1917 Light After Darkness

7/29/2019 1917 Light After Darkness

1/24

" H e that answereth a mattgr, befo re he heareth it, it i s fo l ly andshame unto him."""Prove all things; hold fast that which is good."

L I G H TafterDARKNESSA Message to the Watchers,Being a refutation of "'Harvest Siftings"

- OUR PASTOR---=-E= " Y o u r brethren that hated you , that cas t you out for M y name's sake,-= said , ' L et the Lo r d be glorified'; but He shakk apfiear3I to your joy and th ey shall be ashamed."=-


2/24

Our Present CounselorE A R E LI VI NG in a time when, if i t were possible, "the very elect" would

be deceived, but God's Wor d, our sa fe guide, assures us tha t this cannotbe done, even though the Adversary should use some of his ablest instru-ments fo r that purpose. Jesus' safety was found in what was written,and that constitutes our security also. W e are not ignorant of thedevices of ou r Adversar y.

I n New Testam ent days he used letters and words and spirits pur-porting to come from the right source and through the Lord's channelin order to deceive the early Christians, but this was unavailing. H e evencaused some of his ablest ministers to write letter s that were so nearlyngs found in the Ho ly Scriptures that som e could not tell them apart, andaccepted the m as inspired writings. This gave rise to the Apocryphalmay be found in the Catholic Bibles between the Old and New Testaments.This should cause the Lord's people to be especially on guard at this time, whenwe are so near t he end of the way, entering into Gethsemane, previous to the bindingof Satan.One of these pseudo-writings may be found in a document recently published andmailed to the friends all over the world, entitled "Harve st Siftings," which is an imita-

tion and counterfeit of our dear Bro ther Russell's Har vest Siftings, but a careful exam-ination of th e two writing s bearing the same title will reveal the fac t that th ey a reentirely different. Brothe r Russell's Sifti ngs was a real thing; th e latter is a deception.Brother Russell's production was f or the purpose of giving a plain, simple, straightfor -ward, loving, Christian-like explanation of certain false charges which had been madeby certain ones who had conspired against him. Th is latter document is altoget her dif-ferent. I t is writte n for the purpose of condemning Brothe r Russell's fellow-servants,and is the work of a Prosecuting Attorney rat her than tha t of a Christian. I n the oneinstance the Adversary at tempted t o disrupt the work of t he Society by a conspiracy ofbrethren w ho were sifted out ; in this instance he has proven a little mor e successfulthrough the processes of usurpation, casting out faithful brethren, and then saying,"The Lord be glorified."Th is pseudo-"Siftings" is nothing but a legal document to prove w hat a wonderfulPresi dent the Society has-a supposedly real hero who has saved the Society frombeing wrecked, whereas in reality it is a covered ef fort to overcome Br othe r Russell, asrepresented in his fellow-servants, t o the extent of splitting th e Church, and th e usageof the Lord's money contributed by His consecrated people. Brother Rutherf ord isusing the Lord's money in this way. H e is using th e Lord's people, and he is usingconsecrated time and talents in the same direction.If you will carefully scruti nize his so-called "Siftings," you will readily o bservethat it has every ear-mark of the Lawyer, the Counselor, the Prose cuting Attorney. I tis a lawyer's business to accept his client's case for money considerations, and t o doeverything in his power to prove his case. Lawye rs argue on only one side of a case,and that is always their side-the selfish one. I t is not a matter of stric t justice (as itought to be), but a matter of winning the case by arguments. T o accomplish this pur-pose, such arguments only will be used that tend t o establish their point. All otherpoints will be suppressed, ignored, and omitted, and, at the sam e time, they will d oeverything they can to overcome the arguments on the other side, no matter how truethey may be. Besides this, statem ents of witnesses ar e ofttimes colored to suit theircase, and misrepresentations are frequently indulged in. I n these, and in other ways,they either win the case, or come so near to it that their client seems satisfied, unlessan appeal case can be worked up. YOUwill find all these things used in this so-called"Siftings" to prove a point and t o show what a wonderful champion the Society(Rutherford-Van Amburgh) has found in Our President.H e has set himself up as the Counselor of th e Church, an d this is the kind of coun-sel he is giving them. It might be well to notice in this connection that this wordCounselor is one of t he titles of th e Lord Jesus, a nd is one of the principal wor ks ofthe Advocate, and was never previously recognized as an ofice in the Church.W e are confident that th e friends do not wish the money they have contributed forthe spread of t he Tr uth t o be used t o propagate falsehoods and to push the Primacy soas to split the Church. Neithe r do they wish th e name, memor y, contributions, sacri-fices and prestige of ou r dear Brother Russell to be used in this manner. Therefore,we are inviting your caref ul and prayerful consideration of t he f acts stated in the writ-ings herewith s ent forth to the Lord's people in His name, which, we believe, will beone of th e means the L ord will use at this time to shield and protect Hi s people-Hiss h e e p f r o m those that would otherwise devour and destroy."Grace and peace be multiplied unto you through the knowledge of God and of

Jesus Our Lord."-2 Peter 1 2.


3/24

" L E T T H E R E B E L I G H T ! ""No weapon that is formed against thee shall prosper; and every tongue that shall rise against thee in jrtdgmenf fhou shaltcondemn, Thi s is the heritage of the se wa nts of the Lord, and their righteousness is of me, saith theLord."-Isaiah 53 :17.

A. N. Pierso n Broth er Russel l occupied posi t ions of t rus t in the wo rk of theI. F. Hoski nsJ. F. R u t h e r f o r d 1 vs. R. H . H i r s hW. E. V a n A m b u r g h j T. D. W r i gh ti?. I . RitchieIT T L E d i d we t hi nl c when we l ooked upon t hedead body of our g r ea t l eade r , P as t o r Russe l l ,l ess than nine mo nths ago, that in so sho r t at ime i t ,would become our painful d uty tosound an a l a rm t o t he L ord ' s peop l e eve ry-where, in the s ta tement we are now- about tomake. Li t t le did we then think that those whowould under take to manage the af fai rs of theSociety af ter Bro ther Russell 's death would at -t empt t o pe rve r t and change t he t i me-honoredcus t oms and usages l e f t us by our dea rPastor , o r that ther e would be int roduced such f lagrant andsweepi ng depar t u r es f rom t he fo rm of government a s ou t l inedi n Bro t he r Russel l' s W i l l and i n t he Char t e r o f t he W a t chTo we r Bible and Tr ac t Society, wr i t ten by his own hand.Fo r mon ths pas t we have been hoping to aver t the pres-

ent i ssue, and now i t i s necessary that we rela te to youthe his tory of the unhappy ci rcumstances which have led upto the present t rouble . Even now , we would he si ta te to speakof these things were i t not for the fact that cer ta in brethren,whose names we mus t he r e i n ment i on , have sen t ou t b road-cast lengthy s ta tements which have dis tor ted the facts andwhich ar e calculated to mis lead the Lord 's people wi th reg ardt o t he t r ue si t uat i on a t headquar te r s . Accord i ng ly , we havereceived hun dreds of le t ters request ing a t ru e and completeexplanat ion of the affai rs and happenings here . Fai lure tocorrec t the mis leading s ta tem ents and te ll you the t ruth w ouldsurely mean a culpable neglect on our par t to ful f i l our sol em^.and sac r ed du t y t o p ro t ec t and sa f eguard t he i n t e r es ts o f t heLord's flock.T H E W A T C HTOW ER eade rs have received a paper s tyled"Harvest S i f t ings ." I t bea r s t he s i gna t u re o f t he P res i den t

of our Society, J. F. Rut her fo rd . S evera l f ac t s a r e apparen tat once to the mind s of a l l who h ave read this paper care-ful ly, namely:(1) T ha t t he au t hor has a t t empt ed t o a s sas s i na t e t he goodreputat ion of some of his brethren, D irectors of the WatchT ower B i b l e and T rac t S oc i e t y , who fo r many yea r s under

Society.( 2 ) T h a t th e A u t h o r of 'Hars-est Sift ings," while hnow -ing that S t . Paul enjoins , "speak ev11 o i no man," has seem-i ng ly li ft e d a ll re s t ra i n t fr o m h is t o ng u e a ~ den and t h rough-out his paper has car r ied on a campaign of s lander and evi lspeaking.(3) Tha t whi le on page one of his "Si ft ings ," Broth erRuth erford declares tha t God is his Judge, he seems unwi l l ingthat God shal l judge his brethren, b ut proceeds himsel f to bethei r judge and to unmerci ful ly condemn them.(4 ) Th at while on the f irs t page of "S if tings," ou r brothersays he has no unkind feel ings toward anyone, he proceeds toexpress , t ime af ter t i rne, unkind sent iments toward thesebrethren.( 5 ) While in the concluding paragraphs of his paper , heexhor ts that no bi t terness be al lowed to come in, he has re-peatedly said many things therein to arouse bi t ter thoughtsin the minds of the Lord 's people .' ( 6 ) T ha t t h roughout h i s s t a t ement our b ro t he r has a t -tempted to l ink wi th Brother Johnson's af fai rs in England the

proceedings of the major i ty members of the Board of Direc-tors , and that wi thout there being any rela t ionship whatsoeverand in face of repeated protes t s on ou r par t .(7 ) Th at on the f irs t page of "H arvest S i ft ings ," top ofsecond co l umn, t he au t hor exh or t s " tha t you do no t f o rm anydis t inct opinion unt i l you have read al l thi s s ta tement"; theinference being that you should immediately form a dis t inr topinion af ter reading his s ta tement .W e have too much conf idence in you, dear brethren, t ot h i nk t ha t a f t e r f o l l o ~ l i n g t he l ead i ng o f t he L ord underBroth er R ussel l , man y of gou for years pas t , you could at thi sla te hour be so mis led a s not to be able to discern betweenthis and the spi r i t of the wise man of old: "He that answeretha mat ter befo re he heareth i t , i t i s fol ly and sha me unto him."- P r o \ e r b s 18:13. See Vol . VI, pages 293, 294.

I l -e would not publi sh this ar t ic le merely in defen se of ou rna ine . n ' e ha l e no t h i ng t ha t i s no t f ul ly devo t ed t o t he L o rdand t he T r u t h : we suf f e r because o f our f a i th fu l e f fo r t t oserve these and you, and real iz ing this, we a re no t dis t ressed."IX'e know whom w e have bel ieved and a re persuaded t hatHe i s able to keep that which we have commit ted unto Himagainst that day."

T H E P U R P O S E O F T H I S P U B L I C A T I O NTh e purpose of thi s explanat ion i s not to re ta l ia te , e i ther , thought that he would have a successor in this special of f ice ,

fo r , by t he L ordYs Grace, we t rus t to fol low the of but ra ther tha t the Boar d of seven Directors shou ld "comeJesus, w h e n He was reviled, reviled not again.w The re - to the f ront" and be his successor , and exercise completemanage ment of the Society and i t s af fai rs.fore , we wi l l l eave out personal i t ies and bi t ter words in the (3 ) ~ h ~ ~ t he c h a r t e r of t h e w a t c h T~~~~ i b l ~n d T~~~~presentat ion.

W e believe tha t i t wi l l not be speaking evi l toc o n f i n e o u r s e l v e s t o s o m e of t h e o f fi ci al a c t s of t h e P r e s i -d e n t o f the S o c i e t y , f o r e v e r y v o t i n g s h a r e h o l d e r h a s ar i g h t t o in f o r m a t i o n of t h i s c h a r a c te r . O u r o n l y p u r p o s e ,dea r b r e t h r en , i s t o s e t ma t t e r s be fore you i n such a mannerthat y ou may see the facts and pr inciples involved and beprep ared to recognize the Lord 's leading and guidance throug ht h i s f ie ry tr i a l, t o t he - i n t en t t ha t you m ay en dure t he same ,wi t hou t any r ea l i n j u ry .Herewi t h we se t f o r t h t he sa l i en t po i n t s t ha t you may beass is ted in fol lowing the events up to the present sad cr i s i s :( 1 ) T ha t dur i ng t he l i f e ti me of Bro t he r Russel l, he exe r -c i sed comple t e con t ro l and management o f t he W at ch T o werBible and Tract Society, and al l of i t s af fai rs , for the reasontha t h e created the S ociety wi th his own mo ney an d intellectunder the special guidance of the Lord 's spi r i t , which he

possessed in large measure.(2) T h a t a s he l ooked fo rw ard t o h i s dea t h , i t was no t h i s

Society, wr i t ten by Brother Russel l , s ta ted in plain terms theform of governm ent by which t he S oc i e ty was t o be governed .This , he declared, was intended to apply especial ly af ter hisdeath.(4 ) T ha t a t h i s dea t h , B ro t he r Russe l l l e f t a w i l l ( s ee"W at ch T ower , " December 1, 1916) , in which he exp lains whyhe had con t ro l of t he S oc i e ty dur i ng h i s l i f et ime an d t he m an-ner in which he desi red the af fai rs to be cont inued af ter hisdeath.(5) T h a t B r o t h e r R u s s e l l h a d n o t b e e n d e a d m o r e t h a na few days when his Wil l was de clared to be i l legal and. there-fore , not binding, and that i t s provis ions need not beobse rved by t hose who t ook c ha rge , t hus beg i nn ing t he r ea lmu rmur i n g aga i ns t B ro t he r Russe ll 's a r r angement s , whi ch has-cont inued ever s ince.(6 ) T ha t B ro t he r Rut he r fo rd , be ing we ll a s sured i n ad-vance that he would be elected Pre s ide nt of the Society, drewup some by- laws before his e lect ion, which were taken to thesha reho l de r s ' mee t i ng a t P i t t sburgh , J anuary 6, a n d p l a c e d


4/24

L I G H T A F T E R D A R K N E S Sin the hands of a committee of three brethren, with the in-struction that they suggest before the shareholders' meetingthat these by-laws be adopted by the Society for the govern-ment of its affairs.( 7 ) That these by-laws, prepared by Brother Rutherford,expressly stated that the President should be the executiveand manager of the Society and that he should have fullcharge of all its affairs, both in foreign lands and in America.(8) Tha t the passage of ihese by-laws, under BrotherRutherford's instructions, by the shareholders was contraryto the Charter of the Society, and, hence, not binding, sincethe Char ter provides that "the Directors shall have full powerto make by-laws." (S ee charter, Sec. VI I, elsewhere in thispamphlet.)(9) That Brother Rutherford, knowing that these by-laws,recommended by the shareholders, were not legal, on return-ing from the election called a meeting of the Board of Direc-tors, at which there were present Brothers Rutherford, VanAmburgh, Pierson, Ritchie and Wright. Brother Hoskins, be-ing ill, was absent, and Brother Rockwell had just removedfr om Bethel. At thi s meeting of the Board , these by-laws,placing the control in the hands of Brother Rutherford, wereadopted thus making them legal.(10) That the Brethren present at this Board meetingwho took part in the adoption of these by-laws, not beingable to forecast the future, and not surmising that our brotherwould misuse the power, thought best at that time to takethis action.(11) That not many weeks had passed before there weremisgivings in the minds of several of the Directors as to t hewisdom of the action taken, and though they expressed no im-mediate protest, they recognized that they had placed altogethertoo much confidence in Brother Rutherford in giving him suchsweeping control, for they saw that he was interpreting theby-laws to niean that he alone was the controller of the So-ciety to the exclusion of the Directors.(12) That one of the seriously objectionable results of thispower in the hands of the President was that he appointed aspecial representative, Brother A. H. Macmillan, who fortwo months previous to this time, since Brother Russell'sdeath, had shown himself unfit to represent the Society andits affairs in such an important position, and t hat to this specialrepresentative was delegated autocratic powers by the Presi-dent, so that in the absence of the President, the word of hisspecial representative was declared to be final on all matters,much to the sorrow and discomfort of many of the force.(13) That instead of properly representing the Societyand assisting the President in preserving inviolate its charterand Brother Russell's will, Brother Macmillan did the veryreverse. H e apparently viewed Brother Russell's Will as amere trifle, not worthy of consideration, and time afte r timeas he visited various parts of the country, he held up t1.eBoard of Directors to contempt and ridicule.(14) That instead of the President exercising restraintover his special representative, he apparently sanctioned hisunseemly conduct, as indicated in his statement in "HarvestSiftings," page 11, where he says Brother Macmillan "hasproven faithful and loyal."

(15) That after three months or so had passed, it becameclearly evident to the majority of the Directors that they hadseriously blundered in placing the complete control in thehands of one man, contrary to the charter (Xrticle VI of whichreads: "The corporation shall be managed by a Board ofDirectors, consisting of seven members"), and that under thisone-man rule the Directors were not allowed to direct, andcould get little or no information regarding the affairs of theSociety, for which the laws of t he land held them responsible.(16) That Brother Van Amburgh is the only Director whohas fully supported the President in his methods and policies;whereas prior to Brother Russell's death, Brother Van Am-burgh frequently opposed Brother Russell in the business thathe brought before the Board for consideration, thus takinghours of Brother Russell's valuable time; and tha t sinceBrother Russell's death, Brother Van Amburgh has given hisundivided support to Brother Rutherford, and is permittedto exercise more authority than ever before; and has re-

peatedly refused members of the Board the privilege of get-ting information from the Society's records.(17) Tha t prior to the time of Brothe r Johnson's returnfrom England, in the early part of April, things had not beenrunning smoothly and to the satisfaction of the Board ofDirectors, and that Brother Johnson's return had nothingwhatever to do with the real issues.(18) Tha t when Brother Johnson returned to America heappealed to the Board of Directors for a hearing of the diffi-culties in England. Two hearings were allowed by the Presi-dent, neither of which was an official Board meeting, and inneither of these was Brother Johnson given more than slightopportunity to state his case.(19) That when Brother Johnson requested time and againthat the President call a meeting of the Board to give him afai r opportunity to state his case, the Presiden t became angeredand told Brother Johnson and the Board it was none of theirbusiness, that the management was all in his hands, and thathe had closed up the matter of Brother Johnson's affair andwould not open it again.(20) That when the members of the Board saw this atti-tude on the part of the Pres ident, which was but another ex-hibition of the same autocratic powers which he had manytimes exercised since his election, they concluded it wise totake counsel together and earnestly prayed over the matter, theresult of which was that at the next Board meeting, one ofour number offered a resolution to amend the by-laws whichthe Board had unwisely adopted eariy in the year.(21) That the purpose of the Directors in wishing toamend the by-laws was not that the four members of theBoard might take over the control of the Society, but that theBoard might be restored to its proper position, according toBrother Russell's will and charter.(22) That when this resolution was offered to rescind theobjectionable by-laws, the President was greatly angered andoffered such strenuous opposition that the Board yielded tohis suggestion to hold the matter over for about a month.(23) That meantime the President took a trip West andcompleted the scheme by which he has attempted to declareillegal and put off the Board four of its properly constitutedmembers, three of whom for many years past were recognizedby Brother Russell as legally chosen Directors.(24) That the President's declaration that these membersof the Board have had no legal standing as Directors for yearspast, would mean, if true, that Brother Russell has beentransacting "illegal business" through an "illegal Board" formany years.(25) Be it known, therefore, that Brother Rutherford inhis "Siftings" has beclouded the real issues by claiming thatthe Directors have espoused the cause of Brother Johnsonand want to send him back to England, when we had no desireor intention of doing anything of the kind ; and be it furtherknown that Brother Johnson is in no sense the cause of ourdifferences here at headquarters.(26) Be it known further that we had no thought what-soever of interrupting the affairs of the Society by tying upits funds, as Brother Rutherford charges us, but merely tomake them subject to the Board's direction; and that nothought could be farther from our mind than that of wreck-ing the Society. God knows our hearts and our intentions.Instead, we have been for many years engaged with all ourheart and strength in supporting the Lord's work and in ex-tending the influence of our Society and the Truth, which weall love so much. Our aim fro m first ta last in this respecthas been to fulfill the duties of our office, to which three ofus were appointed under Brother Russell, and to faithfully ful-fill the trust reposed i n us ;and to estop, if possible, a gross andwholesale departure from Brother Russell's Will, his Char ter,and the policies outlined by him to be followed after his death,to all of which the Directors solemnly bound themselves.

We do not cease to rejoice in the Lord and to give thanksfor all the fresh evidences of our acceptance with Him whichwe have enjoyed during our recent trials. Our privileges are.it is true, somewhat curtailed; but be assured that we standalways ready to serve any of you.


5/24

L I G H T A F T E R D A R K N E S S" T R U T H C R U S H E D T O E A R T H S H A L L R I S E A G A I N "

ITH A LL of the mighty power of the Societyat his back-the consec rated financial powerand the moral power- the Pres ident of ourSociety has done his best to cru sh to the ear thfour brethren whose loyal ty to the Lord, theT ru t h and t he b r e th r en no one eve r be forequestioned. All of them have been in theservice of the T rut h fo r many years , and tono ne of them wa s the finger of scorn ev er be-fore pointed. The y worked fai thful ly wi ththei r beloved Pastor unt i l hi s death, and tookup thei r dut ies wi th the new Pres ident wi th renewed deter -minat ion to suppo r t him as loyal ly as they had suppor tedBrother Russell . This they continued to do unti l they sawthat the Char ter , Wi l l , and al l would be so completely sub-ver ted that there might be l i t t l e lef t i f they did not a t oncemake protes t .I t i s probably suff ic ient to say that Brother Rutherford 's"S i f t ings" contains more than a hundred unt ruthful chargesand mis leading s ta tements , a l l made, too, on WATCH TOW ERpaper , pr inted at considerable expense, and sent out f rom-the Tabernacle , the home of the Truth.BROTHER RUSSELL'S WISHES

The real i ssue, dear f r iends , i s : Are we to remain fai thfulto Bro ther Russell ' s memory, his methods and his plans f or thewo rk? In view of the fact that Brother R ussel l concluded toturn over to the Society a l l the Lord 's goods, as a "fai thfuland wise s teward," he f i rs t had an unders tanding wi th theBoard of Directors , reference to which i s made in his wi l l ,a s f o l l ows :"In view of the fact that in dona ting the journal 'Zion's W atch

Tower,' the 'Old Theology Quarterl y' (now the 'Bible Stude nt'sMonthly), ar.d the copyrights of the 'Millennia1 Dawn ScriptureStudies,' Books and various other booklets, hymn-books, etc., to theWatch Tower Bible and Tract Society, I did so with the explicitunderstanding that I should have full control of all the intere sts ofthese publications during my life, and that after my decease theyshould he conducted according to my wishes. I now herewith setforth the said wi sh es ln y will respecting the same."

Th e f irs t par t of thi s agreement was carr ied ou t dur ingBro ther Russell ' s l ife t ime. A nd now, dear brethren, wecome to the second part of i t , as expressed in his Will , pub-lished in T H E T O W E RDecember 1, 1916. W e do well to readit frequently to keep i ts various provisions fresh in mind.Another sect ion reads :

"My object in these requirements is to safeguard the committeeand the journal from an y spirit of ambi tion or pride or headship, andthat t he Trut h may be recognized and appreciated for its own worth,and that the Lord may more particularly be recognized as the Headof th e Church and the Founta in of Truth."

In these two quotat ions f ro m the W il l, i t i s evident thatBrother Russell expected no successor in his peculiar officeas " that wise and fai thfu l servant" (M at the w 24:45-47).And as he wi shed t o s a f eguard T HE W AT CH T OW E R O thatthere should be no oppor tuni ty f or am bi t ion, pr ide orheadship, so i t i s equal ly t rue that Brother Russel l neverintended that anyone should succeed him in the ful l cont rolof the Society's interests thro ugh out the wide world, anddoubt less for the same reason that he wished to keep downheadship. Th is thought i s evidenced in many ways, and byhis pr inted s ta tement to thi s ef fect :"In the event of my death, the Board of Directo rs will come

forward !"--l so a quotat ion f rom the Char ter , Sect ion VI:"The Corporation is to be managed by a Board of Directors con-

sist ing of seve n members."Thus i t wi l l be seen that af ter Brother Russel l ' s death theBoard of Directors became his successors in the control ofthe Society's affairs, as the Edito rial Comm ittee of fivebecame his successors as Edi tors of TH E WA TCHTOWER.

ADVERSARY BUSY RAISlNG DUST CLOUDSSorne of the dear f r iends seem unable to grasp theset ruths . On t he o t he r hand some appear t o g r asp t hem as

readily as they did "The Divine Plan." W e wonder if t heAdversary has been busy rai s ing dust -clouds to obscure theseimpor tant t ruths , and to cover them up wi th fa l se accusa-t ions of ambi t ion agains t the major i ty members of the Boardof Directors . T im e af ter t ime in Brother Ru therford 's "S i ft -ings" we have been accused of seeking honor, posit ion, etc.;yet i t should be evident to a l l that only Brother Rutherford 'ssurmises are of fered in suppor t of these charges . Thu s ourearnest endeavors to do our duty and to s tand in defenseof our Society, and fo r the protect ion of i t s sacred interes t s ,have been so misrepresente d as to appea r to be evil . Ver ilyagain our Adversary i s put t ing "darkness for l ight and l ightfo r darkness."-Isaiah 5 :20.W e humbly bel ieve, dear brothers and s i s ters in the Lord,that not one of us h as an y ambi tion, save to be fa i thful tothe t rus t reposed in us by the Lord and by our belovedPastor . W e recali in this connect ion the words of our Lordand of the Apo stle Pa ul, as fo!lovrs:

"It is required in stewards that a man be found faithful; everyman accordin g to his several ability."-I Cor. 4 : Z ; Matthew 25 :IS."

W e freely confess that none of us has any grea t abi l i ty;but i t i s our des i re to use to H is praise whatever l i tt l e wehave; and as s tewards of the Society, we have sought onlyto be faithful .BROTHER RUTHERFORD'S METHODS VS. BROTHER

RUSSELL'S METHODSThe trouble really had i ts beginning before the electionin P i t t sburgh las t January. Real iz ing that he would beelected Pres ident of the Society, a nd knowing that theChar ter places the cont rol of the Society 's in teres t s in th ehands of the Board of Directors , Brother Rutherford, beforehe s tar ted for the e lection a t P i t t sburgh, prepared some by-laws to be placed befor e the shareholders ' meet ing. In thi sconnect ion i t would be wel l to quote a par t of the Char terof the Society respect ing the only body author ized to makeby-laws. Section VI I reads :

"The Corporation, by its Board of Direct ors [not the voting share-holders], a majority of whom shall constitute a quorum f or the trans-action of business, shall have full power and auth ority t o make andenact by-laws, rules and ordinances, which shall be deemed and takento be the law of said corporation, and do any and everything usefulior t h e good governmen t an d support of the affairs of said corporation."

Kotwi ths tanding this provis ion in the Char ter that theBoard of Direc tors shal l make the by- laws, a t Broth er Ruther-ford 's ins tance a commit tee on by- laws was appointed at theConvent ion in P i t t sburgh. T o this Commit tee Bro therRuther iord 's by- laws were presented, and af ter del iberat ingupon them most of the af ternoon , the C ommit tee proceededtoward the plat form to read them to the Convent ion. I t wasthe hou r set to reconven e the asse mb lage ; but, thin:.ing th atthe Commit tee had probably made changes dur ing thei r longdel lberat ions (ag ains t hi s plan to gain the co nt rol ) , Bro therRut he r fo rd he ld t hem up fo r a n hour beh i nd t he p l a tfo rmwhi le he endeavored to force them to change the by- lawsback exact ly as he had prepared them, threatening a f ight be-io re the Conv ent ion i f thi s were not done. Li t t le did theconvent ioners know of what was going on behind the cur-tain, and l i t t le did they realize why the Convention was de-layed so long. Th er e were several eye-witnesses of this con-troversy, besides the Committee, which was composed ofBrother Margeson, of Boston, Chai rm an; Bro ther Br icker ,of P i t t sburgh, and Bro ther O st rander , of Cleveland.BROTHER RUTHERFORD'S BY-LAWS PASSED

Th e Commit tee held out courageously agains t Bro therRuthel ford, but fear ing the threatened f ight and consequentdis turbance in the Convent ion i f Brother Rutherford did nothave his own way, they f inal ly repor ted the by- laws as or ig-inally prepared by him. W e rehearse these facts to showhow t he Bro t he r managed t o t ake t he power f rom t he Boardof Directors , and to have it in his own hand. On e of the by-laws, which was suggested a t the shareholders ' meet ing, reads :"The Pr es id e~ t f th e Society shall always be the Executive Officu


6/24

6 L I G H T A F T E R D A R K N E S S SEPTEMBER. 1917and General Manager of the Corporation, having in charge the rnanage-ment of its affa irs and work, both in America and in foreign countries."

Another by-law, the one to which the Committee speciallyobjected, authorized the President to appoint an AdvisoryCommittee of three, of which the Secreta ry and Treasurer ,Broth er Van Amburgh, was to be a permanent member. Theseby-laws and such a Committee would naturally be thought bysome to supplant the Directors in their advisory and executivecapacity.The President knowing that the shareholders could notlegally make by-laws, since the Charter gives that right tothe Directors, on return ing to Brooklyn af ter the election,called a mee ting of t he Boar d at which he prese nted his;by-laws for their adoption. Like the dear sheep who werein attendance at the shareholders' meeting, unsuspiciousand anxious to do anything to aid the new President, theDirectors decided without protest to spread them uponthe minutes of their meeting. It was this action that madethe by-laws genuine and legal, an act which the Boardhoped at the time would prove to be for the best interestsof the work.Thus it will be seen at a glance how Brother Ruther-fo rd planned t o thwart Brothe r Russell's expressed wishesin this respect and also the Charter, which places the con-tro l of the Society's in terest s in the han ds of seven breth-ren instead of one.

The Board has been accused of being ambitious. Sup-pose it has been ambitious in the matter of carry ing outthe provisions of Brother Russell's Charte r and BrotherRussell's will, what shall be said of Bro ther R utherf ord'sefforts to take away the Directors' control and usurp tha tcontrol fully to himself? I t seems an easy matter to raisedust to obscure the real issue, and this is what the Adver-sary apparently has been busy doing. W e would not s top tomention these matter s if they were personal. W e couldeasily sacrifice all our personal rights and count them butloss and dross; but in a case like this it is different. Th erights of Directors are not personal. Th e Directors representthe righ ts of the shareholders of the Society, and they can-not set aside a stewardship of this kind and at t he same timebe faithful. "It is required of stewards that a man be foundfaithful." Besides, the civil law demands that Directors shallacquaint themselves with the interests of their corporations,and failure to do so is in the eyes of the law regarded ascriminal negligence.

Being a la vyer , one would naturally expect that thePresident would do all in his power to have his fellow-members of the Board cooperate in the administration ofthe affairs of the Society over which all had been givena stewardship. Th is would have been the course of wis-dom and wh at would have been expected even of on e notprofessing Christian principles.

P E R S E C U T I O N A N D I N T I M I D A T I O NT WAS NOT long till the Directors recog- The President hlmself has since this episode expressed

nized that a serious mistake had been made his approval and endorsem ent of this act of violence oni11 ado ptin g by-laws tha t placed th e ent ire the part of B rother hlacmillan.management in the President's hands, con-tra ry to the Charter. Although they endeav- RESOLUTION PRODUCES CRISISored to cooperate with him in the di- In view of all tha t had transpi red in the mon ths past,rection of the affairs of the society , they the Direc tors decided that some action should be taken tonow became objects of persecution an d in- undo the mistake in placing such sweeping power in Broth-timidation, chiefly by the R ~ ~ -r Rutherford's h ands a t the beginning of the year. Th eresentative, who had previously declared of first step toward rectifying th e matter was to repeal thes om e of them that "if they did not get ou t by-laws, thus restorin g to the Board its authority as pro-

they would be kicked out." vided in the Charter.we realize, dear brethren, that many of these things I t was at this same time that Brother Johnson's affairwill appear strange to you. I t seems almost impossible Came up fo r consideration. Whe n he retur ned from Eng-

that such a situation could exist among those of like pre- land he was given two hearings, in neither of which did hecious faith, and especially in the Bethel and the Tabernacle. have a fair chance to present his case, and later, learningB~~ such is the fact, and we must all meet the condition that there were complications rhat had not been brought

o r later and deal with it as we believe the ~~~d out and adjusted, the Directors gave assurance $9 Frntherwould have us do. Johnso n t hat they were in favor of his having a full andfair hearing. It was at this time, when the Board insistedPOLICEMAN CALLED TO EJECT DIRECTORS upon giving the Brother a further opportunity to explainNo course has appeared too drastic fo r the President and his matters, tha t Brother Ruther ford censured thehis Representative in order to secure and maintain auto- Directors, telling them that the management was in hiscratic control of the Society. During Brother Rutherford's hands a nd that it was no ne of their business, th at he, hirn-absence in July, a rumor reached us that we would not be self, had settled Brother Johnson's affair. Th us the real~e rm it te d o enter the Tabernacle office. Astonished, and issue, the management of t he Society, came to the fr ontdoubtful that such treatment would be accorded a major- and led to the resolution to repeal the by-laws.ity of the T rustees of the Society whose duties would nat- At a meeti ng of t he Board of Direct ors in June, beforeurally call them to the Tabernacle, we desired informa- the policeman incident, a resolution was presented to rescindtion as to whether such an order had been issued and by the by-laws. Thi s was the last meeting ever held by thewhom. While seeking this information in the office, we Direct ors over which Brother Rutherford presided. Wh enwere ordered outside by Brother Macmillan. Believing we the resolution came up the President raised such a stormhad a perfect right in the office, we remained five minutes, of opposition that the brethren yielded to his appeal towhen we retired to the Chapel upstairs, where there was hold the resolution over until the next meeting, which wasno one but ourselves. Presently there approached us announc ed for July 20th. Altho ugh tw o or thr ee reques tsBrothe r Macmillan with a policeman. were subsequently made fo r a meeting prior thereto, these

"Officer, put these men out!" s aid the President's Rep- were refused by the President until July 17.resentative."Move on, Gentlemen!" said the policeman to the Di- BROTHER RUSSELL'S DIRECTORS PUT OUT-rectors. BROTHER RUTHERFORD'S PUT IN"You have no right to put us out, Officer," replied one The next few weeks were eventful. The President nowof the Directors; "we are employed by this Society, and realized the D irector s were fully awake to their responsi-we are not disturbing anybody or anything." bilities. H e was determined, however, that they should"Of course I have no right to put yo u out!" responded never acquire and use the power delegated to them in thethe policeman. "It is I who should go out instead"; and Charter.away he went. The President took a trip to Philadelphia to consult a


7/24

L I G H T A F T E R D A R K N E S Slawyer. Then he started on his trip Wes t. During his ab-sence he heard of the disturbance at the Tabernacle rethe policeman and telegraphed Brother McGee of Tr ento nth at if he were advising us, to tell us to wai t until his re-turn, when all would be adjusted.Little did we realize how the adjustment would bemade. His design was that hpon the advice of his Phila-delphia lawyer he would declare illegal the Board of Di-rector s through whom Broth er Russell had been doing il-legal ( ? ) business for so many years. On his homeward jour-ney he visited Pittsburgh and appointed brethren to takeour places, whom no doubt he felt certain would never at-tempt to rescind his by-laws, as this was his only causefor complaint against us.At the noonday meal in the Bethel Dining Room onJuly 17, Brother Rutherford made the startling announce-

ment to all gathered there that the Directors of the So-ciety had never been legally elected, and th at he had de-clared the offices of four of them vacant and appointednew ones in their places. All the old Directors were pres-ent and the Brethren he had appointed were also present.EROTAERRUSSELL'S BOARD BROTHERRUTHERFORD'S EW BOA-

Brother Rutherford Brother RutherfordBrother Pierson , Cromwell, Conn. Brother Pierson, Cromwell, Conn.Brother Van Amburgh Brother Van .4mhurghBrother Ritchie Brother Fisher, Scranton, Pa.Brother Wright Brother Sp i l l , Pittshurgk, Pa.Brother Hirsh Brother Bohnet, Pittsburgh, Pa.Brother Hoskins Brother Macmillan.Brother Pierson in his letter to Brother Ritchie has takenhis stand with the major ity members of the old Board, givingus a majority-five to two.

A N A P P E A L T O T H E V O T I N G S H A R E H O L D E R SE BELIEVE that Brother Rutherford has madea very grave mistake in adopting such high-handed methods and we appeal to the con-secrated judgment and good sense of thevoting shareholders of t he Society and t o dl

"Watch Tower" readers everywhere!We appeal not for any special and personalconsideration for ourseives. We are in thiscontroversy merely seeking to act as your rep-resentatives. We appeal to you in the in-terests of our Beloved Society and for your

own responsibility as shareholders to protect its welfare and tocarr y out the wishes and plans of the founder, our dear Pas-tor, and to arouse you to the fact that violence has been doneto these.This last step of Brother Rutherford was as contrary toBrother Russell's judgment as expressed in the Charter of theSociety as the former's endeavor to secure entire control ofthe Society's affairs. According to the Charter, which weprint elsewhere in this ~am ph le t, o member of the Board ofDirectors can be removed from office except "by a two-thirdsvote of the shareholders" at the annual election held in Pitt s-burgh the first Saturd ay in January. And yet the Presidenthas gone so far in the direction of grasping further powerand cont iol as to forcibly remove four of its members fromoffice and expel them from Bethel!The question which we have been considering and whicheach of you must consider is: Is it safe to leave the manage-ment of the Society's affairs in the hands of one who showssuch disrespect and seeming contempt for Brother Russell'swishes and the safeguards which he endeavored to throwaround the management of the work aft er his death? Is itsafe to have the control of th e Society so placed that anyand all of the workers who come into conflict with the high-handed and autocratic ideas of the Pr esiden t shall be sum-marily dismissed from Bethel and not permitted, no matterhow efficient and desirous of serving, to continue in the workat headqu arters? Such is the present condition and it has re-sulted directly and indirectly in the removal of more than 25brothers and sisters from the Bethel and Tabernacle withina few weeks.In this connection is it not re ma rk ~b le hat Bro ther Ruth-erford should appoint as new Directors three brethren wholive so far from Brooklyn-two at Pittsburgh and one a tScrant on? I t is worthy of note that Brother Pierson also isnet a resident of Brooklyn; in fact lives several hours' journeyaway. Thus a majority of the new Bo x d is not in closetouch with the work, nor able to intelligently supervise theExecutive's actions and conduct of the work, unless he seesfit to submit much more comprehensive statements of his ac-tivities and the finances of the Society than he has in the past.

BROTHER RUTHERFORD'S LEGAL CLAIMS NOTSUSTAINED

T o justify his course in dismissing the fou r Directors,Brother Ru therford brought fo rward a Pennsylvania statute

which requires that at least three Directors of a Corporationof that Stat e must be residents of the Commonwealt l~. Uponthis he also based his action in appointing the three br threnliving in Pennsylvania.However, a clause in the law reads that this statute is notto apply to Corporations already in existence. The WATCHTOWER orporation was chartered several years prior thereto,hence the statute respecting the three Directors from Penn-sylvania has no application to the Directors of our Society.LVhether Brother Rutherford overlooked this clause weare not in a position to know. Although he listened toBrother McGee discuss this and other points for an hour be-fore the Philadelphia Church, where both sides of the casewere presented, Brother Rutherford, although he followed inrebuttal, never once referred to this fact, nor to any otherlegal point raised b, Brother McGee, who is Assistailt to theAttorney General of the Sta te of YTew Jersey.In this connection we might add that several lawyers havevolunteered opinions upon the merits of this case. Some livein Pennsylvania, New York and New Jersey, and without asingle exception all have agreed that, even aside from themoral wrong, Brother Rutherford's course is wholly unlawful.DECLARES CHARTER MOST REMARKABLE

DOCUMENTFew of the friends of the Tr ut h have not read in theMemorial Xunb er of "The Watch Towe r" the oration de-livered on the occasion of our Pas tor 's funeral in The Templein Se w York. Th e oration was delivered by Brother Ruth-erford, and in order to show his estimate then of the Char-ter of the Society, we quote fr om it on page 374, first column,

second paragraph, as follows :"The work [that is the work of the Harv est] grew ;o grea t pro-portions; and, desiring that it might be conducted in a systematic mapner and perpetuated after his death, he organized the Watch TowerBible and Trac t Society-a corporation , the charter of which wa awritten by his own hand, and is admitted, by m e n w h o know, to be a

most reniarkab le docrcmenf. Through .this channel he has promulgatedthe message of Messiah's Kingdom to all the nations of the earth."

Comment on this seems unnecessary. I t speaks for itself.We leave it to sink into the hearts and minds of th e Lord'speople everywhere and to make its own appropriate impres-sion. Suffice it to say, however, that it must be apparent toall that there has developed a great change in Brother Ruther-ford's mind between the time of his election and the time hewrote "Siftingsv-a period of only seven months.Showing further the sweeping change in his mind sincelast December, we quote the following from "The WatchTower" of December 15th, 1916, page 390, written byBrothe r Rut her for d himself, shortly af ter Brother Russell'sdeath, which gives an accurate and comprehensive account ofthe organization and the purpose of the Society:

ORCANIZATiON OF THE WORK"It is recosnized that everything must be done decently and inorder; that there must be s regular organization to carry on any work.


8/24

L I G H T A F T E R D A I i K N E S SHow, then, may the Harvest work be thus conducted since BrotherRussell is no longer in our midst? Many of the friends throughoutthe country are asking this and other questions, and we take pleasurein answering:

"The Watch Tower Bible and Tra ct Society was organized in theyear 1584 as a means of putting fo rth the Message of the Kingdomin an orderly and systematic manner. The Corporat ion is controlledand managed b y i t s Board of D irec tors and Oi l icers . The Board ofDirec tors i s composed of seven members . Th e Clrsr ter o f th e Cor-f iordt ion prov ides that the Board of D irec tors shal l be se l f-perpe tuat ing;that is to say, when a vacancy occurs by death or resignation thesurv ivin g members are empowered to fill such vacancy. Bro ther Ru s-sell was a member of the Board of Directors. Two days after hisdeath Lhe Roard met an d elected Brother A. N. Pierson as a memberof the Board to fill the vacancy caused by Erother Russell's change.Th e seven members of the Board as now constituted are A. I. Ritchie,W. E. V a n Amburgh, H. C. Rockwell, J. D. Wright, I. F. Hoskins,A. N. Pierson, and J. F. Rutherford."

BROTHER JOHNSON'S CASE NOT THE ISSUEDoubtless some of our readers will as k: "Did not youfour brethren form a league with Brother Johnson and wantto send him back to England?" KO, dear brethren, we had

ho N C ~ hought. It is in connection with this very point thatthe highest tide of error and misrepresentation is reached in'Warvest Siftings."Throughout the paper the Directors are charged with hav-ing come under Brother Johnson's influence, so that theyhave espoused his cause and made him their leader and thatthey were intending to send him back to England, etc.

From what we have said foregoing in these pages, we be-lieve that a11 can see tha t the coupling of Brother Johnson'saffairs with the Board of Directors is an attempt to becloudthe real issue and the real trouble, which existed before th ereturn of Brother Johnson to America. Since self-exaltationbegan before there was any trouble about the English case,and since objections to the President's course were madefrom January to hlarch, it is manifest that Brother Johnsmhad nothing to do with our affair. It is absolutely untrue thatBrother Johnson became in any sense a leader of the Directors.It is equally untrue that the brethren ever thought of re turn -ing him to the English Branch, even though two Committeesappointed by the President, one in England and one in Amer-ica, reported favorably on much of his work.,4t no time did we eyer contemplate deposing BrotherRutherford and making Brother Johnson President, as BrotherRutherfo rd well knew. He and those with him also wellknow that we did not plot against him to oust him and seizecontrol, to exalt ourselves and humiliate him. Since we fre-quently- thus assured him, we cannot understand how he couldbelieve and publish the contrary. All we wished to do wasto co-operate with him for the good of th e wo rk; and we werewell pleased that he act as President and presiding officer.But we were not prepared to quietly allow him to set asideour Pastor's Will and Charter and "lord it over God's heri-tage" without a protest. Th at protest is the cause of all thetrouble, even as St. Paul preaching the Truth at Ephesus wasmobbed, and rhen charged with being a disturber of the peace.

V I O L E N C E I N T H E B E T H E LT the close of a conference near noon, Friday,July 27, Brother Rutherford tried to draw theDirectors Into an argument and partially suc-ceeded. Then in a voice of wrath he demandedtha t if we had any ultimatum to deliver weshould deliver it then. When told that we hadnone, he replied: "Then I have one to deliverto you," and standing up, he delivered hisdecree: "My authority in this house has got tobe obeyed and you will all get out of this houseby Monday noon. Brother Johnson will getout today." A few moments later there occurred in theBethel Dlning Room a scene which we are loath to report;but we believe you should know the lengths to which thesematters have gone in order that you may see the kind offruitage that now appears.At the noonday meal, Brother Rutherford reported to theBethel Family that we would be compelled to leave the BethelHome by Monday noon. Th e brethren then considered ittheir duty to make some statement to the Family. BrotherRutherford wished the Family to hear only his statement;

but we persisted, and one of our number said that he wishedto read a letter from Brother Pierson stating that he "wouldstand by the old Board." Brother Rutherford refused to letthe letter be read and shouted that Brother Johnson had beento see Brother Pierson and had misrepresented the matter tohim. Upon Brother JohnsLn's firm denial of this, BrotherRutherford hastened to him and using physical force, whichnearly pulled Brother Johnson off his feet, said in a fit of pas-sion : "You will leave this house before ni gh t; if you do notgo out, you will be put out." Before night this threat wascarried into effect. Brother Johnson's personal ef-fects were literally set outside the Bethel Home and brethren,as watchmen, were placed at various doors to prevent himfrom entering the house again.Following is a copy of Brother Pierson's letter:

BROTHER PIERSON TAKES STAND WITH OLDBOARDCROMWELL, onn., Ju ly 26, 1917.

Mr . A. I. RITCHIE,M Y DEAR ROTPIER ITCHIE:

I thank you for your favor of the 21st. received last Monday.Meanwhile I have been waiting on the Lord to know what to say

in reply. After re ading the letter, :5e words of the Fsalmist cameto my micd, recurring many emes since: "The meek will Hea i d e in judgment; acd the ree k a i l1 He teach Hi s way." Con-sequently I have taken t ime :o ~ a k ehis reply:

On ent ering the meeting roo= at th e Bethel a week ago lastTuesday morning I was Tery rouch sgrprised to find that BrotherRutherford had appointed a new Board, and so expressed myselft o t ho sr p res ent . P r e s e ~ t l ~e heard the reading of a letter fr oma Philzdelphia law firm, n which %ere set f orth the facts men-tioned in the resolution read tiefore the Bethel Family, via., thatthe Board of Directors, as constituted, was not a legal one, these-fore its members were ro t lega!lj. &rectors. Tkereupon I ex-pressed the thought that if these bzethrcn were not legally --bers of the Board of Directorewhich position some of them hadheld for many years in the eyes of the friends in general-thenthe fa ct remains that :he TVatch Tcwer Bible and Tra ct Societyhas never bad a legal Board. To this Brother Rutherford a ssented. I fcrther stated that if it was true that the Society's busi-ness had been carried on for ro m a y years in a manner notentirely in harmony with the requirements of law, it surely couldbe conti nued in t he same way f or a re7.\- more months, untilanother annual meeting. This was not a motion, but merely acriticism or suggestion, ilpon n-hich no action was taken.

Wh en thc Committee a-hich had draw n up the resolution pre-sented it to me, I told them frankly that, while I had nothingwhatever qa in st the brethren chosen, I did object to the appoint-ment of a new Board. After heari ng the discussion by the dif-fere nt brethren, including Erot her McGee's summing up of th earticles of the charter, I came to the conclusion that the state-ments concerning the legal :tanling of the members of the Boarddid not place the situation i ~ i ts true IigOt; for if four of theleven members of the Board were not legally Directors, then the~ t h e r hree, who had been elected as the Society's officers by t heshareholders, would have the same sta nding so far as member-ship in the Board of %rectors is concerned. While the charter,.as published in the litti e blue-covered booklet we received, make sno provision for the selection of the members of the Board ofDirecto rs and speciiies that "the members of the Board of Direc-tors sha!i bold their respective offices for li fe, unless removed b pa two-thirds' vote of the shareholders."

You ask why I signed the resolution that was so detrimentatto yourself and the other brethren. I felt that there was ameasure of wro ng on hoth sides. Some of you brethr en lnqdmade statements at Philadelphia and other places which calle$for a n explanation, and a le tter of some kind was du c the frien dswho asked for such an explanation. This resolution was draw nup by a Committee, whose original intention was to have it p u blished, to which I objected. While I admire Brother Ruther-forrl's ability and his wisdom in scttling many dimcult questions


9/24

,%FTEMBER I, 1917 L I G H T A F T E R D A R K N E S S 9far the Society, and while P fully helieve that it is the Lord's from what the roads might consider as an injustic e toward them.will that he should be our President, yet I cannot approve of Clrrisiion love,some things he did in connection with this matter. "Yours in the s ew i c e of the Redeemer,

One 'of my principal weaknesses, a s fa r as I know myself, is PEOPLBSULPITAsan."that it is very hard fo r me to say "No," especially to brethre nI love so much as I do all the members of the Board, includingthe brethren newly appointed; in fact, all who are truly theLord's. When signing the resolution, I had strong hopes thatreconciliation might be made between th e two partie s who dif-fered, and that neither publicdtion of the resolution nor any otherexplanation from either side might be necessary. Before I signed,however, a num ber of stateme nts to which I objected werestricke n out. After being thus modified, it was further a greedthat copies of this resolution should be sent only to Classes andbrethre n tha t had heard of tlie trouble a3d requested an explana-tion. I held out for some hours against a thing I did not believein, but since the brethren had changed it, eliminating some ob-jectionable paragraphs, and agreeing to send it only to inqbiringfriends, I finally signed, as a compromise.

When our Secretary showed me a copy of the resolution whichhad been s ent to the Class, I could not help but think th at i t hadbeen sent far and wide to all Classes; and I felt that I had nottaken the proper course in signing even after it had beenamended. Now that I have reason to believe a general circula-tion of this resolution has been made, I want to assure you thatha d I foreseen this I should never have signed the paper. Ife elthat this has done you four brethren a decided injury, because,in my opinion, none of you has any desire to do an y harm tothe Society or bring about a division, but that you simply differwith Brother Rutberford about the control of the Society; thatit is your desire to stand by the charter and the principles ofBrothe r Russell, which recognize the Hoard of Directors as hav-ing the power of control. P have now concluded to take afirmer stand for what I believe is the right, vie., th at the ap-pointment of the new members to taka the place of the fourwho were not legally members according to the decision of thePhiladelphia law firm was not the proper course, and will there-fore stand by the old Board.A copy of this letter goes to Brother Rutherford With muchChristian Love, as ever,

Your brother in Christ. A. N. PIERSONVice president.P S.-You have my permission to make su ch use of thisletter a s you may deem wise.

A few days later, after repeated threats by the Presidentto forcibly accomplish their ejection from the Home, the fourDirectors, though they considered the Bethel their home, andas having the same right there as Brother Rutherford andothers, decided to submit to the injustice of Brother Ruther-ford's orders, and have since gone forth from the Home. Itwas as a result of Brother Pierson's negotiation and inter-cession that Brother Rutherford, after threatening to forceour ejection, agreed with him to make an allowance to coverthe expenses of the brethren leaving the Home. Th e sumwas $300.00; but in no sense did it represent an adjustment ofmatters, but merely as making some provision for brethrenwho after long years of service, now without means, wereabout to be forced out into the world to start life anew.T o justify this drastic and violent action toward hisbrethren in thrusting them from the Home that had shelteredthem during the long years that they labored harmoniouslywith Brother Russell, Brother Rutherford and his associatessay that it was done because we were disturbing the BethelFamily an d the work, and, therefore, done "for the good ofthe Cause." W e derive comfort from Isaiah's prophecy,quoted in the Photo Drama: "Your brethren that hated you,that cast you out for my name's sake, said, Let the Lord beglorified, but H e shall appear to your joy, an d they shall beashamed."At no time has any of us said or done anything among theBethel Family or any of the Classes to stir up trouble.On Wednesday morning, Aug. 22, a copy of the follow-ing letter was received by Bros. Hoskins, Hirsh, Wright andRitchie :"Dew Bxotalm:T n iew of the fact that you no longer have Sunday appointment*

under th e direction of the People9 pulpit Assn.; and furth er, in viewof th e frcf that your clerical cards were secured from the nr io us rail-r ~ t f snder tht name of the Peoples Pulpit Association, fve would askt&g yon return thbb cards to us in order that we mi ~ h t e protected

From this it is seen that they take away our opportunitiesof service, and then require us to tur n over railroad permits,which do not belong to them. If the managers of the PeoplesPulpit Association are doing their duty they have nothing tofear from the Railroads, nor from us.

DIVlSlON AT BETHELIt is proper in this connection to refer also to the supportwhich Brother Rutherford claims from'the Bethel Family.The facts are that the President's special representative andothers, with the President's official sanction, has for monthsbeen secretly carrying on a campaign amongst the BethelFamily and the traveling Pilgrim brethren, spreading falsereports regarding the Board members, and prejudicing theminds of the Family against them. Some of the Pilgrimbrethren, as they passed through Brooklyn, stopping for aday or two, had these evil things whispered in their ears, andthen were sent forth to give them to the Classes. After thiscampaign had been carried on amongst the Family for sometime they began to circulate petitions among the workers tosuppoit the President and his management, and to condemnthe Directors, the understanding being that all who refusedto sign would be dismissed from the service, with the resultthat many signed these petitions, some because they had beenprejudiced, and others because of fearing they would bethrust out of Bethel. Hence the partial list of names of theBethel Family which appeared in "Siftings." Some who re-fused to sign these petitions were discharged and some otherswho signed the petitions have since been dismissed becausethey disapproved of "Siftings," with its false charges.

THE PWIDENT'S SPECIAL REPRESENTATIVEThe au thor of "Harvest Siftings" has something to sayabout Brothe r IlacMillan1s appointment by Brother Russelllast August as assistant to the President. Several letters arequoted in support of the fact, and on page 22 , bottom of thesecond column, Brother Rutherford states that "BrothersHoskins, Hirsh, and Ritchie were displeased with Brother

Mac&iillan's appointment by Brother Russell" and that theyhad been working against him from the first.We believe it is enough to say that there has never beenthe slightest doubt in our minds that Brother MacMillan re-ceived such an appointment by Brother Russell last August,nor have we disputed the fact at any time, nor was there theslightest objection in our minds to this appointment made byBrother Russell. T o the contrary, it is a fact well known toBrother MacMillan that all three of the above-named brethrenheartily co-operated with him a t the time of his appointmentby Brothe r Russell and for months afterwards. We wouldsay, however, that it is one thing for Brother MacMillan tobe Manager under Brother Russell and quite another matterfor him to be Manager under Brother Rutherford.As an example of the tu rn of mind on the part of BrotherMacMillan, the broth er approached Brother Hoskins a t thetime of Brother Russell's funeral in Pittsburg, November 6,and only a few feet removed from the dead body of our Pas-tor, Brother MacMillan said :

"Brother Hoskins, I have something to say to you that 1 know willhurt you very much, and I haven't a ny idea that you have strength ofcharacter sufficient to follow my advice; but I am going to tell you,anyway. I think every one of you Directors except BrotLers Rutherfordand Van Amburgh ought to resign and give a chance for some decentmen who know something to be put in your places. Th ere is not one ofyou fit to manage anything, and you ought to resign: and if you don'tresign you will, every one of you, get kicked out."

Brother MacMillan has since rendered efficient service toBrother Rutherford in fulfilling his own prophecy-"kickingout" the four members of the Board. And those were thethoughts that were being entertained by him as we stood ba-side the bier of our grea t leader, while others bowed theirheads in sorrow, considering it a time for deep searchihe ofthe heart and drawing near to God.Preferring dot to go into persodalities or the de-


10/24

L . I C H T A F T E R D A R K N E S Stails of the conduct of Brother MacMillan we believe that itwill be sufficient to say that soon after Brother Russell'sdeath, under loose rein, Brother MacMillan demonstrated hisutter unfitness for the posit:ion originally assigned him byBrother Russell. In the course of a few months it becameevident to the Directors that it was their duty to make somechanges with regard to Brother MacMillan's position, evenas Brother Russell had often made changes in the position of

the brethren when he discovered that they did not properlyfit in the places he had given them.That there was any malice or prejudice or jealousy inany of our hearts with regard to him or tha t any of us wereseeking his place we most positively deny. I t was purely inthe interests of the work and because there were so manycomplaints regarding Brother MacMillan that the changewas desired.

H I G H - H A N D E D N E S S G O I N G F R O M B AD T O W O R S ETR AN GE indeed that when the mind becomes duct are subject to criminal indictment and that if carried toonce bent in a wrong direction, it colors every- the courts would meet with swift and severe punishment.thing to its own liking and can find excuses to Amongst the proxies held by Brother MacMillan of thejustify almost anything; and so the motto of brethren absent at the meeting, was tha t of Brother Paul Esuch is "the end justifies the means." Thomson, formerly of the Bethel Home, later of Detroit,

'We come now to some proceedings on the Mich. Brother Macllillan, evidently feeling some apprehen-part of Brother Rutherford, assisted by sion regarding this illegal use of the proxies, wrote toBrothers MacMillan and Van Amburgh-pro- Brother Thomson to secure his endorsement of his act.ceedings of which we could not believe these Brother Thomson wrote a reply which we append: Furtherbrethren capable, for we could scarcely think comment on this is unnecessary:them so blind to the principles of justice and

righteousness did we not ourselves witness what occurred.In the latte, part of July Brother Rutherford announceda meeting of the members of the Peoples Pulpit Associationto be held July 31, which he declared was for the purposeof expelling from membership on the Board of Directors andfrom membership in the Association Brothers Hirsh and Hos-kins. The hour arrived and the meeting was called to orderwith fourteen members present out of a total of some fortymembers. The charges were read against the two brethren,to the effect that they had withdrawn their moral supportand were in opposition to the work of the Association. TOsupport these charges several trumped-up accusations wereread which the two accused brethren easily and clearly re-futed. They denied that they had withdrawn their moral sup-port or that they were working in opposition to the PeoplesPulpit Association, and showed to the contrary that theirwhole purpose was to sustain and uphold the work in both thePeoples Pulpit Association and the Watch Tower Bible andTrac t Society, as Brother Russell intended it t o be carriedon. At the conclusion of th e hearing and th e answeringof the charges the result was that the accusers found that ofthe members present there was not a sufficient number whowould belleve their false charges and accusations so as tofavor the expulsion.Then what did they do? With cruel audacity that seemslittle short of Satanic, and of which we could scarcely believean ordinary worldly man capable, these three accusers, ledby Brother Rutherford, gathered together a lot of proxies ofvarious of the Pilgrims, members of the Peoples Pulpit As-sociation, that had been sent in the first of the year for thepurpose of voting for officers of the Association a t tha t time.The following is a sample of the proxies: The Brooklyn "Eagle" recently published a statement de-

"PXOXY scribing the disturbed condition of the Watch Tower Bible........................... .* 917. and Tract Society and the Bethel Home, and Brother Mac-"TO .................... member of the Peoples Pulpit Association: Millan in his letter to Brother Thomson charges that the"you are hereby authorized to act as my proxy and to cast my vote "opposition" (referring to the Board of Directors) ha d givenat the annual meeting of the Peoples pulpit Association to be held a t the information to the " ~ ~ ~ l ~ . ne would say that none ofthe office of the Corporation, at 124 Columbia Heights, Brooklyn, N. Y., the members of the ~~~~d had anything to do with gettingon the 10th day of Januar y, 1917.(Signed) .......................... , the statement in the "Eagle," nor do any of these brethrenhave any knowledge whatsoever of how the informationThese proxies, which were intended only fo r the election reached the "Eagle," except it might have been through theof the officers in January, were from brethren who were ab- calling in of the policeman at the Tabernacle by Brother Mac-sent and heard nothing of the charges brought against Millan himself.Brothers Hoskins and Hirsh on July 31. These proxies were

taken and used for the purpose of voting these two brethren N O LAW SUlTout of and thus accomplished their expulsion from the We ar e charged in "Harvest Siftings" with great wrongDirectorship and from the Association, when if the vote had because we consulted an attorney with regard to some leg21been taken merely of those present who heard the charges matters; but it was not until the President himself had re-and who only were capable of judging, the charges and the peatedly told us that certain portions of t he Charter wereattempt at expulsion would have fallen to the ground. And illegal that we considered it our duty to consult an attorney,though seven of those present earnestly protested against such who is a brother, well established in the Truth. And hishighhanded methods, no heed was given to their protests. advice, which proved to be sound, revealed to us that BrotherWe are advised by good authority that such acts and con- Rutherford's legal opinion was very unsound. Then the

"Detroit, Mich."DEARBROTHERMACMILLAN:"Failure of the copy of 'Harv est Siftings' you sent me t o arrivehas delayed my reply to your let ter asking my approval of your

action in using my proxy for the removing of Brothers Hir shand Hoskins from the Board of Directors of the Peoples PulpitAssociation. I have just finished the rezding of a borrowed copyof the 'Siftings.'

"Without evidence additional to that contained in 'HarvestSiftings' I would not have cas: my vote agains t the Brothersmentioned. My one readin g 1oca:es no definite charges agains tthem, but merely surmisings. I f surmisings were to hang peopleyou and Brother Rutherford u..ould haae been strung up longego by my side .

"As I recall it, my proxy K i S given for the yearly election ofofficers and not for the making of an? changes in the Board. I nthat case you were wrong i n using it as you did and theBrothers should have a fair vote on the matter. For that rea-so n I am sending your letter ar d a carbon of mine to them fortheir information.

"Please do not understand that I have lost confidence in thejudgment of yourself or Brother R,~therford. I merely neverhad absolute confidence in the jcdgment of anyone. W e are allfinding-it easier to be wrong tha n to be right. Some are wrongthis time and it is two out of four in whom I have had aboutequal confidence in the past. I trcst that you are all trying tobe right and I hope that some day n-e ail 1 all succeed.".I suppose no further cse will be nade of my proxy. I t isnot my wish that there be an y further voting done with it.

"Be assured of my continued love for you, Bro ther Mac, andthat you hdve a daily interest in my petitions.

"Your brother by His grace, PA ULE. TEOM~ON."


11/24

E I G H T A F T E R D A R K N E S SPresident made a trip to Philadelphia to consult a lawyerthere with the purpose of securing a legal opinion which wouldjustify his declaring the Board illegal. Was it wrong for usto get legal advice when we saw one after another of thewise safeguards devised by our Pastor being swept away?I t was not our desire to go into court proceedings. Fa r fromit. And yet, all corporations are creatures of the law andnecessarily subject to it. Th e law requires that Directorsshall direct. They must know what their corporation is do-ing, and if they allow a President or other official to exceedhis powers to the detriment of the corporation, they do so attheir own peril, especially if they are driven in the directionof the law and do not take steps to protect their trust. Ther e-fore, many brethren have advised that as the Watch TowerBible and Tract Society is a business corporation, it was noth-ing sho rt of our duty as Directors to protect its interests.

But though we are assured that the courts would not sus-tain the action of the President in his efforts to subvert theSociety's Charter, but would decide in our favor, it is not ourintention to institute a friendly suit or any other kind of asuit to determine the question at issue. We feel that wehave discharged our obligation thus far in making knownthese conditions to the voting shareholders, having narratedevents leading up to the present situation at headquarters.Briefly, the situation is that all who do not approve the Presi-dent's course and conduct are one by one being required toleave the work here. This has aiready affected four of us,together with our families as respects residence at Bethel,and th ree of us with respect t o the work as well, and whileBrother Hirsh, by the President's order, may no longer liveat Bethel, as a member of the Editorial Committee he con-tinues to work at his desk.

R E P E O P L E S P U L P I T A S S O C I A T I O NEALIZING the weakness of his position and hisinability to legally maintain full control of theWatch Tower Bible and Tract Society, becausethe Charter states that the Corporation shall be

managed by the Board of Directors, BrotherRutherford finally comes forward in "HarvestSiftings" with a new argument, which it wouldseem is but another effort to conceal the realissue.On page 16 he brings forward the PeoplesPulpit Association, saying that as Presidentof that Association he has full control of all the affairs of theWatch Tower Bible and Tract Society in the State ofNew York, with the result that he would nullify and makevoid the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society and establishas the dominant factor in the work the Peoples Pulpit Asso-ciation. As a matter of fact the very reverse is the case-tha t the Society is the controlling Corporation. We can dono better than quote Brother Russell's explanation in "TheWat ch Tower" of December 1, 1915, page 359, years afte rthe Peoples Pulpit charter was copied from the charte r of theWatch Tower Bible and Tr ac t Society-with the exceptionof a few words. The explanation mentioned is as follows:

"The whole management is by the Watc h Towe r Bible and Tra ctSociety and these auxiliary organizntions merely help in carryin g onits work. We sometimes use one name and sometimes another, just asanyone wculd have the right to use any names appropriate to his work.I t is equally appropriate to say that we are the Intern ational BibleStud ents Association. We ar e Bible students, and ar e helping Biblestudents in all parts of the world by the printed page, by financial as-sistance and in other ways. It is also approp~ia te to use the namePeoplcs Pulpit Association in connection with persons who are engagedin p rea ~h ing nd are acting under guidance of the Watch Tower Bibleand Tract Society.

"I n other words, the Peoples Pulpit Association cannot transact buni-ness 'except through the VJatch Tower Bible and Trac t Society. ThoWatch Tol'er B.ble and Tract Society has the management, and th ePeoples Pulpit -%ssociation does the work-absolutely."

The following also appears on the Tract Fund Ac-knowledgment leiters sent out by the Watch Tower Bibleand Tract Society:"S . B. Ali cortributions should be remitted to the Watch Tower

Bible and Tract Society, as it is the parent Corporation, having generalsupervision of the work. 4 1 other corporate names used in connectionwith the work are nerelp auxiliary to the Watch Tower Bible and TractSociety."

In this connection it is well to remember that BrotherRutherford has stated that the preparation of Volume Sevendid not cost the Tx'atch Tower Bible and T ract Society onecent, as all the fun& (probably over $20,000.00), were con-tributed by a brother for that purpose. The book was pre-pared without the knowledge of either the Directors or theEditorial Committee, and was copyrighted and issued by thePeoples Pulpit Association. Since none of the money wasdonated to the Society, and since the proceeds from the saleof the book are kept separate from the Society's funds, ofcourse the said brother will not be entitled to 2,000 or morevoting shares to which such a donation to the Society wouldbring him.In view of the foregoing, dear brethren, remember that ifthe Peoples Pulpit Association is substituted for the WatchTower Bible and Tract Society, instead of being an agentto the Society, every shareholder in the Society will therebylose his vote altogether, because there are fewer than fiftyvotes, all told, held in the Peoples Pulpit Association. It is inthe SVatch Tower Bible and Tract Society alone in which youhave secured one vote for each $10.00 contributed to the work.

T H E W I L L D I S C R E D I T E DCARCELY had Brother Russell's bodygrown cold in death until his Will was de-clared to be not in "legal form," and there-fore not binding, or obligao ry. W e under-stand that when he wrote it in 1907, he wellknew this; and it is our thought that hedesignedly left it so to reveal whether thosewho would follow him in authority wouldhave sufficient respect for him and his ex-pressed wishes, to faithfully follow them,even if th e civil law did not comp el th em todo so. The eve nts of t he last eight mon ths have evidencedthe great wisdom he showed.Para graph s 15 and 16 are a very imp ortan t part of thewill; and reveal in part how our Pastor arranged that hiswishes in regard to the management of the Society after

A N D D E C L A R E D I L L E G A Lhis decease would be safeguarded, by arranging that hisvoting shares be used by five sisters to endeavor to electonly such men as President, Vice-President and Secretary-Treasurer as they had good reason to think would closelyfollow the letter and spirit of the Charter and the Will.Such an arrang emen t would surely commend itself to everyright intentioned person. You will be surprised to learnthat our President almost at once took exception to thearrangement, and hinted t hat the whole Will and arrange-men t was "illegal." He procured a lon g legal opir,;onfrom a local firm of attorneys, which was used to preventthe sisters from voting the shares at the election at Pitts-burgh on January 6. I t was claimed that these sh a r umerely constituted the Pastor's Church membership; andthat it could not be "legally" bequeathed. Th e fact tha tthe 45,000 shares had been donated t o th e Society ten y ears


12/24

L I G H T A F T E R D A R K N E S Spreviously, on certain terms (which they were disregarding)was overlooked, and these Sisters have been the trusteesof these voting shares ten years prior to his death, and hisdeath, therefore, would not make void their right to votethose shares. Thus was another safeguard made by "thatwise and faithful servant" against the possible seizing ofthe Society's income and trus t funds by ambitious mendestroyed. W e can see no harm that could come to any-one by allowing the shares to be voted according to theWill; and we see much danger from their cancellation.Whe n any arrangeme nt of the Pasto r's does not suit thenew President, he usually finds a way to declare it "illegal";but if it will be to his advantage, he uses it and ref ers tohim as "that wise and faithful servant."

If the sisters' committee, authorized by the Will, has nolegal existence, is it not true that the Editorial Committee,which has no othe r authority fo r its existence, is equallyillegal?THE PRESIDENT'S MANAGEMENT

The President has expressed overconfidence in statingthat nothing has been found wrong with his conduct ofth e affairs of the Society. Unfortun ately, several importa ntmatters seem to have been poorly handled during his ad-ministra tion; namely, the Photo Drama, the sale of whichwas announced by the President at the Pittsburgh Con-vention as evidently the Lord's Will, but which was after-ward forced back upon the Society.I t is well known tha t the Angelophone has until re-cently been poorly handled, and has caused the writingof hundreds of lett ers of complaint by the friends. Th iscould have been avoided very largely by keeping on withBrother Russell's plan respecting this enterprise, his in-structi ons being to have new records ma de at once in casehis voice was not satisfactory.Many efforts were made to have the President followthese instructions, but he could not be persuaded until asister from Illinois came fo rward and paid $1,,500.00 to havethe lectures rerecorded. Brother Cooke is now handlingthe Angelophone successfully notwithstanding BrotherRutherford's advice to him to sell it to the highest bidder andget rid of it.

The pastoral work has also suffered at Brother Ruther-ford's hands, not intentionally, of course. Changes in thisdepartment have caused misunderstandings and delays andmuch inconvenience.Further, the President's inability to work with Di-rectors as fair-minded as those whom he has put out ofBethel is also a serious indictment against his administra-tion of eight short months. I t is conspicuously marked,too, with a long list of brethren whom he ha s alienatedfrom active co-operation in the work of the Society.Th e measure of progress of the work during the pasteight months has been due almost altogether to the work-ing force which Brother Russell left behind-a force which,unlike Brother Rgtherford, was thoroughly trained to lookafter their respective parts, and did so, even in the face ofthe President's mistakes.

RECARDING THE ANCELOPHONE"Harvest Siftings" refers to the fac t that Brother Ritchiehad requested the Board of Directors to allow him to takeover and manage the L4ngelophone, when there was some $18,-000 to the Angelophone's account, in Bank, and gives the infer-ence tha t Bro ther Ru tiierfor d came to the rescue and preventedthe Board from voting an-ay $18,000.00 to Brother Ritchie. Thetruth is that Brothers Rutherford, Van Amburgh and Mac-

Millan despised Brother Russell's last work, the Angelophone,and hampered and ridiculed it, always seeking to kill it.Th e morning after Brother Rcssell's death, Brother Mac-Millan ordered Brorter Cooke to cancel all the contractsand close it dovcn. Seei xg th e continued opposition tothe Angelophone. a n d kzox-ing from Brother Russell'sdeath that they m-ished to get rid of him, Brother Ritchiewent to Brother Rutherford and offered to take over thebusiness as it \\-as, r i t h SlP.KO.00 in the bank, and toendeavor, with Br other Cc.oke. to make it a success. Hi sreply was: "I love 1-03 too mcch to let you try it. If youwere a man of the TI-crldI w-auld do it in a minute."H e did not explain tkar the business wa s in debt $25,-000.00, and more th ae Ei.KO.OCI rrould soon be due. B roth erRitchie's acquaintances ~ 2 2-at believe that he wished totake advantage of the S o d e ~ .

C O M P O S E D H I S O W N B I O G R A P H YT SEEMS too bad that at considerable expensewe brethren should be called upon to get out areply to Brother Rutherford's "Siftings.''Many times we have felt like doing nothingin the matter, but depending wholly upon thegood sense and training of the Lord's peoplenot to judge, lest they be judged. But the Lordevidently means that we should now do some-thing in the way of making known to thefriends conditions as they have really existedat the Brooklyn Tabernacle and Bethel since

Brother Rutherford's election, although these conditions wereknown to but a few until several weeks ago-the few pre-ferr ing to keep silent and bear the burden, not even tellingtheir wives, in the hope that the President would come tohis senses and rectify the wrongs.At such a time as this there are found those who, for onereason or another, will go to undue lengths to support thosewho wield the power. We have in mind just now BrotherHudgings, who, however, has overreached himself in thisinstance and makes a bad matt er worse. Whatever possessed

him, under oath, to testify that Brother Hirsh "composed thearticle" on the last two pages of the Memorial Number of"The Watch Toweru-a biography of Brother Ruther ford-only the Brother himself is competent to say. At any ratehe went a long distance out of his way to show to the Presi-dent that he is with him hear t and soul. If Brother Hirs hwere the au thor of the biography he would not be ashamedof t. There would have been no wro ng committed in his

composing it. In fzct, it rrould :lave been much more appro-priate for him to compose it than for some other person-forinstance the President.We had thought n-e n-ould never mention this matter toanyone; but since the dear brother swears that Brotherilirsh "composed the article." and Brother Rutherford forsome reason has seen 5t to publish the sworn statement inhis "Siftings." we can see no good reason why our lips shouldbe longer sealed.This biography oi Brother Rutherford first appeared insome of the newspapers of the country the day after his

election. In order to have it in the hands of distant news-papers for publication the day following Brother Rutherford'selection, it was necessary that it be prepared a week or morein advance. Thi s Kas done at Brother Hirsh's suggestion, butit was not romposed by Bro ther Hirsh, who saw it for thefirst time when Brother Ruth erfo rd himself handed i t to him.With the exception of some necessary reductions in sizethe article is practically word for word as it was originally.Brother Wisdom, too, has gone far out of his way to pleasethe President. Hi s letter published in "Siftings" seemscharacteristic. W e well remember last summer at NiagaraFalls convention, when the thermometer was a hundred ormore in the Convention Hall, and everybody was ready tomelt, this same brother, for an hour or more, greatly to thedistress of his hearers and the chairman, roasted the lateBrother Abbott-and this was long after some matter had

been published in his paper and adjustment had been made.I t is said that Brother Wisdom while traveling at the Swiety's


13/24

L l C H T A F T E R D A R K N E S Sexpense, kep t up th is form of persecut ion for some t ime.W e were n o t su rp r i sed t o l ea rn t h a t t h i s sam e b ro th erh as t u rn ed b o th h i s t o ng u e an d h i s p en ag a in s t u s. Ou rconversat ion wi th h im was so sat i sfactory to h imsel f a t thet im e a s t o cau se h im to say t h ree t im es, " I can n o t say t h a tyou are wrong ." Instead of Bro the r Hirs h seek ing the con-versat ion on the t rain , the bro ther h imself said , "When youget located in your s leeper ahead , come back to me." I t i sobserved in th is Bro ther 's le t ter that he was talk ing not on lywi th o n e b ro th er , b ut w i th o th e r s a t Bro o k ly n an d h a s t h in gsso jumbled a s to make i t p ract ical ly impossible to t re at h isl e t t e r se ri ou s ly . H e h as ad d ed ru m o r t o ru m o r . Th er e i sa proverb t o the effect that a l ie wi l l t ravel aro und thewo rld whi le t ru th i s get t ing her boots on . An d how t ru e th isi s o f Bro th er Ru th er fo rd 's "S if ti ng s"! H e h as sen t i t t oa l l p a r t s o f t h e ea r t h .

SLIPS OF BROTHER RUTHERFORD'S PENOn page 12, of "H arve st Sift ings," to p of second column,Bro th er Ho sk in s i s q u o t ed a s say ing "We, t h e Bo ard , a r ethe managers and w

1917 Light After Darkness

Documents

Transcript of 1917 Light After Darkness