1917_Harvest Siftings Part2.pdf

(3581 KB) Pobierz
Harvest Siftngs Part 2
. (PART 11.)
- -
"&r we wrestle trot ayuitist flesh uild blood, brtt against prirlcipulilics, uglxirrst puwcrs, agcrirrst thc rulers of tit^'
of iht world, against spirittial m'ckcdncss iitr high p1accs."-Eplresiar~s 632. .
[l'fcp.rcd by tIrc President of lllc WATCH TOWER
SOCIETY by rcqucst.of t11e Board of Directors. Not for general
dlstr~but~onbut sent free on request.]
ITH one accord, I believe, all the consecr:~ted ner, becausc they weze not legal members of the Board, and
will agree that our great Adversary would be thcrcfore coultl not be put out. The President has no power
pleased to have us occupy our time in the dis- to put anyone off the Board. I never attempted such a thing.
cussion of our differences, to the neglect of the There were four vacnncics on the Board, and the Charter
Harvest work, especially as the Harvest work provides that the President, after these vacancies have existed .
is drawing to a close and greater efforts in that for thirty days, shaN appoint proper persons to fill ~uch
direction must be put forth. ctcs. That is all I did The reasons for making the appoint-
All of us are inclined to exclaim, "How . ments are set forth in HARVEST SIFTINGS,
pages 16 and 17.
strange that we should have such trials in the . Neither is the issue whether or not the Directors werc
Church nowl" Then we are reminded of the grother lRusselfs Directors and whether the present Board
words of St Peter, !'Beloved, think it .not - !a%? Brother Rutherford's Directors. Brother Russell never
strange concerning this fire among ~011." (1 had a Board of 'Directors. I have none, The Directors of
Peter 4:12.) It will require calmness, sobriety of mind, pur- 'the WATCII TOWER BIBLE AND TRACTSOCIETYhold office by -
itr of heart and an increased measure of the Lord's Spirit rhson of the law of the State of Pennsylvania and the Char-
grace to those who keepbin mind the ultimate purpose of our any persok as a member of the Board of Directors,'
warfar& The Kingdom of Heaven is at hand, and every- The real ,issue is, UloJ ihe President justified in appointing
tiling that car! be shaken will now be shaken. ('Hebrews forrr members of fhe Board of Directors, which he did on thc -
12:26-28.) Our great desire is to enter into that Kingdom. 12th day of July, 1917, to fiN vacancies then exkting, and to tb
Uppernost In the mind of every Christian should be the hold officeuntil the next annual elecfion fo be held by the
tllought, What can I do to insure my gaining that great prize? Shareholders on the 5th day of January, 1918? An~tlring
To say that any of us are free from mistakes is npt in aside from the facts bearing upon-tltij question heclouds the
the stom. The Lord will supply all the needed ter of the Corporation. Brother ~Russell'sWill did not name
keeping with the truth, .We are all imperfect, and-the ludg- tsme. The paper published by our opposing brethresl-s~eks 4
,.merit of everyone is more or less warped. Surely it is due to, bring in a great many other things which have nothing to
time for us to heed the words of the Apostle, "Above all do with the real issue, but which have a tendency to confuse.
things, have.fervent [overspreadmg] love amongst yourselves, They even attempt to show that some of us are criminals
for love covers a multitude of defects." and should be sent to jail because of the action taken to safe-
"Light after Darlmess" is a misnomer for a paper issued guard sthe interests of the friends generally. Not in defense
by. Brothers Hirsh, Hoskins, Wright and Ritchie, and is not of myseIf do I publish this statement of explanation, but
in fact a reply to HARVESTSIF~INGS. I shall refer to it herein that those who desire an explanation may have it To this
as "Opponents' Paper," having in mind the brethren who pre- end, and that the side issues may be eliminated and that the
pared and published it. Among them are not included Brother friends may see the real situation, I am making this reply,
A. N. Pierson, because, as I am advised, he had no part in which will be sentto those who wish it.
the publication of said paper. When it was ready to be pub-
SIFTINGSthe facts leading
lislred he was asked for hi signature, but refuse&to sign it, up to the adon taken by myself, I now here call attention
;Ind stated he would have nothing more to .do with thelr pub to some of the statements made in the. "Opponents' Paper"
lications, or words to that effect. It will be observed, how- relating to the facts in connection therewith, and let every-
ever, that a letter formerly issued at Boston and containing one of ~ou
Having reviewed m HARVEST
ille name of Brother Pierson was so adroitIy arranged at the "usurper , and am "grasping for power",. as I have been
conclusion of "Opponents' Paper" as to lead the unsuspect- charged. Personally, the charge does not effect me, but I
determine whether or .not I am 'a liar," a
ing to believe that said document had been signed and issued have been reminded by some of the brethren that my posi-
by Brother Pierson. The authors of the "Opponents' Paper," tion is more or less a public one, hence it is due others that
con- I make this statcment. Arst let us dispose of some of the
tains no less than one hundred untruthful charges and mis- side issues before examining the real issue.
- leading statements, and since there are much less than half
. -
.that number of pointr discussed jn HAXM~T
it fol-
lows that theauthors of "Opponents' Paper". place myself,
Brothers Van Arnhurgh, Hudgings, Macrnillan, Wisdom, The "Opponent' Paper" charges' (page 3,.5e?ond column) '
Cohen, Herr, Hemery, -garden, McCIoy, AzaaKenzie and mem- that "Brother Russell had not been dead more than a few-
bers of the Bethel family in the Annanias Club. The rash- days when his Will was declared to be illsgal,-%d therefore
ncss of such a chirgc must be apparent to all who look at not binding." The evident purpose was to con- the thought
the facts from an unbiased viewpoint. I am reminded that that I ofla fhc gugfy one. I here state that I Kaai.encver tie-
St. Jude said tst even our Lord did not bring a railing ac- dared Brother Russell's Will illegal and therefore not bid-.
cusation againstzatan, but contented Himself by saying, "The ing. The only quesli?n ever raised about Brother Russell's %ll
Lord rebuke the."-Jude 9.
w1licI1 it is not here necessary-to repeat. -
Let us look tor a moment at the real issue in this matter. Some were disappointed wKen they heard Brothcr R$s-
Tlle issue is not Brother Van Amburgh and Brother Rnther- sell's Will read; I wis not among that class. Shortly
ford vs. the others named-far from it. We Iravc nothing i~ftcrBrother Hirsll bcgan to soul~dotlt the friends to see
against any of tlrosc brothers. but would bc glad to help them. what would bc the srntimcnt with refcrcr~c~
clearly set forth on page 19, column 2 of HARVESTSI~N~,
to setting
Ncither is thc issue whethcr they were put out as Inenl- firotl~erRusscTl's Will. Tn proof of this I submit here\\-ith
bcrs of the Board of Directors in a proper or improper man. the afidavit of two witnesses:
with freedom of speech declare that HARVEST SIF~NGS
was concerning his. voting shares, the facts of which @e
from the Charter with the evident purpose of trying to show
that they were in the mind of Brolher Russell at the tinre he
wrote. his WilG and that he was safeguarding them against
a spirit of ambition, or pride, or headship. By carefully read-
ing it y& will see that the first quotation from his Will re:
fers to the fact that he was fo have control of T%E WATCH
Town and other publications during his life. This had no
reference whatsoevei to fhe .management of the detailed
affairsof the SOCIEN. It will be noted that the quotations
from the Will refer in express terms to .the Editorial Comi
mittre and have no reference whatsoever to the Directors, for
the manifest reason that Brother Russell knew that no one
person can name and provide for the Directors of a corpora-
tion. After quoting these statements from the Will with
reference to the Editorial Committee, the? the "Opponents'
Paper" proceeds to draw a concIusion, saying, "Thus it wi!l
be seen that after Brother wsell's death the Board of Dl-
vectors became his su.ccessors in the contro! of the SO'S
affairs," whereas not .one word in the Will even intimated
such a thing.
Permit me to say here that I have never for one moment
denied or even questioned the right of the Board of Directors
to corrtrol tlre affairs of tlri. WAXR TO= BIBLE AND TRACT
SOCIETY. The Board of :Directors are now in control, but
there is a vast difference between being in control and muit-
aging the defails of the work of a corporation. My position
has always been, and now is, that the four brethren in ques-
tion were not leffally members of the Board of Directors in
'July of this year, and because of their avowed threat and
purpose to disrupt and disorganize the work, I exercised the,
power which the law and the Lord had placed in my hands to
appoint members of the Board of Directors who would work
in harmony and for the SomElr's general welfare. Had the
four brethren continued in a quiet, orderly manner to perform
their duties, and had not manifested a disposition to disrupt
the work and made threats that they would tie up the funds
by law suits and wreck the S,
State of New York)
. CountyofItings ) SS.
- WE, the undersigned, Mrs. J. B. Walbach and Miss Mary
U. Walbach, both of Brooklyn, New York, do voluntarily
iiiake the following statement under oath:
That on ordbout Nov. 2d, 1916, about two days follow-
ing Brother Russell's death and prior to the arrival of his
hody in Brook!pn, Brother R. H. Hirsh.came out of the Bethel
I-Iome and jolned us on the opposite side of the street and
walked with u3 two blocks, durrng which time he made the
following remajks in our presence; the time being about 2.30
in the afternoon, following the reading of our dear Pastor's
\:ill in the Bethd Diniing~Roomat the noon meal. He said:
"What do you think of Broth~r~RusselllsWill? I,
. myself, do not think it represents his more recent wishes.
It was written, as you know, many years ago; and I thrnk
if should be broken; The Will as it stands, is not the
best arrangement for wrying on TEE WATCE TOWER,
and is really unjust to members of the Bethel Family.
Most of the brethren whom it mentions .for the Edito9al
Committee are sot now members of the Bethel Fam~ly,
ar.2 naven't had experience with such work anyway;
whereas there are brethren right here in the Home, now
rrtyself, for instance, who have had years of experience .
in arranging matter for the Tom;and I am certain that
if Brother Russell had written that Will more recently
he would have made it different, particularly in wnnec-
tion with the Editorial Staff. It takes experience to pub-
lish TRE.WATCHTOWER properly."
The above quotation is as nearly verbatim as it is possible
for US to recall. The conversation is quite clear in our minds
as it made a lasting impression on us both. .We felt appalled
that Brother Hirsh, or anyone else, should be discussing or
even thinking about such matters at such a time, even before
our beloved Pastor had $en buried. When he asked us if
we did not agree with hun that something should be done
: to break Brother Russell's Will we merely repped that we had
nothing to say about it. He was much exerused, and it was
readily apparent that he was grEeved over nct having been
mentioned in the Will as a regular member of the Editorial
Committee instead of being only named as a substituta He
c!eclared to us that three of the Committee should be asked
' to resign.
Snbscribed and .sworn to before me
this 1st day of ~ctober,~.
there would pever hay
been any attenrpt even to call tn qrrestion the legabty of thew
office. The step was taken only as a last resort and as a safe-
guard until there could be an election held by the Share-
holders, and a Board elected. I have set forth in HARVEST
par;ticularly on page 16, the moving cause for ap-
pointing the four members of the Board.
"Opponents' Paper", pape 4, parapph 21, says, "The pur-
pose of the Directors wlshing to amend the By-laws was not
that the four members of the Board might take'over the
control of the So-, but that the Board might be restored
to its prfper position according to Brother Russell's Will and
Charter. A.4ain.w~ reiterate that Brother ~Russell'sWill did
not name a single one of the four as members of the Board
of Directors, nor did he attemot to do that which he could
not do. namely, provide in his Will for a Board of Directors
The Charter, of course, orovides for an organized Board for
the Socrm, which the Sm
D., 1917.
Notary Public.'
Sfy commission expires March, 1918.)
"Opponents' Paper" has so juggled the Will of Brother
JZus~ell, thc Charter of the Corporation, and the paper written
111 1894 by Brother Russell, as to confuse in the minds of the
rcadcr the whole matter, and anyone not familiar with these
papers is apt to be misled.
The Charter, of course, provides for a Board of Direc~tors,
lrut trot one .of fhe ppposers is named in thut Charter, nor did
Brother Russell ever name them, or any one of them, as Di-
rectors in his 'Will or in any document he has ever written.
Brother .Russell's Will only incidentally mentions that "The
Socds Board of Directors shall make proper provision for
the Editorial Committee." . No one is named in his Wr11 as
a member of the Board of Directors. Why. then, should these
brethren continually hold before your eyes the thought that
the President has set aside Brother Russell's Board of Di-
rectors? Nothing is further from the real truth.
Tune and a~ain
now has, and which in' facf
is in control of the affairs of the Socrrr~,and which is work
ina in harmony with the Shareholders' wishes and the polic?
followed-by the SOCIETY for the past thirty-three years.
namely; that the President shall be the executive officer and
e.enera1 manager, subject. of course, to the control of the
Board of Directors, and the Board subject to the control of
the Shareholders.
"Opponents' Paper", in an attempt to convey the thought
that I am an autocrat, in a bold headline on page 5, says,
"Brother Rutherford's By-Laws Passed."' We sometimes .
wonder why men can so far 'forget themselves in malanx '
statements1 Why do they have such a bpse of memory? -
With stronner reason should brethren in the Truth speak in
harmony &th the facts.
Shortly before Brother usse sell's death he had'stated that
he desired to put the Sm
they quote from a booldet issued by
Brother RusseEZn 1894, more than twenty-three years ago, at
which time hesas calling attention to why he and his wife,
Mrs. Russell, should control the SOCIETY.
more particularly on an effi-
ciency basis, and that all who remained at Bethel shouI&be
able to render and -should render effiuent sgrvice. Such facts
were brought to the attention of the Fxecutive Commitfee.
which was comoosed of Brothers Rltchie, Van Amburgh end
myself. We discussed ' the matter and, decided to ask ihe
Shareholders to oass some by-laws-at Prttsburgh. proceeding
unan the theory that the voice of the people, the Shareholders,
should be heard. Accordinglv. I was requested by the other
members of the Executive Gmmittee, presumably because
T am a lawyer bv profession, to draw up such by-laws and
suhmit thcm to Brothers Van Amhvgh and %tchie, which
ilicv fullv anproved. Brother Ritthre, as Chaxrman of the
Annnxl Meeting at Pittsbargh. appo~rlted a committee of&ree
liretlircn to examine and report to the convention these by-
law and resolutions. He carried these by-laws to Pittsburgh
Therein he said,
"Their [the Directors] usefulness it was understood would
come to the fr&t in the event of my-death." When he wrote
there words he had no thought of either Brothers .Ritchie,
Wright, Hoskins or Hirsh. because at that time none of them
were connected with the SDCIE~Y.
These words do not occur
in Brother Russell's Will, nor in the Charter; then it is mani-
fcstlv unfair that an attempt is made to try to incorporate
these words in Brother Russell's Will, or in the Charter.
Another evidence of unfairness is clearly manifest by the
statement on pace 5, column 1 in "Opponents' Paper". There
they quote extracts from the Will of Rrother.Russel1 and
and by his own hand delivered them to the committee. When
rlre committee returned I asked if I might see their report.
Sow note the discrepancy between the statement of "Op-
l~onents'Paper" and the real'facts. "Opponents' Paper" de-
liberately states that 1. had a well laid plan to get control of
the affairs of the S~CIETY,
that there is no power
in Heaven or on earth that could hinder their doing so.
"The words of the poet aprusmy confidence and the
desire of mv heark in this and all thinns:
'pen&, trouiled sonll thu neesat not tent;
Why grent Provlcler stlll 1s near* ,
Who led thee last will lead thee rtfli:
and that by threats and intimida-
tion I forced the committee to .report a by-law giving me *
control. The,facts are, not one word was said about that
section which refers 40 the executive officer and manager of
the corporatiott, aali the word 'kontrol" does not even appear
in the by-laws. The by-laws, as drafted, provided that the
President might +point :an Advisory Committee of three to
advise him apon wch matters as he might desire. The com-
rr~itteeon resolufipns had changed this by-law to read that
rhe.Board of .Directors, and not the President ~hould~app~ipt
fhcAdvisory Committee.. This was the onfy questron drs-
cussed between.nrysclf arrd the comntittee. Neither the law
nor the Charter provides for any Advisory Committee what-
soever, but I thought it well that anyone who succeeded
Brother Russell in office as President should have the benefit
of wise counsel from other consecrated Shareholders, either
in or outside of the .Board, towhom he could refer any
matters of importance, and that therefore the President alone
sl~ouldbe privileged to select his advisors. If you desire to
employ a lawyer, you wish to have the choosing of that .
lawyer; if you desire to employ a physician, you desire to
select the physiaan, because it xnvolves you personally. On
the same theory, if the President needed and wished advice
lte alone should be privileged to select his advisors. Thus I
argued with the Committee and they agreed with me. Brothers
Kitchie, Hirsh and Wright were present and heard this dis-
cussion, and they how that my statement here is the exact
truth. Why they have had such a lapse of memory I am not
able to state. I append herewith the statement of a member
of the Committee on By-laws who was present and who
corroborates my statement, and which shows that the charge
that I was at.tempting to get control 'is absolutely untrue:
Be calm. and slnk &to Els will.'. -- .
"May the Lord conhue to bless you in thc.service,
and grant you the needed strength to finish the great
work that the Lord has placed in you^ hands, is the -
earnest prayer of,
'!Yours in the service of the Master, '. -
R H. BBI~E%', .
At a meeting of the Board of Directors GHowhg the an-
nual meeting, these by-laws were passsd by the Board of Di-
rectors because that is the technical and legal requirement of
the charter. Then you might ask, why were they presented
to the Shareholders? I answer, because the Shareholders
constitute the Corporation, and while, technicalfy, the power
to enact by-laws resides in the Board,: yet everyone should
desire to abide by the voice of the majority of the Share- -
holders, believing that the Lord would speak through them.
We are all familiar .with the time-honored statement, "The
voice of the people is the supreme law." It is recognized that
Congress alone has the right. to pass laws, and yet Congress
must respond to the voice. of the people who are, in fatt,
the Government On the same principle, the Board of Di-
rectors of the WATCE TOWEB
would have no moral right to utterly disregard the wishes of
the Shareholders. These by-laws passed.were not my by-laws,
but the by-laws of the SOCIETY,
first approved by the Shar~-
holders, and then passed by the Board of Directors. Thur
enactment constituted a solemn compact which should be
binding on the parties.unless their enactment was procured
by fraud .or coercion. The brethren in question seem to
think it necessary to charge me with fraud and coercion in
order to 'show some excuse for their trying to set aside the
wishes of the Shareholders At the time of the passage of
these by-laws Brother Hirsh was not on the Board, but later
he joined three others with the avbwed purpose of trampliing
under foot the wishes of the Shar+olders, trying to repeal . .
the by-laws which were passed w~thoutquestion, and take
the management of the SOCI~Y'S affairs out of the President's
hands and put it into the hands of the "four" to manage the
same. I have never attempted at any time to get control of ;
the SOCIETY. I have merely diligently tried to perform the
duties of manager, and there is no corporation in the land,
of any consequence, but what has a manager aside from the
Board of Directors. None of the four brethren, or any others .
to my knowledge, have found fault with my management, or
shown any instances of ,mismanagement,
The P~oa~s
"N. S., Pittsburgh, Pa.
IN CE~ST:-In reading the paper
'Lieht after Darlmess' d am sorry to see matters put in
SU& an unfair way by the authors.
"In the first article, 'Our Present Counselor', the quali-
ties of justice and niercy seem to me to be sadly lacking.
I cannot help wondering if the author believes the words
of the Master in Matt. 7:2, 'With what judgment ye
judge, ye shall be judged,' and if so, why he should wish
the Lord to deal so unmercifully with him.
"I also see that the By-laws passed by the members of
at the election last January are mentioned in
:I way tl~atwould convey to the mind of the reader that
vou had demanded many changes to be made so as to
put more power into our hands. You perhaps remember
Charter gives the execu-
tive absolute control. I have stated heretofore why that
Charter was thus written. I have asked the Board of Di-
rectors of that corporation to provide for an Executive Com-
mittee of four to perform certain duties with reference to the
control of the Bethel Home and office, but this does not in
any manner effect the office of the President as General
Manager. There must be one head to every institution. I
am free to confess many might have been found to perform
this duty better than .myself, but since I had nothing to do
with putting myself In office it can hardly be -consistently
charged that I am responsible for being there. . .
On the 31st of July Brothers Hirsh and Hoskins were
what the point of di erence was. It was not whether the
President should be the Executive Officer or whether
tlrere should be an Advjsoty Committee,-these 'Lhings
llad been passed upon. It was merely as to who should
appoint the Advisory Committee. The By-laws provided
that the Secretary and Treasurer should always be a mem-
ber of the Advisory Committee, and two others to be
appointed. The thought of the committee on by-laws
was, that these two members should be appointed by the
Board of Directors while ur thought was, that as this
committee was to be the gesident's Advisory Commit-
tee, that the President sbould appoint these two members
of the Committee. One of the members of the Board of
Directors (possibly more) was present at that time and
he agreed with you on the matter, and the committee
then made fhe change, giving the President authority to
appoint these two members of his Advisory Committee.
"This was befsr-e the election, and had some one else
teen elected it would have applied to him just the same
as to you.
"The brinsg up of this matter of the By-laws has
helped us to .form a better estimate of the vslue of the
remainder orligl~tafter Darkness', and make a large
dipcount. 7
"I wish to say, dear Brother Rutherford, that I still
believe that 'The Lord of the .Harvest1 has full controI
of the situation, and that He is amply able-to direct the
work, yes, even withotit the aid of a Board of Directors
at all. I believe that the Lord makes no mistakes, nntl
I qm sure that if the Lord panted these four brethren
for good
cause. In this connection "Opponeflts' Paper'-charges that
other brethren and myself are "gtnlty of crhiinal offenses,
subject to criminal indictment and to swift and severe pun- -
ishment." The evident purpose of this is- to-~nateprejudice-
in the minds of the friends against us, and to show that we-
brethren are high-handed lawbreakers. Nw, Ue.brethren
really believe this charge, they should at 5ticc~ceaseto ad-
dress either of us as "brother." For this rea%n-.I feel sye
that they do not believe the charge. -
In 1911, at the instance of Bfother'lRusseIl, a by-law 6s
passed providing for'tht removal of a member of the PEOPLES
upon grounds therein state& The by-hw
provides that the rqoval shall .take.place at the annual m&t-
rng. Of course it is understood that when the annual meet-
ing is convened it can be legally adjourned from time to time
until final adjournment, and each adjourned session is still
the "annual meeting.* At the anntral meeting, January last,
several of the brethren who could, not be present gxve their
to direct the affairs of the SOCIETY,
proxies to others. The proxy, of course, carries the authority
to the holder to voie on anything thf comes before the an-
nual meeting. The annual meeting adjourned until some date
in March, to take up unfinished business. At the subsequent
meeting the President was absent and adjournment was had
to a still later date. The record shows that the annual meet-
ing was regularly, legally and propetly adjourncd until the
27th day of July, 1917, and of course when it met at this ad-'
journed session of the annual meeting its powers were iden-
tical to' what they were at the first meeting. A11 pro-ries werr
still in force~unlessrevoked in writing. 0p.e brother who
had moved away held some of these proxies and new proxies
were afterwds given to other brethren to vote, thereby re-
voking former proxies. They were in proper and legal form.
"1 feel constrained to write you in regard to a state-
ment appearing in the pamphlet, 'Light after Darkness.'
1 am not writing this with any feeling of ill-will toward
the brethren. instrumental in writing . that pamphlet '
but I fecl it is really m)r &ty to refute, in my case at
-8 least, the statement in the above mentioned pamphlet re-
garding some of the Pilgrim brethren being brought into
"Lansing, Mich., Sept. 18thl 1917. .
tile Bible House, filled with information and sent oct,
I was not once approoched,by any of the brethren im-
plicfted, so far as they personally were concerned.
Yours with brotherly love in the only thing worth
coiivened on the 27th day
of July in regular order and legally so. Prevlous notlces
,had been given to Brothers Hoskins..and Hirsh that at that
meeting charges would be held aga~nstthem. They were
present at the meeting on the 27th .of July;. a number of
other brethren were also present. k11 the proxies repre-
sented were presented at that time. The charges were read
to than and they both asked that the'-meeting be furthir ad-
journed to give them more time. The record discloses that
.at their instances the'motion was made and passed that the
meeting again adjourn until the.3lst of July, whicl~was dotle.
On the 3lst of July the adjourned annual meefing convened
again, legally and in the proper fom. The charges were
. read and testimony was heard on both sides, and then votes
were taken. Five votes were legally'bst that the two breth-
.ren named should not be removed, and one of these was a
proxy-they claimed seven votes, but the two indicted breth-
ren could not Iegally vote on a question involving their own
removal from the ~SS~CIAT~ON.
- v
"Sept. -26, 1917. "
"In the paper issued by the opposition, I noticed a
statement to the effect that the members of the Bethel
Family, the brethren at the .Tabernacle, and the Pilgrim
I~rethrenhad either been bribed or intimidated by the
President and therefore were permitted to remain in the
service of the SOCIETY.
"As one of the brethren above designated, I enter my
protest agai~rst suclr a -false assertion.
"During the month of August last I was privileged to
LC at Bethel and in all tl~osefour weeks, not once was I
approached on the subject: Not a word was written to
me by the SOCIETY
either before coming or since my go-
ing away from there, regarding the matter. .
"With Christian love, I remain.
"Your brother in Christ, W. J. THORN."
"Mason City, Iowa, Sept 23, 1917.
Twenty-three votes were'
legally cast in favor of removing .jhe brethren named, and
lrence they were removed, as provided by the by-law. Nearly
all of tliose who voted by proxy have since addressed letters to
tl~cbrethren who'held their proxies, approving the action;
and thus they were not only legally dst but subsequently had
the approval of the members. These facts are shown by the
official. record of the PEOPLES PULPIT
"J. F. Rutherford,
"Brooklyn, N. Y.
"Greetings I I am writing you in regard .to your letter
in the last TOWERjust read. The statement on page 9
of 'Light after Darkness' reprding the Pilgrims' being
influenced by anything.outside the publications, which have
come into my hands does not .in any sense apply to me.
My judgments are formed wholly from the statements
received from the SOCIETY
one is at liberty to inspect. l
Personally, I do not know who the information to
the "Brooklyn Eagle". which,it published. I do know that a
reporter from that paper called on me and related the details
of the trouble with the brethren-who issusd a'Opponents'
Paper". I asked the reporter to state who told him what he
had just related, and he refused to tell me. The reporter
then called upon me to make a statement. My only reply
was, "I have nothing to say." I do know that the statement
in the "Brooklyn Daily Eagle" seriously reflected upon
Brother Russell as well as other brethren. Subsequently I
llacl a talk wit11 Brother Hirsh about the matter. He stated
lo me that on the 17th of July (while he was making an im-
passioned speech in the Bethel dining room), a newspaper
reporter was waiting in the parlor and had called for Mr.
Hirsli. Brother Hirsh said he refused to see the reporter at
that time, but that a few days later he did meet this news-
paper reporter on the street and told him something about
the matter. It is due for me to state here that this newspaper
reporter was not an accredited reporter of the "Brooklyn
Eagle." Whether Iae gave the information to the "Brooklyn
Eagle," or not, I do not know.
' "Opponents' Paper" charges that the president and others
have been secretly carrying on a campaign amongst the Bethel
Family and the Pilgrim Brethren, spreading false reports re-
garding the Board and others, and that the Pilgrim brethren
were sent out to spread these things among the classes. As
to the truth or falsity of this statement I call upon everyone
of the Pilgrim brethren in the service to make known if any
such representations have been made to them and if they were
asked to spread- any charges. Prior to the breaking of the
storm I talked+ith not a single Pilgrim brother aside from
B,rother Wisdan, and it was Brother Wisdom who brought
the informatio~
and the brethren who have a
grievance. I feel this confidence, that this SOCIETY
has its work to do. It cannot be hindered, nor in any
sense be interfered with until this-work is completed.
Then will be the time for it to go to pieces, but not before.
"Your brother in the Blessed Hope of joint-heirship
with Christ, and the Divine Nature,
"I see by the pamphlet entitled 'Light after Darkness'
on page 9 that you or 'your representative' is accused of
'whispering in the ears of the Pilgrim Brethren and pois-
oning their minds' concerning the former Board of Di-
rectors. I will sav the first 'Whispering' I heard was
from the fo~rrbrethren who make the accusation. Tn the
~irstpamphlet they sent out I &st learned of tlre trouhle.
"Yours by the Lord's grace,
, "R. 0. HADLEY?
"Since reading 'Light after".Darkness' . which would
more properly be styled, 'Darkness after Light', I have
decided to write you so as to let you howthat you have'
my entire confidence, as well as. all the sapporf I can
give you in any gnd every way. The Lord's ,hand is so
manifestly on your side in this whole matter, that I have
not the slightest doubt that He has overruled. it, and that
His will has been done. '
"The charge made in 'Daress after ~i~htl-that &
minds of the Pilgrims .have been poisoned by your.re$-
resentative, Brother Macmillan, is surely false, as 'far as
to me at Chicago. For three months while I
was being harssed at the Bethel Home and in the work by
these brethren,~some of whom did no:work, several of the
Pilgrim brethren visited the Bethel and not one word was
uttered by me to them about the difficulty. So far as I have
knowledqe, the matter was not discusstd by other members
of the Family. Some of the Piluims .have voluntarily writ-
ten mc.nbout tl!ix. T liere append nomc of their letters:
I am concerned or have any knowledge. -
"It appears from 'Darkness after Light' thit they a&
being actuated by passion instead of principle and thit
they are appealing to the sentiment of the friends in-
stead of to their sanctified reason. This is manifest by
their use of our Pastor's picture on the front cover.'
"Yours in Him joyfully,
"MI k, RnbrmJJ
which any
"Clayton, N. M., Sept. 20th' 1917.
''~ogansp&t, Ind., Sept. 18, 1917.
The "Opponents' Paper" contains a letter from Brothcr
I;. G. Mason which could well be submitted without com-
ment. I shall riot here attempt to discuss it. In big Ircad-
lines it is designated as the "Auditor's Letter," and tl~c
\iiriter himself sti styles himself in the communication.
Brother Mason was never Auditor of the SOCIETY
defiance, and when he thou@t probably he would have .
LO go, he packed his baggage and left it in his room. ' He
\vent out on the street without his hat and remained out
for several hours. His hat' and baggage weri taken to the. .
front hall, and when he returned they were handed out . .
to hini on the doorstep and admittance was Mused. He
was then offered some money to pay his expenses to his
home in Columbus, Ohio, where he had not bn
After several weeks of
at any -
tim& He was a subordinate clerk in the Purchasing De-
partment at the time he was asked to leave Bethel. Prev-
ious to that he had been working 'in the Shipping Depart-
ment and. his tireatment of other brothers and sisters
working with hi!. had been so unkind and rough that he
was removed fr@ there and put as a subordinate clerk
in the Purchasisg Department Bills checked by him
were' not paid uhtil verified 'and passed upon by others,
particularly by the one who has charge of the Purchasing
Department. Everyone who.knows Brother Van Amburgh
well knows that he has safeguarded the treasury and never
paid. any .bill unless he had a voucher for it and knew
that it. +s correct. The charge that hundreds of dollars
are being paid out without record is wholly out of har-
ntony with the. truth. Several years ago a system of
vo~lchcrswas put in force and approved by Brother Rus-
sell, ably assisted by Brother E. W. Brenneiscn, who is
a trained accountant and auditor. This system eliminates
a lot of unnecessary bookkeeping and was adopted to save .
time and that more time could be devoted to other,im-
portant work However, the system. fully safeguards
cvery avenue. The brother's criticism, therefore, is not
a criticism of myself, but of Brother Russell, who adopted
the system used hy the SOCIETY
since last
November. This he dcclined. We feel .sorry for Brother
Johnson and regretted that it was necessary to publish'as
much of the facts as we did relating to his episodes, but
since he was repeatedly found in consultation .with Broth. ,
ers ~Etchie,Wright, .Hoskins and Hirsh, and several-times
approached me saying that..I should'yield to them, that I
was a "usurper" and that the Lord was displeased with
me, that the Scriptures proved it, and that 'we are con- .
sulting a lawyer and we know what we can do," and ntany
other statements whit$ were in identical language to that
used by the four who were opposers; and seeing they had.
adopted a schenie or plan identical to that which he ]lad.
pursued in England, it seemed imperative that I publisl~
what I did. What Brother Wisdom told me was sufficient
to put any reasonable man on guard, and to warrant him
in taking action to safeguard that which was placed in
his hands.
. .
for years and which I have
not changed. His letter refers to an invoice of $11,000, which
he says he refused to check up. The fact is that he could
not check it up,, because 11c was not familiar with thc
account, .and was not an experienced. bookkeeper or ac-
countant. The account was checked by Brother Hudgings,
who lias charge of that department and who had several
years straining under Brother, Brenneisen. It was paid
in the regular course, and a proper record thereof exists.
There were many similar instances in which Brother
Mason showed his unfitness for office work where special
care i's reqt~ired. On one occasion he drew a voucher
. asking the Treasurer to issue a check for $gso.oo in pay-
rneht of a small bill of $g.go. The matter was caught by
the head of the department before .the voucher reached
the Treasurer's ofice. *After repeated blunders of serious
nature Brother Mason admitted that he had "never kept
1:ooks or done office work in his life" previous to his being
transferred to the department from the shipping room at
the Tabernacle, a few weeks previous. '
Brother .Mason was asked to remove from the Bethel
hecause of his uncouth conduct, and because of his
seemingly uncontrollable disposition to be unkind and
rough with others, and because he showed his dis-
loyalty by .openly announcing that the "Brooklyn Eagle''
had published a "corking good article about the trouble,"
and that he approved the same, which article was a direct
reflection upon Brother Russell. After his departure hc
offered for sale to the .SOCIETYsome of his household
goods, which we bought to help him out. Wile endeavoring
ing to make the sale he affected great loyalty to the SO-
CIETY'S management, volunteering the information that he
had been asked by the opposing brethren to "write 'some-
thing for their answer to HARVEST SIFTINGS"
With the evident'purpose of trying to prove that I
have been seeking notoriety, the ?Opponentsg Paper" sets
fort11 at length a statement about my biography. Evi-
dently,,Brother Hirsll wrote this part of "Opponents' .
Paper. The inconsistency of it is apparent. He attempts
to show that he had been trying to. keep it secret, but that now
lie must publicly declare that I had written my biography.
He there says, "I had thought I would never mention this
inattcr to anyone, but since the dear Brother LHudgings]
swears that Brother Hirsh composed the article, etc, I
see no good reason why our lips should longer be sealed."
One would infer he had never mentioned the matter be-
fore, Why, then, should Brother Hudgings think of mak- t
ing an affidavit about it at all? The facts are that Brother
Hirsh made this charge against me openly and publicly .
in Philadelphia. before a large, audience otl July 19th, not-
withstanding he had inadvertently taken to himself full
credit for the Memorial TO= biography article in his
imppssioned speech in the Bethel dining-room two .days
previous. Those who heard him in Bethel on July .l'lth
were somewhat surprised that he should reverse the matter .
so soon thcreaftcr. #Evidently his memory is very dc-
ficient. Brother Hudgings, hearing these charges .and .
knowing that they were false, voluntarily made the affidavit .
witllout my knowledge and handed it to me just before
went to press, and it was inserted. T11e
facts are as follows:
A week or ten days prior to the Shareholders meeting
of kst January, Rrother Sturgeon called at my office and.
said that a newspaper man and a lawyer were in the Home
and were talking to Brother Hirsh; that they were anxious
to meet me. I first decIintd to see them, but on reflection
agreed to see them a few minutes. These two gentlemen,
together .with Brothers Hirsh and Sturgeon, came into my'
room and th5 newspaper man and the lawyer plied me
,with questions for two hours and elicited from me all of
my personal experiences from my youth up: A few days
later Brother Hirsh called on me and stated, in s-ubstance,
"Brother Rutherford, everyone know6 you-arZ going to
but that he
"positively refused!' The other statements in Brother
Mason's letter are not worthy of consideration here.
No one has ever been'asked to leave Bethel because
they refused to sign a paper 'or endorse the present admin-
istration. Some who .were engaged with others in dis-
turbing the Heme aria office devoted the larger portion
of their time in talking about the difficulty, striving to
foment trouble, and wemasked to go. The thought of
the management is -that those who receive the benefits of
the Home and SKIETY Should render adequate service
therefor .and thaE2the Bethel should be a place of .peace
and quLtness an$consecrafed labor for the Lord, not a
. place of dissension. It has always been the recognized
rule. long ago mde 'by Brother Russell, that "it is a
Privilrge to be at%e Bethel Home, no! a .right," and any-
one's stay may beterminted at any tlme.
It is needless to say that no force was used on Brothel
Johnson the day he and some others started a disturbance
In the Bethel dining room. They were asked to be quiet,
and when he refused, he was taken by the coat sleeve and
nrked to go out, .No fo~cewhatroevar was applied, He
be elected President." To this I did not reply. Continu-
ing, Brother Hirsh said, "If you will keep-odands off
and not interfere I would like to prepare sorriething for . -
the press, and the newspaper man who wag hertyto-s'ee me, .
the other night wishes to give it out. to the Assobate&
Press. Then he said;:"Would you .mind dictating tb yotir=
stenographer those potnts about youp life?". There being.:
no secret about this, and'fio reason why I should decline;-.
I dictated to my steeographer a brjef statement of my;
life experiences, which Brother Hirsh took away, and after-
wards, with the aid of the newspaper man mentioned,.he
prepared a notice for. the press which I did not see until
it was published. Based upon this, Brother Eirsh after'-
wards prepared a similar article..for the second edition' of ,
tile Memoti~l TOWER,
as set forth in the affidavit, and which
was at thc Bethel Homc fomenting trouble, in open de-
linncc of the management, and repeatedly said he wbuld
not go' unless the Board said so, meaning by the "Board" .
the four alleged members who were supporting him in
the conspiracy against the SOCIETY.
Zgłoś jeśli naruszono regulamin