request was duly received, but such ' has been the press of business that I have been unable to live it that thought and attention which I desired before answering you. In the present condition and aspect of the case I feel extremely reluctant at giving any affidavit to be connected with the matter as proposed. When honorable senators come before the public with statements under oath concerning what their own eyes have seen and • what their eats have heard, and learned and reverend D. D.s step forward and swear as plumply that such statements are false; when reverend gentlemen and learned professors write private letters, and then in affidavits before the public swear to the reverse of statements therein made; when intelligent and fair-famed deponents make oath to statements one day and the next swear that their testimony was false, or was never made; when deponents complain to the public that they have been duped or tearfully persuaded to swear to what is false; — there is reason to fear that the public will withhold all con­ fidence in affidavits connected with any matter that seemingly has sueh a tendency to demoralize and corrupt the morals of the parties interested therein. The public perhaps, to-day, would award me a fair reputation for truth and veracity, but should I volunteer an affi­ davit, the ‘pros’ or ‘cons' might reasonably raise a question, after the adverse statements that have appeared, which I have uo disposi- �54 x ON THE KENT’S HILL TRAGEDY. 55 wishing for affidavits to prove that she had uttered the same things in A REJOINDER TO THE REPLY tion to discuss nor the folly to covet. As to what Miss Reed said at my house in the fall of 1866,1 do not think I could from memory give her statement with accuracy, in her language, as she expressed herself at the time. We had at that time quite a conversation­ respecting the case of Louise, all my family taking part in the talk. Many of the statements made by Miss Reed were in sub­ stance, though perhaps not in the same language, as they appear in your book. I recollect of her mentioning her conversation with Mr. Harriman relative to going after Louise, and of her wishes and anxi­ ety in that matter — of the expressed fears and feelings of Mr. Harriman — of the excitement on the Hill—of the delay—and her own feelings of-impatience, etc.; but what language she used to express these ideas I cannot remember to quote. I do not think, she did use the terms 1 terrible suspense,’ ‘ terrible commotion,’ ‘ terri­ ble excitement,’ etc., etc. These expressions, I presume, were the language of whoever wrote out the affidavit for her to sign. It is not often that deponents write their own depositions. Hence it it the case that illiterate people and extremely broken in language are made the authors of flowing words, elegant expressions, of which in ordinary communications they might well deny the paternity. I noticedin the ‘Reply’ that the affidavits, as they purport to be, have the stamp of the same hand on most of them p but this does not justify’ those who signed them in denying the paternity, because their own language is not used, after they have signed them and made oath to their truth. I do not recollect that Miss Reed censured . Dr. Torsey in the conversation alluded to, but rather seemed to regret that the condition of the case and facts were such as to make him unavoidably subject to censure. When speaking.pf the preju­ dice against Louise, I asked her if it was known on the Hill that Dr. Torsey was prejudiced, to which she replied in the affirmative, -and said it was unfortunate for him that it was known. I came to theconclusion, after the conversation with Miss Reed, that she did not hold that the Faculty or Dr. Torsey were culpable, for or guilty of an intentional wrong, but for an unfortunate mistake, which resulted in a fatal wrong to Louise. When I remarked in substance that a seri­ ous or cruel wrong had been done . Louise, Mr. Stillman A. Reed replied, ‘ That is what we think.’ I inferred by that we he meant to include his sister, whose views, I suppose,, he understood. If Miss Reed on reflection wishes to say that her first affidavit was false, and. that she there uttered untruths, I canuot see the utility of your t private conversation. 21s to her making the statement in the affidavit in your book, you need go no further than to her last affidavit in the ‘ Reply’ for testimony to prove that she did make them. She says Mr. Greene said, ‘ This is a matter of great interest to us, and we wish to know all about this simply for our own satisfaction,’ ‘After this explanation from them, I proceeded to answer their questions as well as I knew ; but they gave me no intimation that these answers , would be printed or made public ; nor did I ever intend or suppose that they would be, till after the publication of Greene’s pamphlet ’ (P- 30 of Reply). It seems after the publication of your pamphlet She knew 'they’ had been printed and made public. They—what? Why the very answers that she gave you, as she says, she supposed, for your ‘own’ personal and private ‘satisfaction.’ She saw them in print, and knew them; and th^y were answers made ‘as well as she knew.’ From what she says about noticing that you were taking her answer in writing, and her hesitating about giving them in ‘this form,’ till after your explanation, I infer that these answers formed the basis of her affidavit, which, being arranged in form, she signed, and to which she made oath. I think this must be so, for these answers to which she alludes I believe appear in no other place in your pamphlet, except in her affidavit. She says you wrote her a letter asking questions about Louise and the manner of her leaving the Hill; but she says, ‘ By the advice of my friends at home I did not answer his letter, because I did not wish him to have any writ­ ing signed by me, I fearing that he might use it against the Institu­ tion at Kent’s Hill.’ Why did she hesitate to write, and give you simple and truthful answers? If she thought the truth was not against tho Institution, why did she fear you would use her answers against it ? She could scarcely use plainer language than she has in this part of her affidavit, to say or impress the idea that if she wrote you the truth it would be against the Institution, and you might thus use it. I am sorry that Miss Reed, by her attempt to retract from her former statement, finds herself placed before the public in so unenviable a position. It is true, both yourself and the authors of the ‘ Reply ’ have endorsed her moral worth, high standing, and veracity; but she can scarcely afford to be made the recipient of such puffs and fawning at tho risk of public ridicule. _ “After respectfully declining putting forth an affidavit in this matter, I will close this communication by saying that if you hav �a 57 A REJOINDER TO THE REPLY ON THE KENT’S HILL TRAGEDY. been guilty of using undue influence and tearful entreaties, as she represents, to induce Miss Reed to swear to a falsehood, or if the parties interested at Kent’s Hill have, by letters of persuasion, emis­ saries or attorneys sent to her, exercised a similar influence over her feelings, to obtain a retraction of her former statement, at the expense of her truthfulness and reputation, the guilty party ought to share the larger portion of public condemnation, rather than this unwary young lady, who doubtless would gladly have avoided any recollect that she repeated or said anything about the conversation she had with Dr. Torsey; but I do remember that she said in sub­ stance that it was known on the Hill that he was prejudiced against Louise, and that it was unfortunate for him that it was known. If Miss Reed has made statements at variance with each other and with facts, to please you, or to shield and please any other party. I am sorry for her. Yours, &c., 56 connection with the affair. “ Very respectfully yours, “ Sumner R. Newell.” ' “Paris, April 20, 1868. “Jonas Greene, Esq.,— Dear Sir, — After the exhibition of the extreme uncertainty of the truth of affidavits, as recently made in certain pamphlets now in circulation, I feel that public confidence must be shaken, and not much reliance placed on such productions. I must therefore decline making an affidavit of what I heard Miss M. I. Reed say, in the fall of 1866, concerning your daughter Lou­ ise leaving Kent’s Hill, as you have requested. It would be difficult for me, after the time that has elapsed, to quote from recollection many of her expressions, or much of the language made use of at that time. I find by recent observation that when people undertake to give the statements of others, it is very safe to accuse them of. falsehood, if they fail in giving the same language, although they convey the same idea. I well recollect that Miss Reed — in the fall of 1866, I think it was November — gave me, and others at the same time, a partial history of that affair. I do not think she went minutely into the matter, to tell all she knew about it; but talked freely, and answered all inquiries freely— not censuring or blaming any one. I have read her affidavit in your pamphlet, and I find many of the ideas therein were the same she advanced iu the con­ versation to which I allude. I think she did not go into all the details in the matter at that time, as she did in her affidavit. She related the conversation with the stage-driver, Mr. H., very much as it appears in her affidavit; and she also spoke of her feelings, fears and wishes, and of her impatience at the delay, of the excitement on the Hill; and giving or conveying the same idea as one might gather by reading her affidavit; but I caunot say what the phraseology of her language was in giving expression to those ideas. I do not S. P. Gammon. L I I I, Robert G.'Skofield, of Readfield, in the County of Kennebec, of lawful age, upon oath make affidavit and say, that on the 26th day of January, 1867, Mr. Jonas Greene, of Peru, and Miss Mira I. Reed, of Roxbury, came to my house at Kent’s Hill. Mr. Greene came there from Augusta on the evening of the 25th, and stopped during the night On the morning of the 26th he asked myself and wife if he could have a room, as he wished to have some conversa­ tion with Miss Reed in relation to his daughter Louise. We told him he could have a room as he desired; and about half past nine o’clock in the morning he went with his team to the Eaton House, near the College buildings, and about ten o’clock returned with Miss Reed. They stopped at my house to dinner, and were there some three hours or more. While there I heard no expression nor did I see any iudication of haste on the part of either of them. They were in conversation together some two hours before dinner; but what their conversation was I do not know, as I was not in the room with them. They dined with myself and family, and remained some half an hour at my house after dinner. Mr. Greene informed me at this time that Miss Reed was going to the Corner with him, to make oath to a statement made by her iu relation to his daughter Louise, and when they left they went iu that direetiou. Robert G. Skofield. State of Maine. — Kennebec, ss.— April “ HAth, 1SG8. — Then the above-named Robert G, Skofield personally appeared and made oath to the foregoing statement by him subscribed. “Before me, Emery 0. Bean, Justice of the Peace.” “I, Sybil M. Skofield, of Readfield, in the County of Kennebec, ' of lawful age, on oath depose and say, that Mr. Jonas Greene, of Peru, came to our house at Kent’s Hill the night of the 25th of * �58 A REJOINDER TO THE REPLY January, 1867. That on the morning of the 26th of January he asked if he could have a room for the purpose of having some con­ versation with Miss Mira I. Reed, of Roxbury. Myself and husband. Robert G. Skofield, told him he could; and about half past nine o’clock that morning he went with his horse and sleigh to the Eaton House, about one half-mile from our place, and immediately returned with Miss Reed. He came into the house with her and introduced her to me. They remained until after dinner, and were there three hours or more. After they had been in the house a short time, Mr. Greene asked me for pen and ink. • I told him the ink had been frozen, and was rather pale. He replied that it would answer his purpose. They occupied a room adjoining and opening into the one where I was, and I heard Mr. Greene and Miss Reed in conversa­ tion. I saw Mr. Greene writing at the table where he and Miss Reed sat, and he was reading from a written paper and asking her questions. When I went into the room to ask them to dinner, they were near the table where he had been writing, and Miss Reed had a written paper in her hand which she appeared to be reading. Im­ mediately after this Mr. Greene came into the room where the dinner table Was set, and said we need not delay dinner for them ; but we did wait some half an hour, and they then dined with myself and family. After dinner Mr. Greene went out of the house, and Miss Reed and myself went into the room adjoining the dining-room, where they had been before dinner. On the table was a written paper, Which Miss Reed took and began to read. Soon after this, Mr. Greene came into the room and said to Miss Reed. ‘ Can you read it?’ She replied, ‘Yes; I thought I would look it over.’ or ‘ read it over again.’ I will not be positive whether she said ‘ look it over again,’ or ‘read it over it again.’ It was one of these two expressions. I left the room soon after this, and when I left she was still reading this paper. They went from our house about half-anhour after dinner. While Miss Reed was putting on her clothing to leave, I said to her I wished to send some apples to a friend of mine rooming at the same house with her. She replied that she was not then going back to the house, but was going to the Corner. Before dinner I heard Mr. Greene reading to Miss Reed from a written paper. This reading and the conversation between them I could have heard had I chosen to listen. His reading was not rapid, nor • was the conversation between them in a low tone of voice. There were no expressions or acts on the part of Mr. Greene or Miss Reed I 'W- » 1 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Greene, Louise Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Rejoinder https://archives.kentshill.org/files/original/6/24/Collection_LouiseGreene_Rejoinder1867.pdf 8f2c674679b7b87b02d8d258eeb05a5c PDF Text Text & V8A2> X'<U>ERSi'z/ Kents Hill School Kents Hili, Maine Volume 20, Number 6 April 1998 �Fourth Floor Mystery The True Story < Ghost in Bearce By Stephanie Jones Many community from KH after writing members have taken interest two letters, one to her in finding out more about sister and one to her the ghost of Louise Greene. schoolmates. She Her name was Martha confessed in both of Louise Greene, but for some the letters and asked •» reason we all refer to her as for forgiveness, inLouise. She has a granite eluding hints of suimonument that sits on top r cide. Louise wrote, “I of Mt. Gile in Auburn, ''<■ do not know what will Maine, The monument become ofme. If I get reads: “Martha Louise L __ I home do not do anyGreene; Age 22 Years; thing with this letter; Daughter of Jonas and L.M. if not, will you please Greene of Peru, Maine; A send it to my mother The real Louise, in her 1866 student of five years at Kents before term closes?” senior portrait Hill; A member of the She spoke of a feeling graduating class of 1866; Who perished of “an iron door to the Savior shut and here in May, within two weeks of gradua- bolted to her.” tion; A martyr to the prejudice and caOnce Louise left school, she travpneeot man.” eled by stagecoach to Lewiston, purLouise entered Maine Wesleyan chased rat poison, and disappeared. Miss Seminary at Kents Hill, a college back in Greene’s body was missing for a total of 1861. The headmaster was Rev. Henry T. five months. On October, Friday the 13th, Torsey. Louise was a good student and a 1866, her body was discovered by a senior dorm proctor. She had been ac­ hunter. Louise’s parents were enraged cused of stealing several items of cloth­ over their daughter’s death and directed ing. School officials searched her room their anger towards Rev. Toisey, accusing and found clothes, a substantial sum of him of sectarian fanaticism, cruelty, and money, and a master skeleton key. Con­ neglect in expelling their distraught daugh­ fronted, the girl tearfully confessed to ter. They claimed he showed no mercy, stealing the money and other items. Fol­ which drove Louise to suicide. lowing interviews with Preceptress, A group of six students were cho­ Frances Case, and President Torsey, sen by their fellow school mates to be in Louise left Kents Hill for good. charge of investigating further into On May 23, 1866, Louise departed See Louise on page 4 Wk. I �tay num i u hili :e to challenge i Sunday. Louise from page 1 whether Mr. Greene was correct...did Mr. Torsey treat this student unjustly? The committee decided that Louise was guilty of the thefts and Dr. Torsey had behaved with kindness and restramt. Infuriated, Greene wrote to each student and asked them a series of questions, probing their, “wicked and uncalled-for attack on our dead child,” and their exoneration of, “the old angler,” Henry Torsey. One ofthe stu­ dents returned Greene’s letter unanswered saying, “Should advise a careful perusal of English grammar...” across the top. 1 talked to many members of our com­ munity about the stories of Louise sightings and experiences. Mr. Erie Turner was one who had a very interesting en­ counter. One late night a few years ago Mr. Turner (and Lily) was working late in Bearce. He was in the room that is now Mr. Rockwood’s office getting some files. Mr. Turner looked over to where Lily was and saw her with an “erect mohawk,” growling at the air. The photocopier had begun to bang repeatedly in the faculty lounge. Lily was obviously barking at something or someone and Mr. Turner knew no one else was in the building. Mr. T says that Lily hardly ever ag­ gressively snarls like she did that night. He had heard tales of the ghost in Bearce, but had never thought of an encounter occurring until this very moment. Mr. ond floor of Bearce, has had two encoun­ Turner became very frightened, and ran ters of her own. The first time was a couple down the stairs where he hid under his of years ago in the winter. Mrs. Coates desk. While cowering under the wooden was photocopying in the faculty lounge structure he called his wife, Mrs. Adria when she heard a “psssttt...” and some Turner, who came to his rescue and walked moving around. First she thought it might the poor soul home. the Chapel, just as her hair began to stick I have obtained a sheet from Mr. up on the back of her neck. In front of her Dunham with quotes from Mr. Hansen, and hung, “the hem of a white dress in the top his experiences with Louise. He was of the ceiling.” Although she does not quoted as saying, “The ghost of Bearce believe in ghosts, she knows that this Hall is real It’s the spirit of Louise Greene... event is something unexplainable. One night while checking Bearce with anOver Spring Break, Mrs. Coates was other teacher, we clearly saw her. We were working and all of a sudden she heard a on the first floor looking up and we saw a piano play, but it didn’t go along with the white luminescent light go from one chapel music she was listening to over the radio doortothe other...weranaroundthe build- inheroffice. Mrs. Coates got up and went ing from top to the basement. It was locked to the Chapel, the music stopped. Later, tighter than a teddy bear. There were no she was working and felt someone look­ windows open, no sign of any person.” ing over her shoulder. She turned toward Mr. Hansen had another experience the doorway and saw a white form similar as well, in the late 60’s. “One spring night, to a sheer curtain that quickly disappeared, very late, I was checking Bearce and I So, next time you are in Bearce, do heard a very clear; lovely laughter. It didn’t not fear the ghost of Louise Greene. In­ scare me. This was a weeknight. I ran stead remember what I have told you. upstairs but saw nothing. It was after Maybe ifwe as a community welcome her lights out, all the lights in the dorm were and treat her kindly then we may be able out. It was clear, distinct laughter coming to find out more information or possibly from inside the building; there were no even help her “move on.” windows open and no signs of any kids Formore information about Louise, outside the dorm.” please refer to the upcoming display in Mrs. Coates.who works on the sec- Bearce Hall. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Greene, Louise Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Kents Hill Connection Article Description An account of the resource Kents Hill Connection Volume 20,Number 6. April 1998 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource April 1998 https://archives.kentshill.org/files/original/6/25/Collection_LouiseGreene_Newpaper2011.pdf feefd5dc1bcbf5144b26227c223c537e PDF Text Text C9 Sun Journal, Lewiston, Maine, Tuesday, September 13,2011 ADVICE Greene girl’s story told in pamphlets DEAR SUN SPOTS: In your Aug. 27 column, a reader inquired about the monument on Gile Moun­ tain in East Auburn. I have enclosed a copy of a Sun Spots’ column from January 1988.1 saved the column at the time because it was a sad and interesting story. I en­ joy your column very much. —David, Poland Spring ANSWER: Thank you, Da­ vid! Sun Spots never would have found that old column without your help (pre-Internet). Since other readers prob­ ably will find it interesting, too, Sun Spots re-typed it. It read as follows: “This is a true and tragic sto­ ry of the young girl for whom the marker was erected. On top of the crest at Mount Gile is the marker, which is inscribed piest to die.’ On the south side “There are three sizeable is the inscription: ‘Heartbreak- pamphlets written about this ing, dearly beloved, adieu.’ tragedy. One is by her father, “This monument was placed entitled ‘Crown Won but Not by the parents of M. Louise Worn,’ another by the trustGreene, whose father could not ees of the Maine Wesleyan overcome his grief and bitter- Seminar and Female College ness at the death of his daugh- at Kents Hill, entitled ‘Libel ter, who was a kleptomaniac. Refuted: A Reply to Greene’ She had been accused of steal­ and the third, ‘A Lugubrious, Sun Spots ing and other misdemeanors Doleful Tale and Death of Lou(which her father refused to ise Green,’ by Judge George C. with the girl’s name: ‘M. Lou- believe) by the administrators Wing. ise Greene, age 22, daughter of the school at Kents Hill. She “For many years the Bowof Jonah and L.M. Greene of had been expelled and rather doin College graduating class Peru. Student for five years than go home, Greene boarded was brought on a field trip to of Kents Hill, 1868 graduate, the train to Auburn, where she Mount Gile to visit the markperished within two weeks bought poison in a pharmacy, er, just prior to graduation exof graduation, a victim of the wandered out to Mount Gile at er’cises. The pamphlets are prejudices and caprices of East Auburn and drank the poi- in the Maine Collection at the man.’ son (said to be iodine) and died Auburn Public Library under “On the north side of the on the spot where the monu- Kents Hill Tragedy and are for marker is inscribed: ‘I could ment was erected in her mem- in-library reading only.” have lived for one friendly ory. She was found by a hunter The current Sun Spots hand grasp and thought it hap- after an extensive search. checked with Suzanne, the li­ brarian for the local section in Auburn Public Library, to see if the pamphlets are still available to patrons. Suzanne said she “verified that we do have all three pamphlets, they are in poor shape but readable. They are bound together and catalogued as ‘The crown won but not worn: or, M. Louise Greene, a student of five years at Kent’s Hill, Me., by Jonas Greene.’ The call number is Local History CT 275 .G77 G6. It is in our local history collection and is for in-library use only, as your correspondent states.” DEAR SUN SPOTS: I am writing in response to Chickie Gorey (Aug. 30) who was looking for a snagit. At Craft-Mania we sell the Snag Nab-It for $2.19. It is used for repairing snags in knits and wovens. — Lee,_ lmdl@prodigy.net ANSWER: Thanks for ex­ plaining the snag-it’s use tothose of us who are craft-impaired! This column is for you, our readers. It is for your questions and comments. There are only two rules: You must write to the column and sign your name (we won't use it ifyou ask us not to). Please include your phone n umber. Letters will not be returned or answered by mail, and telephone calls will not be accepted. Your letters will appear as quickly as space allows. Address them to Sun Spots, P.O. Box4400,Lewiston,ME042434400. Inquiries can also be emailed to sunspots@sunjournal.com. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Greene, Louise Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Sun Journal, Lewiston, Maine. September 13, 2011 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource September 13,2011 https://archives.kentshill.org/files/original/6/26/Collections_LouiseGreene_Newapaper1958.pdf 7820b256dd8fac648810f34f7bcb1ecd PDF Text Text Marne WtoirD>i>eiaft Maidks nn i By FRANK W. LOVERING off carrying millions of years and consciousness of her guilt tim of your revenge, persecu­ before. led her to commit suicide tion and tyranny was found Regularly each Fall as part bS -?.re: ---rather than face her parent. That would be the place! of certain Bowdoin College Father Never* Forgot In that sense alone she was a dead in Auburn yesterday. . . ! fraternity initiations, and as Her ~ father, Jonas Greene, martyr to the prejudice and Our opinion is that jou are a one objective of the Bates would never forget, nor let caprice of man.” base scoundrel and a black­ Freshman class ride, neo- others. He bought a small area A barrage of pamphlets was hearted murderer, and we, Phytes from issued by the contending par­ every one of us, not only con­ ------ -Brunswick „„„ in the andforest, indicated today Lewiston climb Mount Gile at by granite markers as about 30 ties. ■ The father published a. sider you so, but others look East Auburn, where they are feet square; and had a costly book, “The Crown Won But upon you in the same light." ~ln 'each >o'’h anniversary of «*■required to find in the woods monument set on exposed Never Worn.” The Auburn <On the a monument set by an angry ledge straight up beside the lawyer read all of these and young student's death the ■I and grief-stricken father in boulder. The marble memorial said “Jonas Greene’s book may mother wrote the Head Master memory’ of his 22 - year - old and the great rock are fenced 'lead one to think Miss Greene's to jog his memory—if need be. daughter who took her life with square iron bars let into offences might have been con­ Tire lawyer, Wing, summed the year after the Civil War. ornamental cast iron posts, doned and her face saved. But up his renew of the case in The Bowdoin pledges hunt hollow, rising from octgaonal the facts stand forth that she these words: “The efforts of out the granite shaft by flash­ bases and capped with urns admitted her guilt, and the Jonas Greene to injure and conclusion must obtain that' defame the reputation of a light around midnight, and surmounted by acorns. must copy word for word the Where the posts receive the she was the victim of ‘the school and its head but cut­ 1 three inscriptions to prove they rails there is an applique of prejudice and caprice of man,’ ting in enduring ‘stone an as­ visited the eerie spot. Because rosettes to form the standard that prejudice and caprice are sertion of the martyrdom of of .this tradition the inscrip- old-time cemetery fence. The best expressed in the passion­ his daughter, finds no justifi­ tions are never quoted fully in bottoms of the posts are dow- ate and vindictive conduct of cation other than his own ca­ print. her father, and cannot be pricious and prejudiced spirit eled into granite blocks. One line lifted from the text The monument stands on a found in the officers and which warped his judgment and embittered his heart.” has been the subject of debate granite pedestal 30 inches teachers of the Seminary.” Jonas Greene's printed ti­ ever since the monument was square, bedded in mortar on Resentful Spirit set. In it the father of M. the ledge; and springs from a .The girl’s mother took the rade put the affair wholly on Greene of East Peru, moulded 10-inch base two feet situation in the same unbe­ the shoulders of Kent's Hill i Louise Maine, expressed his opinion square. Rising eight feet the lieving and resentful spirit as Seminary. The contending which a stone-cutter preserved shaft tapers to a slightly bev­ the husband and father did. publications led to embattled for posterity: the girl was “A eled top. The upper half of On October 14, 1866, tile day sessions of the trustees. After martyr to the prejudice and the monument has chamfered after the girl’s body was found every fact had been combed caprice of man.” corners, but the faces into on Mount Gile (formerly more out the trustees issued a Miss Greene was within six which the inscriptions are cut pleasingly named Oak Hill) pamphlet which cleared the weeks of graduation fl-om are at right angles to the cor­ Mrs. Greene wrote Head Mas­ school of Greene's fiery allega­ tions, and Head Master Torter Torsey: Maine Wesleyan Seminary and ners. Female College at Kent’s Hill, Two of the inscriptions are “Mr. Torsey—Sir: The'vic- sey, a noted teacher, as well. Readfield. She had been sent puzzling: the third out of the j home by the Headmaster, Dr. ordinary. Nearly all the text is H. T. Torsey, accused as a in italics. The first inscription 1 the visitor sees is on the west raffles. ■;3 Clothing of other girls had side: “I could have died for been found in her room. Those the friendly handclasp and who defended her said it was |thought it happiness to die.” -|“a matter of mixed-up laun- This “ is from the despondent dry.” But she had a skeleton girl’s last letter homo. key, and admitted taking The east face of the marble . $5.00 from a student’s purse. carries the words, extraor­ Discovered By Hunter dinary until explained: Miss Greene’s body was “Heart breaking. Dearly be­ * found by a hunter in the loved, adieu.” ■ :.i shadow of a boulder October Tears The Veil 13 1866, coincidentally a Fri­ booklet day. She had taken poison the A ----_ by . Atty. George G. afternoon of Wednesday, May Wing, Jr., who lived in Au23, five months and a half be- burn, t‘~_, tears the veil from this fore That tragic day Spring had mystery. As Miss Greene pre­ returned to brighten the rough pared for her rendezvous with she took her class ” ring wood road that winds on a death ’ ”” shelf to the top of Mount Gile from a finger in’ her dormitory . Spring, with gold and room, as well as her gold sleeve scarlet honeysuckle blossoms buttons; and removed from her and lady’s slippers and jack- neck the cord on which she in-the-pulpit nodding drows­ had long worn the tiny key ■ to a trinket chest. These she ilyThe si t u a t i o n she had cherished as the dear posses­ brought upon herself preyed on sions of her school life. She iher mind. She did not have sealed them in an envelope, the courage to go to her home wrote on it the words quoted. ______ ____ distant folded the thin package and in East Peru 20 miles had determined what she put it in her trunk. . . the ... Kent’s Qn front pane] appear would do. "She ‘took '’■Till stage to Lewiston, 27 miles Miss Greene's name, age and away, and passed several hours parentage; her home! town, m Auburn across the river that the date of her death and, morning. She had been seen among other statements the Irving but her. apparently controversial phrase of her Inscription on monument to girl student v.ho o^mought condition did not father. “A martyr to the pre­ took poison after she was suspended from a Maine 4 register with a drug clerk who, judice and caprice of man.” seminary: under one pretext or another, Attorney Wing turned this barbed shaft which was aimed M. LOUISE GREENE E01Shfewande°red slowly along at the Kent’s Hill Seminary AE. 22 yrs. tu? dusty road toward East Head Master, to direct its luburn. and suddenly, through stinging impact on the father. dau. of budding trees, saw Mount Wing wrote in an analysis of Jonas & L. M. Greene the case: of Peru, Me. GiA’few rods up the grade she “. . . If her father was the passionate, vindicative man his A student of five years at Kent’s Hill, a mem­ own printed pamphlet shows ber of the College graduating class of 18G6, who it m^eand looked about. Fifty him to have been, Louise perished here in May within two weeks of grad­ ^afedowm the slope through Greene knew she had to meet uation. Tet brush at her left was the that condition when she went ,___ _______ thC7,H top of a great boulderfrom the Seminary in discrace A martyr to the prejudice, and caprice of man. had wearied . . . and fear of her father I f i J sr ■: SB *** L-;■ � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Greene, Louise Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Portland Sunday Telegram September 28,1958 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource September 28,1958 https://archives.kentshill.org/files/original/6/27/Collection_LouiseGreene_Newspaper1979.pdf 351c50561d833b80a570bcc7adff79c2 PDF Text Text LEWISTON DAILY SUN LEI5IST0W, ME. D. 32,000 !<OVT A New England Newsslip pACT Workers Uncover Gravestone Mystery I By SCOTTL.PARKIN Ten young people from the Lewiston Auburn area were working on a cemetery restoration this fall, when they stumbled upon a lone monument on Mount Gile in Auburn. Inscribed on one side was the inscription “A Martyr to the Prejudice and Caprice of Man.” The name M. Louise Greene was etched above. With that information in hand, and their curiosities aroused, the teen agers, all participants in the Androscoggin Comprehensive Training Program (ACT), began to in­ vestigate the mystery of Miss Greene. With some help from counselors, they dug for clues at local libraries and in the newspaper, and a few even went to talk to the West Peru town manager, who knew about the Greene family history. They uncovered a tale of suicide and grief. Martha Louis Greene was a student at Kents Hill Seminary in 186G. but was suspended for allegedly^stealing a fellow student’s clothes. Apparently fearing what her father would say about her suspension. Martha took a stage to Lewiston. At a city pharmacy, she bought poisonand walked into the Mount Gile woods. Her corpse was found by a hunter on Oct. 13,1866. The ACT group found out that her father, Jonas Greene, decided to inscribe Martha’s monument with the above in­ scription. It was meant to remind the seminary of the suicide for all time. He also published a pamphlet denouncing the seminary. According to ACT Outreach Worker Marie Stevens, the 10 participants in the project were proud of what they had ac­ complished "They really learned from the experience,” she said. “These are kids who dropped out of high school They really enjoyed it.” Ms. Stevens pointed out that most young people in ACT’S Training Readiness lor Youth have been disillisioned with with education. TRY programs attempt to rekindle interest in learning. “The kids have to really want something from our program. We try to teach them basic skills.” she noted. "A lot of young people think their situation is hopeless. By coming here, they do have something positive going for them." Ms. Stevens believes that education does not seen very importamt to parents in the area, and that effects the young people. "Dropouts seem to be on the rise.” Ms. Stevens said. According to Ms. Stevens, the typical participant in the TRY program is from an economically disadvantaged home. All young people have to meet Comprehensive Employment Training Act 'CET V guidelines, be unemployed and be a resident of Androscoggin County. ' W-' I : M1 ’ I / .I /YGr 11 ■'; i -r:~. “i'. I i I C'Ai t i -v ' -v • - w. v A ACT GROUP UNCOVERS MYSTERY These participants in the Androscoggin Comprehensive Training Program did historical research into this lone monument on Mount Gile in Auburn They discovered a sad tale of suicide and bitterness.’Left to right are Laurie Scam- mon. Doug Bragg, Jeanette Wright. Rachel Grady, Kelly Twitchell. Emily Searle istandingi, Janet Wood. Debra Cyr, Sheila Girard Bottom right: Mark Lauze, Tina Gervais. (Staff photo by Wardwell) M � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Greene, Louise Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Newspaper Story from the Lewiston Daily Sun November 7,1979 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource November 7,1979 https://archives.kentshill.org/files/original/6/29/Collection_LouiseGreene_Newspaper1988.pdf 4fa3b89b713382f3f147e1987213362e PDF Text Text Something has been bothering me for years. Many, many years ago, while hunting in East Auburn on Mt. Gile, I came across a small stone marker erected in the mem­ ory of a young girl. The marker was aged at that time. I asked around town and was told by a resi­ dent that he knew of the stone and that the young girl had been a stu­ dent at Kents Hill and due to some misunderstanding in her grades had become distressed and walked from Readfield to where she had collapsed. Does Sunspots know the true story? Willard Grover, Sabattus This is a true and tragic story of the young girl for whom the marker was erected. On top of the crest at Mt. Gile is the marker which is inscribed with the girls name, “M. Louise Greene, age 22, daughter of Jonah and L.M. Greene of Peru. Student for five years of Kents Hill, 1868 graduate, perished in May within two weeks of graduation, a victim of the prej­ udices and caprice of man”. On the north side of the marker is in­ scribed “I could have lived for one friendly hand grasp and thought it happiest to die”. On the south side, is the inscription “Heartbreaking, dearly beloved, adieu.” This mon­ ument was placed by the parents of M. Louise Greene, whose father could not overcome his grief and bitterness at the death of his daughter, who was a kleptoma­ niac. She had been accused of stealing and other misdemeanors (which her father refused to be­ lieve) by the administrators of the school at Kents'Hill. She had been expelled,.and rather than go home, Greene boarded the train to Au­ burn where she bought poison in a pharmacy, wandered out to Mt. Gile at East Auburn and drank the poison (said to be iodine) and died on the spot where the monument was erected in her memory. She was found by a hunter after an ex­ tensive search. There are three sizeable pamphlets written about this tragedy. One is by her father entitled “Crown Won but Not Worn,” another by the trustees of the Maine Wesleyan Seminar and Female College at Kents Hill enti­ tled “Libel Refuted: A Reply to Greene”; and the third entitled “ A Lugubrious, Doleful Tale and Death of Louise Greene”, by Judge George C. Wing. For many years, the Bowdoin College graduating class was brought on a field trip to Mt. Gile to visit the marker, just prior to graduation exercises. The pamphlets are in the Maine Collec­ tion at the Auburn Public Library under Kents Hill Tragedy and are for in-library reading only. l\ J � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Greene, Louise Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Lewiston Sun Newspaper, January 14,1988 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource January 14, 1988 https://archives.kentshill.org/files/original/6/30/Collections_LouiseGreene_Newspaper1966.pdf c598c520dfb681fe3d27a28d8f2edd86 PDF Text Text PAGE TWENTY I I itlM, p it ; v,< >. .7 Of cc.I' ■ V Eg®?:' 2.-» -Mil Ia. -—------■popsHi ... - r <■■; i: , . n r? " M r <® ' •• 7-trt •tjv'V isvu.-x. . . :: f ' IK o .. .•.iil».... • .?■??<■ Hif i • : - ■ '■ ' .ll t® ®. ■SO SWEI r-;->*1,i ■<■■■' ■■- ■' «■■?'•><.s.' ■<■■ -.''iti Staff Photo By Wardwelli FORGOTTEN MONUMENT ON MOUNT GILE — This 1 monument to the tragic suicide death of a 22-ycar-old girl lies almost hidden on the west side of Mount Gile overlook­ ing Lake Auburn. After a hundred year's, the fence is rusted 1 with age and the marker with its bitter epitaph has been toppled by weather or needless visitors, but the granite still clearly shows a father’s indictment against “the pre­ judice and caprice of man.’ The monument is located about 50 feet to the left of the trail up the mountain from the end of the Oak Hill Road. I "Caprice of Man" ML Gffe Monument Recalls Century-Old Tragic Story >3 © - a 1 "instead 'of heading for her ?hnoeugfhrKaPXsTdio”nd Ih. fore long, the cimtrover y -:'r.ar. i tra':- ew.iil fiar/d. H r mrdiirr v.rote the headma-P-r of lite -Pool. “VJnde 1: t pares v;i life i n] nnr, a of e;: ,, tj.e animver ary of roar I.o ,i c dentil n-'iin I .Lai! write t, p.i.r, -c Iione.-lly and firniiy >> -iiei <■ wei'e the cause of liar dcatii,” Her father, fo.ia L. ?' Green.:. p-bii-h, a a iar e 1 ' inpi.i.'. “I h" Cro.'.T. V.’on lint ri'i tile Llrrm for :r;“ '-H' ' teilm; Of. id . ofi.'n.'i: ■.-.rr, 6 a nil a. pabii-in ■> ronort a felt VI Vi By DAVID SARGENT ............................. investigation, and..... Greene pub­ A hundred years ago this lished another pamphlet. month, residents of Greene claimed that Louise Androscoggin County were had lost clothing in the school laundry and had been forced to caught up in a passionate i ' ’ take other clothes to replace itcontroversy over the suicide death of a young, heartbroken The officals alleged she had a girl. Today, a monument to her skeleton key to open the other memory on Mount Gile lies in students’ rooms, and had con­ disrepair almost hidden from fessed to stealing $5. sight and largely unknown to For months, the facts andl the hundreds of people living the event event were were I fantasies of the within the. limits of its debated, and eventually the dede-l irn'intipanoramic view of East Auburn tails were compiled in a book unci the lake. !*»* ’ ■ intuvov fianrita and the lake. ! by the Auburn lawyer George The .... death ------ of - . M. Louise c. Wing. Greene, 22-year-old student at •;; ,.w ~ “If she is „a victim of the Kent’s Hill Female College, prejudice and caprice off rman, aroused sentiment in the area (hat prejudice and . .. - . caprice - .! are to a fever pitch, but feelings best expressedI in I.. th? I... passionate were divided. Some blamed and vindictive conduct of her! college officials for driving the father and not in the offices of I girl into taking her own life (he teachers,” he said. ““'In In that I and thought of her as “a martyr sense alone was she a martyr to I to the prejudice and caprice the prejudice and caprice of I of man,” as the granite man.” I monument at the site of her Wing believed that fear of her! death says; others believed that father and consciousness of her I feelings of guilt and fear of guf]t led to her suicide. i an unforgiving father led to her often, time brings events I death. such as this into perspective, I The tragic series o f but a century has only served | circumstances began on May to dim the facts surrounding 26, 1866, when Louise was called Louise’s death. In fact the cirto the office of the headmaster: cuins(ancOs Of (his incident a at the college. i too years ago have been re-i She was told that clothing peafe(i tjmB and again in one belonging to other students had form .. or another, and. after: been found in her room, and tragedy has struck, the charges with graduation only two weeks of “prejudice and caprice of away, she was ordered to return man” begin to fly. to her home at Peru. Louise The eight-foot granite obelisk went to her room, tore the gold on Mount Gile lies fallen in buttons from her sleeve, took front of .the iron-fenccd bottldoff her class er (oday, a victim of either] — ring, and tore M th: ■>;___ the string ~:th with h: her- trunk >— key| weather of wanton vandalism. from her neck. Putting these The bitter epitaph on the front ' -‘■•"3 tne ®e|The j... in an envelope; on which she can be read by pU]jjng -.1 the had written, “Heart breaking — ]eaves anc] branches away, but Dslipped ,?arly, ,,be 0Vbetween ud? bidden underneath ar? the ‘a'dsn “..j^coufMVdied slipped them them between the the pages, pages, ywordSi Cfluld haye died for home, Louise took the stage: to Lewiston. No one can what liimielit.- were ”°'na throiwri her mind, but er.il people saw her cning as -lie w.iiliwl along the street.. Siw l;0ll ..;’t Ol,)P pel',>n a: one of tile stores, and then d: appeared S-.-n, particver... formed, br it e, .:-i un'i'. Oc'oiier tha; mm!, r found her i, < i. id !1 .1 In .de tile !0 r A' Kiel; • r, 'Jo int G.ie where the m a in. in ..., rn iii d f.ne 4, bar,,'! at Ea-t Pera. ' s a Ugnt n happiness to die. ‘ ‘ i M 1=] © a i e a s > i i 0 > £i © Ia 49 SS � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Greene, Louise Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Lewiston Daily Sun /Lewiston-AuburnTuesday Morning.May 24,1966 https://archives.kentshill.org/files/original/6/31/Collections_Louisegreene_NewspaperMay1966.pdf a6b4c4dfa35248e8cca84f048617a7b5 PDF Text Text Konneboc Journal, Augusta, Tuesday, May 31,196& 5 Bitter Anniversary o o By DAVID SARGENT she a “martyr to the prejudice ly and firmly believe were tile the issue were brought together The Lewiston Sun and caprice of man," as the en- icause of her death." in a book by an Auburn lawyer, Pamphlet AUBURN (AP)—One hundred graving on the weathered gran­ George C, Whig. tars ago this month, residents ite monument says? Her father published a pamph­ “If she is a victim of the pre­ Androscoggin County were The tragic series of events let, "The Crown Won But Not judice and caprice of man, that mght up in a passionate con- began May 26, 1866, when Worn.” claiming that Louise prejudice and caprice are best oversy over the suicide of a Louise was called to the office had lost clothing in the school expressed in the passionate and I >ung, heartbroken girl. of the headmaster at the col­ laundry and had been forced to vindictive conduct of her father Today, a monument to her lege. take other clothes to replace it. and not in the offices of the emory on Mount Gile lies in She was told that clothing be­ The officials replied that she teachers,” he said. srepair almost hidden from longing to other students had had a skeleton key to the other The eight-room granite obelisk ght and largely unknown to been found in her room, and rooms, and had confessed to on Mount Gile now lies fallen io hundreds of people living with graduation only two weeks stealing $5. in front of the rusted iron fence ithin the limits of its pan- away, she was ordered to le- Eventually, all the sides of around the boulder, a victim of •amic view of Lake Auburn turn to her home at Peru. either weather or wanton van­ ■ id a busy state highway. dalism. The bitter epitaph on She placed her class ring, I Divided the front can be read by pulling the gold buttons from her I The death of M. Louise school uniform, and her trunk I tire leaves and branches away, / reene, 22-year-old student at key in an envelope, printed! but hidden underneath are the-' ents Hill Female College, "Heart breaking — Dearly be-l Il words, “1 could have diecLpr ■oused strong sentiment in the loved, adieu" on the outside, I Bone friendly hand gravtXnd •ea, but feelings were divided, and slipped it between I thought it happiness^ he] ad the girl brought the pages of her diary. Then, in-] agedy upon herself, or was stead of heading for home, she] took the stage to Lewiston. i t * ElStilB#ISib Poison Si. FORGOTTEN MONUMENT—This memorial to the tragic death of a 22-year-old girl lies almost hidden on the west side of Auburn’s Mount Gile overlooking Mount Auburn. After 100 years, the fence is rusted with age and the >■ xAtf ’ , ’ i : -• marker with its bitter epitaph has been toppled by weather or heedless vandals, but the granite still clearly shows a father’s indictment against the “prejudice and caprice of man.” She bought poison and then] disappeared. Search parties] were sent out, but it wasn’t un-| til October that her body was! found huddled beside the huge] boulder on the mountain where] the monument was erected. She! was buried at East Peru. Before long, controversy I flared. Her mother wrote the, school officials, “While God | spares your life and mine, as often as the anniversary of poor Louise’s death returns I shall write to those who we honest- � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Greene, Louise Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Kennebec Journal, Augusta, May 31,1966 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource May 31,1966