Consolation, January 25, 1939
Download: PDF — Consolation, January 25, 1939
Contents
Jesuitized Albion (Part 1) 3
The Peace of Munich 4
Behind the Scenes 4
Putting On the Pressure 5
New Government 9
10,000 Miles on a Bicycle 9
For Free Speech 11
Whited Sepulchers of Radio 12
NBC Embarrassed with Questions 12
Never Put Up a Cent 15
Animal Husbandry 16
Counsel by J. F. Rutherford 17
Soul 17
Reply to Ananias 18
Under the Totalitarian Flag 20
Pope and Emperor vs. Martin Luther 20
Bloodshed in the Name of Religion 21
South Atlantic States 23
Treasury Department—U. S. Government 24
Australia 25
Why Be Inconsistent, Mr. Tholen? 25
British Comment 28
Tendency to Fascism 28
Panaceas 28
Totalitarianism in Trade 29
"Modern Evangelism" 30
The Roman Catholics 30
Railroads 31
Published every other Wednesday by
THE GOLDEN AGE PUBLISHING COMPANY, INC.
117 Adams St., Brooklyn, N. Y., U. S. A.
President Clayton J. Woodworth
Vice-President Nathan H. Knorr
Secretary and Treasurer Charles E. Wagner
Five Cents a Copy
$1 a year in the United States
$1.25 to Canada and all other countries
NOTICE TO SUBSCRIBERS
Remittances: For your own safety, remit by postal or express money order. When coin or currency is lost in the ordinary mails, there is no redress. Remittances from countries other than those named below may be made to the Brooklyn office, but only by International postal money order.
Receipt of a new or renewal subscription will be acknowledged only when requested. Notice of Expiration is sent with the journal one month before subscription expires. Please renew promptly to avoid loss of copies. Send change of address direct to us rather than to the post office. Your request should reach us at least two weeks before the date of issue with which it is to take effect. Send your old as well as the new address. Copies will not be forwarded by the post office to your new address unless extra postage is provided by you.
Published also in Bohemian, Danish, Dutch, Finnish, French, German, Greek, Japanese, Norwegian, Polish, Portuguese, Spanish, Swedish, Hungarian, Ukrainian.
OFFICES FOR OTHER COUNTRIES
England 34 Craven Terrace, London, W. 2
Canada 40 Irwin Avenue, Toronto 5, Ontario
Australia 7 Beresford Road, Strathfield, N.S.W.
South Africa 623 Boston House, Cape Town
Entered as second-class matter at Brooklyn, N. Y., under the Act of March 3, 1879.
Appetizers
Schoolboy Howlers
Julius Caesar was renowned for his great strength. He threw a bridge across the Rhine.
A grass widow is the wife of a dead vegetarian.
An optimist is a man who looks after your eyes, and a pessimist is a man who looks after your feet.
A pedestrian is a man whose wife has taken the car.
The Mediterranean and the Red sea are joined together by the Sewage Canal.
A zebra is a sort of cream-colored donkey with black stripes, from which they make stove polish.
Politics are a deadly form of insect life.
A spectre is a man who cheers a football team.
The Royal Mint is what the king puts on his roast lamb.
A man who lives to be a hundred is called a centipede.
Joan of Arc was Noah's wife.
A buttress is a female goat.
In 1620 the Pilgrim Fathers crossed the ocean. This is known as the "Pilgrim's Progress".
A brunette is a young bear.
Courting disaster means to get engaged.
A cataract is a cat that catches rats.
Celibacy is the name of a great man.
Pompeii was destroyed by an overflow of saliva from the Vatican.
A Christian is allowed to have only one wife. This is called monotony.
Henry Wadsworth Longfellow was born in America while his parents were traveling on the continent.
A census-taker is the man who goes from house to house increasing the population.
Up to Liza!
Rastus and Liza were married but a short time when he came home with a big washtub, a washboard and a three-foot mirror.
Liza—Whut's all de truck you brung?
Rastus—Not all, but yo' kin take yo' pick. Yo' kin take de tub an' washboard an' go to work, or yo' kin take de mirror an' set down an' watch yo'se'f starve.—Labor.
CONSOLATION
"And in His name shall the nations hope."—Matthew 12:21, A. R. V.
Volume XX Brooklyn, N. Y., Wednesday, January 25, 1939 Number 505
Jesuitized Albion (In Two Parts—Part 1)
THE French police, when seeking to solve a particularly puzzling crime, proceed upon the assumption that there is somewhere, somehow, a woman involved, and that if they can locate the woman they will be able to solve the mystery. Hence the phrase, "Find the woman."
In international affairs, where the various factors that enter into a given situation are particularly mystifying, the presumption that somewhere in the background there is a Jesuit, or Jesuit influence, will often lead to surprising discoveries.
The influence of the Jesuit organization in the Roman Catholic system has long been recognized. The head of the Jesuit order is often referred to as the "Black Pope". In his book While Peter Sleeps, E. Boyd Barrett, an ex-Jesuit, shows how the Black Pope can and does dictate to the regular pope, who is, by way of distinction, referred to as the "White Pope".
The influence of the Jesuit system in England cannot be doubted, although its workings are hidden from the public eye. But straws show the way the wind is blowing in Albion. It is further in order to utilize these straws to find some solution to the "Munich Plot" which has so perplexed the observer of international trends.
At the outset it is of interest to reveal the Jesuit in the Cliveden woodpile, than which it is difficult to find a more imposing and voluminous woodpile in Britain.
The Cliveden Set
Considered one of the most influential groups in Britain, the Cliveden set is suspected of being pro-Nazi and of having forced favors to Hitler at the expense of Britain. The Cliveden set practically controls the British press. The set includes Lord Lothian, educated in a Jesuit school, but ostensibly converted to Christian Science. He makes frequent visits to Hitler. Lord Londonderry, another member of the set, is a close friend of Goering. Major John Jacob Astor, owner of the London Times, Geoffrey Dawson, its editor, and Barrington Ward, assistant editor, Sir Neville Henderson, ambassador to Berlin, Montagu Norman, head of the Bank of England, and Lord Halifax, the Foreign minister, are also identified with the set. Lady Astor, formerly Nancy Langhorne of Greenwood, Va., entertains the Cliveden set at her home every week-end, and it is there that most of their planning and plotting is done. Sir Stafford Cripps, of the Labor party, referring to the Cliveden set, stated, "People do not fancy the future of this country as does the gang of Lady Astor, as being that of a junior partner in a Fascist Internationale." Lord and Lady Astor both deny that there is such a thing as the Cliveden set. That, however, is not significant. The Jesuits, and their pupils and sympathizers, are adepts at plain and fancy subterfuges.
Prosperity, as well as adversity, makes strange bedfellows, and the Jesuits are pleased to co-operate with anyone who will further their schemes for world-domination. One may be a "Christian Scientist" or "Anglo-Catholic" or what have you. That is of secondary consequence. The main requirement is a certain pliability and agreeableness with an eye to the main chance.
The "Fuehrer" 'Principle'
The London Times has suggested that "the 'Fuehrer' principle (dictator idea) can exist within the framework of Parliamentary institutions". That is just another way of telling England they will have a dictator one of these days. Chamberlain's sympathies are undoubtedly in that direction.
His trip to Berchtesgaden is believed to have been planned long ago by the folks that meet at the home of Lord and Lady Astor, already referred to. With reference to this, Robert Briffault, British scientist and author, in an address at St. Louis, remarked:
Chamberlain's spectacular flights to Germany for conferences with Hitler were not the result of a sudden inspiration: It is known in diplomatic circles that the trips were planned weeks in advance and that an airplane was held in readiness for the prime minister. As a matter of fact, the first suggestion was that the king himself should go see Hitler.
The war tension that followed was terrific, but never once did the government heads expect to fight. The fear instilled in the people was deliberately planned. There were elaborate measures taken for protection from air raids, bomb shelters were dug in Hyde Park and sand was sprinkled in attics to prevent damage, in some unexplained manner, from incendiary bombs.
The whole thing was planned to make the peace with the Fascist powers seem more sweet. It is strange how little people understand diplomacy and how greatly they can become stirred by war.
The Peace of Munich
By no means all Britishers are satisfied with the "peace" that was won at Munich. The "appeasement" of Hitler seems to many to have been gained at the sacrifice of honor and principle. A few illustrations of the reaction of these are here given:
The Manchester Guardian, of September 23, observed editorially:
If Mr. Chamberlain now reads his papers he will see no trace of admiration for his part as the head of a great democracy, no trust that he can save any shred of principle from the wreck, no belief even that he can recover his country's honor. England and France have known some humiliations in the last few years, but none so great as this. Our name is mud in the United States and in the Dominions; the smaller European States have thrown up all faith in the saving of the European order and are scrambling to declare their neutrality or to seek safety in agreement with Germany.
A statement by Messrs. Reedman, Guenault, Sumner and Davis, of the University of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa, appearing in the October 14 issue of the same, said:
There is more than a suspicion that the war scare was partly artificial and was used to avert the gaze of the democratic peoples from the fundamental issues while the one remaining liberal State in Central Europe was reduced to impotence.
We do not believe that even at Munich the alternative to giving Hitler his full demands was war. Mr. Chamberlain went to Munich with two very good cards in his hand—the fear of war even in Germany (out of which Mr. Chamberlain made much political capital) and the unreadiness of the German High Command to lose another world war. Yet Mr. Chamberlain deliberately threw those two cards away. It is doubtful whether any group of politicians in history have had such a pernicious influence on European politics as the present so-called inner British Cabinet. Each has been concerned with major events in recent years which have brought shame on the people of Britain: Sir John Simon and Manchuria, Sir Samuel Hoare and Abyssinia, Lord Halifax and Austria, and now Mr. Neville Chamberlain and Czechoslovakia. They have so long forsaken any guiding moral principle that they are apparently incapable of distinguishing between right and wrong.
The tears which Duff Cooper, First Lord of the Admiralty, shed in the House of Commons when he learned of the ignominious peace dictated by Hitler at Munich were not crocodile tears. He honestly believed that Britain's surrender to Germany means the end of the British Commonwealth of Nations.
It is an odd circumstance that on the eve of the meeting of the four men at Munich to carve up Czechoslovakia the so-called 'eternal light' burning over the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier under the Arc de Triomphe, Paris, flickered and went out, and remained extinguished until the return of the premier.
Behind the Scenes
Ladislas Farago, in Ken, November 3 (1938) issue, adduces reasons why he thinks that the September war scare was artificial, stating: that the Munich four-power conference was arranged in the private office of Montagu Norman, head of the Bank of England, four years before it occurred (and names those present); that in 1934 English armament firms placed huge advertisements in German papers offering for sale tanks and guns prohibited by the Versailles treaty; that Chamberlain has 833 shares of preferred stock in Imperial Chemical Industries, and 5,414 shares of ordinary stock, while his son is on the sales staff at the main office in Birmingham; that in June, 1937, Norman had laid out the plan that Hitler was to annex Austria and dismember Czechoslovakia, with the subsequent return to Germany of some of her colonies; that Blum’s government was overturned because he would not go along with this ultra-Fascist program, and, finally, that Runciman, who was sent to Prague to becloud the issues, was himself the man who in 1934 authorized the first export of aero engines to Germany in open violation of the Versailles treaty. The article thus lays bare the fact that Britain is really Fascist, and indicates that Hitler has all along been staging theatricals for propaganda purposes, well knowing that he had nothing whatever to fear from the British Government, which takes its orders from the head of the Bank of England.
Further unfavorable reactions to the Chamberlain “appeasement” policy, so unpopular among liberty-loving Britishers, are registered abroad, particularly in the United States. Some of these follow.
Putting On the Pressure
◆ Drew Pearson and Robert S. Allen say interestingly, in the Philadelphia Record,
British bankers had bet money on the demise of Czechoslovakia by advancing money to German industrialists, who in turn were working with certain big Czech bankers. “These Czech bankers put the pressure on Benes, the British put the pressure on Chamberlain, and Hitler put the pressure on both. The British bankers won.”
Heywood Broun’s observations in the October issue of The Arbitrator are even more arresting:
I think that in the next general election Neville Chamberlain should describe to the voters the nature of the day which might impel him to say “Enough is enough”. The suggestion is offered that while he might candidly admit that circumstances might make it necessary to cede England, Scotland and Wales for the sake of peace, he proposes to argue that London should remain as a free city in a canton setup. And if Hitler will not agree to that Sir Neville should insist on retaining the upper floor of 10 Downing Street as a private apartment so that there may be some spot which shall be forever England. It’s a long way to Tipperary and a short hop to Berchtesgaden. Geneva is no more. The World Court is out of the picture and the League is dead. Instead there stands Adolph Hitler’s summer cottage, and to it the democratic leaders may go by appointment to ascertain the will and pleasure of Der Fuehrer.
The opinion of the New York World-Telegram’s special correspondent, John T. Flynn, is equally incisive. He says:
If anyone in this country now has the hardihood to raise his voice in support of the proposition that we should go to war to save the democracy of England, I assume that the proposal would be greeted with a horse laugh. What is at stake in England is not democracy, but her economic empire. What she is interested in protecting is that economic empire—those vast possessions which are, in fact, merely markets for her. What England saw threatened by a war was that empire. What she wants us to help her protect is that empire. To protect it she has destroyed the last home of republican government east of the Rhine.
An ex-soldier, in the Toronto Star of October 8, lamented as follows:
Everything we thought we were fighting for in the great war, freedom, justice, international honor and democracy, have been thrown on the junk pile. Czechoslovakia follows Ethiopia and China into bondage.
In Spain, short of sending British troops to assist the rebels, Mr. Chamberlain has done everything he possibly could to ensure a victory for Franco. He calls all this a policy of “appeasement”. To a good many people it looks more like the policy of making the world safe for Fascism.
A little more of the Chamberlain appeasement policy and this world will be turned into a Fascist slave camp, which, after all, is perhaps, what certain Britishers really want.—Ex-Private 160607.
Democracy goes to Munich
Communism the Alternative?
A bitter paragraph appearing in Reynolds News of October 16 indicates how the Jesuit tactics of the Fascists are driving men to sympathy with Communism, accepting what to them seems to be less odious than hypocritical religion, and failing to see that God's way is neither that of the religionists nor that of the Communist. The latter, in the estimation of such perplexed minds, appears to manifest qualities of candor and consistency which the pharisaical religious systems lack. The item follows: Russia has no aims menacing to Great Britain, breathes no fire against Democracy anywhere. Under the gangster code of morals now governing international relations, there is no reason why Ministers of the Crown should be polite to her. And Russia has been guilty of two unforgivable crimes. She has succeeded in creating a form of Socialist economy over one-sixth of the globe; and while "democratic" statesmen have been tearing up treaties and breaking their bonds, she has stood firm by her solemn obligations and the principle of Collective Peace.
Many Britishers see clearly that the trend of British politics, so adroitly played, is in the direction of Fascist-Nazism and away from the democratic traditions and policies of the last few centuries. Nor are they blind to the fact that the tools of the Roman Hierarchy everywhere contribute their efforts to that end.*
In a speech in London U.S. Ambassador Kennedy showed his Roman Catholic training by saying it has long been a theory of his that dictator and democratic countries should get along together without emphasizing their differences and that there is no sense in letting these differences grow into unrelenting antagonisms. In other words, in his heart Kennedy is for Fascism and, as such, is not a fit man to represent a democratic country. He knows that Fascism hates and detests democracy; if he were on his job as a representative of America he would let the whole world know that America hates and detests Fascism even more.
Boake Carter called attention to the stage-play by Chamberlain and Daladier, that neither of these men expected war, and certainly neither Germany nor Italy expected war. German tourist agencies invited tourist travel, and a German naval cadet ship made a peaceful visit to Bermuda while the excitement was at its height, and the Italians never withdrew a single vessel from the trans-Atlantic service.
* "British Comment," in this issue, gives some additional facts.
The United Press story from Rome is that Hitler intended to invade Czechoslovakia at 2:00 p.m., September 28, with 3,000 planes and 60 divisions of troops, but Mussolini was told by the British ambassador at 11:30 of the same day that if the invasion occurred Britain would not remain neutral. Mussolini called Hitler at noon and arranged for the Munich conference and thus staved off the invasion and the world war which, allegedly, would have followed.
Money Flees
While patting Chamberlain on the back for the Munich "victory", wealthy Britishers are not taking chances with their money, and are investing it elsewhere without waiting to see the results of the "appeasement" tactics.
Britain's national debt as of March 31, 1938, was £8,026,143,422, the same being the largest in its history. The public debt of the United States, as of June 30, 1938, was also the largest in its history, standing at $37,165,000,000, or about $2,294,226,963 less than Britain's. The population of Britain is only about one-third that of the United States; so the per capita debt there is much greater. Recent rearmament expenditures, in the greatest, maddest armament race in history, caused tremendous increases in both debts, but especially Britain's.
A nation that is financially hamstrung is not likely to be in position to evade the toils of a system that has the experience and financial resources possessed by the Roman Hierarchy. That system appears to have made extraordinary progress during the period of the world's perplexity. Aided and supported (or, let us say, aided and abetted) by the unscrupulous Jesuit organization, the Roman Hierarchy has an evil advantage that even the great British Empire appears powerless to resist.
The author, G. T. Garratt, in his Mussolini's Roman Empire, at page 240, remarks apprehensively:
On most subjects the average Englishman is prepared to recognize the complete authority of the priest over his flock. Many, including the writer, would have resented any attempt to penalize Catholic orders in the manner that has occurred in France, and have looked upon the existence of Catholics in England as lending a variety and interest to our national life. During the last two years they have found repeated cause to modify this view. If the priest comes down to the Market-place as a politician, and from inexperience shows himself more reckless and bigoted than the ordinary layman in public life, then common sense revolts at treating him as a privileged person.
If the pope takes sides on political questions about which many Englishmen feel deeply—as, for example, Italian aggression in Ethiopia and Spain—then again the English Protestant feels justified in examining the reasons which may have caused him to take this attitude, and will refuse to recognize such political pronouncements as being ex cathedra statements which any of his fellow countrymen should accept without question. If they accept as unquestionable, declarations condoning repeated breaches of treaties, of international law, and of the ordinary rules of civilized warfare, then the non-Catholic Englishman is entitled to ask whether Catholics any more than Communists are fit persons to be entrusted with the charge of English interests abroad. We find, on examination, that a large proportion of the Foreign Office are drawn from wealthy Catholic families, and that the general atmosphere is extremely friendly to Fascism.
Their [number of] supporters in each political camp gives them a voice in Parliament far greater than their numbers would justify. They have at their command immense wealth, for the Church has age-long experience in accumulating property.
Some of the lukewarm Protestants are also beginning to wake up, but they will have to protest a good deal more loudly, and with a better understanding of the Scriptures, before they merit "persecution for righteousness' sake", as do Jehovah's witnesses in Germany and elsewhere.
John P. Macqueen, London, appears to be cutting his eyeteeth. In an address at the Synod of the Free Presbyterian Church at Inverness, Scotland, he observed:
The Press and the reporters are largely under the control of the Jesuits. In 1912 between 70 and 80 percent of the editors and newspaper reporters of Britain were not only Roman Catholic, but Irish Roman Catholics; and if they were that in 1912, what must they be now?
John's clerical brethren, however, seem to be slipping in the opposite direction, and John will do well to protest so loudly that they will excommunicate him — and he will stand a good chance of "laying up treasure in heaven". Prayers for the dead, the eastward posture in prayer, and crosses are now to be found in various churches of what was once Presbyterian Scotland.
Others, too, are becoming suspicious of the Jesuitical manner in which Rome is gaining ground in England.
British Broadcasting Control
Sir John Reith, former director general of the British Broadcasting Company, resigned his £7,000-per-year job with that company to take a £10,000 job as chairman of Imperial Airways. His deputy, when he left the Broadcasting Company, was C. G. Graves, a Roman Catholic, and probably is his successor. The Protestant papers of Britain were filled with terror at this situation, the Protestant Reformation Society saying in its annual report:
Protestants have viewed with increasing alarm the increasing interpenetration of the British Broadcasting Corporation by Roman Catholic influences in such key positions as deputy director and editor of the Radio Times.
He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh, and mock when their fear cometh. (Psalm 2:4; Proverbs 1:26) When Jehovah's witnesses tried to tell them these things in advance they were only scorned.
The American ambassador to London, who seems to be somewhat confused as to what are his duties as the representative of the American people at the Court of St. James's, is lending a hand. Said ambassador, Joseph P. Kennedy, whose sympathies with totalitarianism have already been referred to, at the behest of the British government, interposed in the production of a moving picture relating to the German-Czech crisis. He says all he did was to communicate with "a member of the Hays organization". The name of the member is not mentioned, but since Jos. I. Breen is a member of the Hays organization as well as a subject of the Hierarchy, and since he is the main censor of moving pictures in the United States, mention of the name is not necessary. Suffice it to say that the picture was 'properly censored' and Americans saw only what the Jesuitized section of Britain wanted them to see. Talk about Jesuit efficiency. Breen does the censoring, the "Hays organization" is "credited"!
These two instances are examples of the manner in which the Jesuits indirectly have sufficient control of radio and movies to further their ends. All that seems to be needful is a watchful eye.
Censorship of the Press
The press still plays an important part in the business of keeping the public informed, and its prestige has been only slightly lessened by the advent of the movies and the radio. Hence censorship of the press is a vital matter with the Jesuits and their Fascist-Nazi buddies. Note the following examples, observing that the Jesuit method does not always attain its ends at one bound. Sometimes those who should be subject to its demands appear to be working at cross purposes. But that outward appearance also serves a purpose. It confuses the public and covers the tracks of the conspirators against liberty.
Alfred Noyes, English poet and biographer, became a Roman Catholic eleven years ago, and three years ago published a life of Voltaire, widely praised at the time by Catholics and even run as a serial in a Catholic paper, the Tablet. In May, 1938, the Italians running the camorra at Vatican City condemned the book and demanded its suppression and then Cardinal Hinsley, the principal Catholic authority in England, wrote to the London Times that he had read the book, admired it and could not speak of it too highly. Noyes got mad; and who can blame him? He objects that the Italians who are trying to run his conscience and boss him around like a child give him no explanation of their condemnation and no date when they will explain their course, so he has sought another publisher and gone on with his book.
The type of "freedom of the press" which Rome (and therefore the Jesuits) favors appears to have been defined by De Valera, prime minister of Eire (formerly a part of the British Empire) when he recommended "modified freedom of the press". This "modified freedom" would, of course, mean no freedom at all; for everything would be censored in advance; and don't think for a minute the censor would escape Jesuit control.
The Blasphemy Bill
T. E. Harvey, Independent, English Universities, is hereby awarded the title of "Free Speech Harvey" for his courageous and intelligent resistance to the so-called "Blasphemy Act" before the British House of Commons in the summer of 1938. He reminded the members that Christ was for free speech, He was against the attempt to root out the tares from among the wheat; he told them that the early Christians were regarded as enemies of mankind, and having, in the actual language of the proposed act, "activities calculated to interfere with the established religious institutions of the country." He reminded his hearers that truth is its own best weapon and he did not think the House of Commons added any to its glory the day when, 300 years ago, a Puritan House condemned a Quaker for blasphemy, branded his forehead and bored his tongue with a red-hot iron. He wished that the British House of Commons should stand by the principles of John Milton: "Give me the liberty to know, to utter and to argue freely according to conscience." His address was roundly applauded.
The Glasgow Herald and Catholic Observer reported joint CATHOLIC APPROVAL of the bill which Mr. Harvey so effectively OPPOSED.
In due time it could be called blasphemy to refer to facts such as the following: In the first four months of 1938 there were no fewer than 37 crooked clergymen under the surveillance of the London police. They make most of their money by swindling women, collecting money for bogus missions of one kind or another.
Concessions to Rome
The pope, for the first time since the fifteenth century, has a personal representative in England who has direct access to the foreign office, a definite concession already largely Catholic. The new so-called "Apostolic Delegate" is Monsignor William Godfrey, formerly rector of the English College in Rome.
The sending of an "apostolic delegate" to a country not having diplomatic relations with the Vatican may be considered by some to be a piece of Papal effrontery. It is a little of that, and also somewhat of a deception. Actually an apostolic delegate has nothing to do with the country to which he is sent, but is merely a representative from the pope to the Catholic church in that country. Undoubtedly the delegate makes use of his position to do what he can toward influencing political developments so as to be favorable to the Hierarchy. This business of sending delegates and diplomatic representatives is an aping of earthly governments, at which monkey-business the Hierarchy has always been an adept.
The presence of an apostolic delegate also serves to put a check on ecclesiastical personages inclined to exercise a little too much liberty. Hinsley may need a little supervision, as his approval of Noyes' book indicates.
(To be continued) RIGHTEOUS RULER
THE NEW GOVERNMENT
Bicycle Trailer in the Ozarks
◆ As an illustration of what can be done by a heart desirous to do something to the praise of Jehovah's name, take a look at this trailer. Merwin Boen, who operates this combination in the Ozark mountains of southwestern Missouri, says by way of explanation:
I am a young man not fortunate enough to have a car for the service, so I use a bicycle, and thus carry on. Territory for witnessing became scarce in the county where I usually witness, so I built this trailer for my bicycle and go long distances from home, camping sometimes for many days at a stretch.
10,000 Miles on a Bicycle
◆ I am an Australian pioneer, and work alone, using only a push-bike in my work.
By that means I have covered considerably more than 10,000 miles. My method is to go to a main town on my assignment of territory, rent a room, or stay with friends, and from there work all the territory for 40 or 50 or sometimes for 100 miles around.
The phonograph I carry on my back; the literature, 40 books and 100 booklets, on racks; my towel, soap, shaving kit, a clean collar and a pound of dates are in a leather bag. This equipment usually lasts me ten days, but I keep going until all the literature is placed or until I run out of territory, when I return to my room and load up for another trip. I stay wherever night overtakes me, eat where I can, and in all my travels in the Australian bush I have never yet been without a meal or a bed, though sometimes I have had to keep witnessing until 9:00 or 10:00 at night before someone would be kind enough to give me a shakedown.
One cold winter night in Queensland it was necessary for me to get over some bad country that if rained on would not be passable for a week or more, and as rain was working up I left Barrington station at sundown to follow an 18-mile mail route to where I could pick up a good road. All I had to follow was a horse track used once a week.
After an hour's walking it got dark, and in the hills, with heavy timber about, the night was black as pitch, and it was not long before I was off the route altogether and was plain BUSHED. When I realized this fact I was at a creek with a steep bank on either side and a small trickle of water in the bottom. I knew this was not the track, because a horseman would not cross at such a point.
It was like this for a mile on either side. After I had tried every method of bushcraft that I knew, to pick up the track, I finally found a place where I could cross, and set off in the direction that I thought was the right way. After walking an hour I came to a fence with a gate in it. I went through it; still no tracks. The gate had not been used for weeks. I went on in the same direction and, after another hour, came to another fence; right at the gate each time, and still no track.
Bicycle trailer in the Ozarks
This time I stopped, lit a fire at my bike, so I could find it again, walked to the top of the nearest hill, and was FOUND; for there, down in the valley, was a tiny light shining, and when I let out a cooee the dogs began to bark. It was not long before I was knocking at the door, at 1:30 a.m.
What a surprise that chap got to see me at his door! After a short conversation as to where I had come from, where I was going, and why I was out so late, he asked me what I was doing, and I let him read my testimony card. He then said, "Judge Rutherford! I often hear him on the radio, and would very much like to get some of his books. Where can I get them?" I laid them on his table, and he said, "Well, if a young man like you will do all this, and travel through this rough country, and get lost, to bring this message to me, there must be something in it worth while." He made me a meal and put me to bed in his spare room. In the morning I left two Bibles and took his order for the full set of 16 bound books, which I sent him when I got back home. Such things have happened many times. Through it all God’s name is extolled and a good witness is given.
Trailer camp at Sydney convention
I have had marvelous experiences with the phonograph. After listening to the record ‘Why the clergy oppose the truth’ one woman said, “Now I know why our parson warns us not to have anything to do with Judge Rutherford’s books.” In one instance, on request, I played records at a telephone exchange so that all subscribers on the line might hear, and one of them telephoned in an order for books.
At present I am tied up with rain in a country where the soil is black mud and when it rains everything sticks like wet dough. But I am not idle. I chance to be at a sheep-shearing camp, quartered with forty men. Every night I play records for the men, and though some are goats there are enough sheep to make the goats keep still, so they can listen to the message of the great King whose name we delight to honor.—H. A. Bell, Australia.
In the Turks and Caicos Islands
◆ One of Jehovah’s witnesses recently visited the Turks and Caicos islands, 450 miles northeast of Jamaica, bringing there, for the first time, the message that Jehovah’s kingdom has come. Though the witness is a British subject, and had every right to make the trip, and was well supplied with funds and complete identification papers, every possible obstacle was put in his way, to prevent his landing (after a seven-day trip in a sailing vessel). The influence of the Anglican and Methodist clergy was used to try to keep the people in darkness.
After all the illegal activities of the harbor master and immigration commissioner in behalf of the clergy had been overcome (at some considerable expense for cablegrams), the clergy then went among the people to still try to prevent, if possible, any truth’s leaking out as to their fraudulent racket. But they did not succeed. They even told them that if they dared obtain any of the literature they would come to their homes, collect it and burn it.
Every home was visited, 450 bound books, 22 Bibles, 1,700 booklets, 1 Watchtower and 2 Consolation subscriptions were placed, and three small companies were organized. The message was presented by phonograph. One woman, when she heard the truth for the first time, exclaimed, with tears flowing down her face, “Today is salvation come into my house.” Another said, “It is God that sent you here; for we are in darkness.” Another: “This is the true message of God, and we never heard it before.” During a study meeting one young man wept aloud, saying, “What have I done, to merit such favor from Jehovah?”—C. R. Launy, Jamaica.
If All Were as Orderly
◆ Proving that the Devil is an unmitigated liar, one of the policemen at the Seattle convention of Jehovah’s witnesses was heard to say to another, “If they were all as orderly as this crowd, we might just as well go home and go to bed.”
Sound-Car Echoes
◆ Just a year ago I received my sound-car equipment No. 3 and helped to have it installed. There is an ordinance here in this city against sound cars; so I went to the mayor and gave him witness and explained the work of the sound car. He took some books and told me to go right on, as it’s a splendid work. So I told him of trouble in other cities, and why. He said, “Go right on; and if you have any trouble, come and see me.” Also went to the chief of police, and he was favorable and nice, too. He took the book Riches.
The first evening out with the lectures, after all was over and I was two blocks away, police drove up with flashlights and said, “No more of this or we will take you in.” So I told them what the mayor had said, and the chief of police; but they said, “If you put it on again we will take you to jail.” So I said, “You won't need to take me; come and go down with me now.” They said no. So I went down, and the night lieutenant said, “I told these fellows to let you alone.” So I said, “Well, then, I'll go right on,” and did so, on the street in front of the post office, where there are numbers of men loafing. Went there many evenings, placing over 200 pieces of literature.
All went well until in my own driveway three weeks later. I put on lectures for about fifteen guests, when up came motorcycle cops (I was already all through with the lectures). They said, “You can't do this.” I asked why. They said, “You had it too loud.” I asked, “Did you hear it?” They said no, but had a complaint.
Asked who made the complaint, they said they did not know, but it was a white house six doors down. And you can guess who lived there —“the Christian preacher.” I told the cops what the mayor had said, and the chief. They asked if I had it in writing; and if not, I'd better have it, so they would not have to take me in. This was on Sunday afternoon. So on Monday, at 8 a.m., I was in the mayor's office, waiting till 9 a.m. to see him. I told him what had happened. He said, “I guess you'd better bring this before the city council meeting on Thursday. So I did; and after explaining the work to the council the mayor made a motion that this work be continued, preaching the Gospel by sound car, and not be hindered. The streets commissioner seconded the motion (as I had also gone to him before and he took Riches, when I was working in the business district; he said his wife spent the holiday reading it). Motion carried—only one objection; guess his religion. So the Devil's bluff did not work; and here we are out every day and evening with the sound car, and with marvelous experiences— too many to relate, but we thought you would like to know a city ordinance against sound cars does not stop the message by sound car in some places.—Martha Holmes, Iowa.
For Free Speech
◆ Repercussions of Judge Rutherford's address “Fascism or Freedom”, broadcast by radio station WBBR on October 2, have been plentiful and varied. Letters received by the radio office have been numerous, with opinions forcefully expressed pro and con. Consolation here reproduces one of these letters, chosen as most representative of the American ideology of freedom of speech.
203 E. 14th Street
New York City
Oct. 2, 1938.
Radio station WBBR
Brooklyn, New York.
Gentlemen:
I wish to congratulate you for the broadcasting of the Watchtower program.
Altho I do not believe in Jehovah or any one of the other gods offered to us by the hundreds of existing religions, I do believe in freedom of creeds; freedom of thought; freedom of speech; freedom of the press; freedom of the radio; freedom of assembly and freedom of self-determination.
I have noticed from personal observation that the Catholic Hierarchy in the E.E.U.U. is carrying on today the most vicious campaign against all the above rights guaranteed to all our citizens irrespective of creed, color or religion.
Unfortunately it is true that the Catholic Church in America is bending all efforts to mix itself in national politics and is making perilous inroads into the educational institutions and is trying to establish in America the same old policy of uniting the church and the state, which has proved a thousand times to be against the best interest of the state and of the people as a whole.
Only by chance I heard this program, and I like it so much that I'm going to buy a brand-new radio so as to have better reception next time your program is on the air.
I extend my congratulations to the courageous citizen who spoke from the Watchtower program. Please send me a copy of his address.
Very truly yours,
[Signed] JOSEPH V. ROGERS.
Limitation of space prohibits the publication of other equally interesting expressions from citizens who still recognize their American rights of free speech and believe in them.
Jehovah's Kingdom publishers (Spanish and English) at Harlingen, Texas
(To be continued) Whited Sepulchers of Radio
IN EUROPE the dictators barefacedly glory in the removal of fundamental rights of freedom of speech, press and worship. They have been so bold and so brazen in their denial of the people's liberties that it has aroused a spirit of revulsion and protest throughout the entire United States. In America it is not popular to publicly expound a belief in the destruction of freedom of speech or press. The big business representatives and the prominent religionists all publicly state their devotion to the liberties of the people, but their actions are quite different from their public utterances.
The National Broadcasting Company likes to glorify itself and parade before the people as an organization upholding the fundamental principles of freedom of the air. Its president, Lenox Riley Lohr, went to Buffalo recently and delivered an address before an outfit designated the Federal Council of the Churches of Christ in America. He expounded to them some excellent and beautiful phrases on freedom of the air, telling them the policy of the National Broadcasting Company is to give the greatest freedom even for controversial subjects. The following paragraphs are quoted from Press reports of his address:
Freedom of the air does not give every citizen the right to express his opinion over the radio—there are not hours enough in the day to allow that. It is a freedom to broadcast a controversial subject. By controversial subject I mean that on which a substantial group of citizens—large in number and important in influence—has a different opinion from another substantial group of citizens, and on the outcome of their discussion a third substantial group would be affected. The Supreme Court reorganization plan was such a subject.
This is NBC's policy. On any controversial subject we will give equal opportunity without charge to both sides to express their attitude before the public. There must be speakers of equal consequence, equal in number, speaking at equally desirable times on an equal number of stations. Of course, that cannot be achieved absolutely. But that is the standard, and we try to follow it as closely as possible.
NBC Embarrassed with Questions
In the meantime, however, some interesting letters were being sent back and forth between A. L. Ashby, vice-president and general counsel of the National Broadcasting Company, and Judge Rutherford. This correspondence proves the action and policy of the NBC toward Judge Rutherford's lectures and the Watch Tower programs to be vastly different from the public utterances of the corporation's president.
For many years the company has declined to broadcast Judge Rutherford's lectures. The PUBLIC reason given by them is that the lectures are controversial and that Judge Rutherford "attacks other religions". The REAL reason, however, is different. The fact is that the foreign power known as the Roman Catholic Hierarchy has taken upon itself to censor and interdict Judge Rutherford's lectures. Hierarchy subjects have brought pressure and have intimated to the broadcasting corporation that if it does present such lectures, even though they be true, it would be just too bad for the corporation: it would lose Catholic trade and suffer greatly financially.
Consolation presents herewith some of this recent correspondence. Letter No. 1 is an epistle of Vice-President Ashby to Judge Rutherford. Letter No. 2 is Judge Rutherford's answer. No. 3 is what Mr. Ashby hopes closes the matter.
[Letter No. 1]
NATIONAL BROADCASTING COMPANY, INC.
RCA Building - Radio City
New York, N. Y.
A. L. Ashby
Vice President and
General Counsel
November 16, 1938.
Mr. Joseph F. Rutherford,
124 Columbia Heights,
Brooklyn, N. Y.
Dear Sir:
Several times during the past few months Mr. Sidney Weiss of the Acorn Agency applied to us on your behalf to sell time to broadcast your religious speeches or to take the programs on a sustaining basis. You cannot be unaware of the reasons we gave for declining to broadcast those programs, yet in your letter of October 31st you ask why we refuse to broadcast what you characterized as truths about certain religious and political organizations.
We repeat what undoubtedly you already know, The National Broadcasting Company does not sell time to anyone to discuss religious matters and it will not permit its facilities to be used upon any basis to attack or reflect upon any religious faith or denomination. No deviation from that rule will be countenanced. Concretely applied, this means that our facilities are not open to others to attack your religious philosophies or principles and by the same token they are not available to you to attack religious organizations with which you are not in sympathy.
Faithfully yours,
[Signed] A. L. ASHBY.
[Letter No. 2]
November 26, 1938
National Broadcasting Company, Inc.
A. L. Ashby, Vice President
RCA Building, Radio City
New York, N. Y.
Dear Sir:
This is to acknowledge yours of the 16th. You entirely sidestep the issue. Mr. Weiss of the Acorn Agency made application for your facilities for me to address the public on the subject of "Fascism or Freedom". There was nothing religious about it. You state that your facilities are "not open to others to attack your religious philosophies or principles". Permit me to say, my dear sir, that I have no religious philosophies or principles. I am not a religionist. I am a Christian who bases his conclusions entirely upon the Word of Almighty God. As to my speech on "Fascism or Freedom", it set forth the indisputable evidence that the Roman Catholic Hierarchy, operated from Vatican City and which is inimical to the American principles of government, is carrying forward a campaign in America to turn the nation over to the Fascists. You decline to permit the people to have these truths broadcast. That is not religious, but it is an organization acting under a religious name to accomplish a wrongful political purpose.
Will you be so kind, my dear sir, as to answer the following questions:
1. Are the facilities of the National Broadcasting Company, Inc., open to use for the purpose of informing the American people against an enemy of American principles, regardless of the name of the enemy?
2. Does the fact that an organization operates under a religious name afford for such an organization a complete shield from being exposed by your facilities as to action that is against the fundamental principles of the American government?
3. Is it your purpose to shield and protect any and all organizations by denying the use of your facilities to expose them, which organizations operate under a religious name and cloak?
4. Are all organizations operating under a religious name immune from public exposure by the facilities of your corporation when that exposure is based upon absolute and provable facts?
I will thank you very kindly to let me have your answers to these questions.
Very sincerely,
[Signed] J. F. RUTHERFORD.
[Letter No. 3]
December 5, 1938
Mr. J. F. Rutherford,
124 Columbia Heights,
Brooklyn, N. Y.
Dear Sir:
We have patiently endeavored to fully and fairly acquaint you and your representatives with our broadcasting policies. In view of this, you have all the information necessary to answer the questions contained in your letter of November 26th.
Faithfully yours,
[Signed] A. L. ASHBY.
Why Ashby Stands Mute
It would seem that any person having due regard for his honor and integrity, and having any consideration for American principles of liberty, would have been glad to answer the questions propounded by Judge Rutherford. But the officers of the National Broadcasting Company readily see that these questions are too ticklish for them to handle.
Take, for instance, question No. 1, which is as follows:
"Are the facilities of the National Broadcasting Company, Inc., open to use for the purpose of informing the American people against an enemy of American principles, regardless of the name of the enemy?"
In line with the public utterance of President Lohr, this question ought to be answered "Yes". But a "Yes" answer comes into conflict with their concealed policy of subservience to the Catholic Hierarchy's dictum. To comply with the Hierarchy's demands they would have to answer "No", and that would be exceedingly embarrassing because it would expose their cringing to the demands of an enemy of American principles. Of course, it would not do for them to publicly admit that an organization operating under a religious name is completely shielded by them from exposure as to action against fundamental principles of the American form of government. Therefore, in line with their public policy, it would be necessary for them to answer question No. 2 "No". But this would likewise involve them in conflict with the organization operating under a religious name and to which they have prostrated themselves. It wouldn't do to answer it "Yes", and they are afraid to answer it "No". Therefore they become as one blind and dumb.
The same reasoning applies to questions No. 3 and No. 4. It would not do to admit that organizations operating under a religious name are immune from public exposure through their facilities. They cannot publicly admit that it is their purpose to shield and protect such organizations through denial of NBC broadcasting facilities. At the same time they dare not publicly state that NBC facilities are open to expose such organizations operating under a religious name and cloak. The Hierarchy says "No, no", and the NBC obsequiously complies with the Hierarchy's bidding.
Thus you have the picture of the National Broadcasting Company. On the outside it appears pure and undefiled. Its public utterances hold it forth as one loyal to American principles of freedom. Its actual policy, however, is that of toadyish flunkyism to the greatest enemy of the American people. It acknowledges money as its god and the Roman Catholic Hierarchy as its censor, dictator and boss.
"Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity."—Matthew 23:28.
—O. R. MOYLE.
NATIONAL BROADCASTING COMPANY, INC.
RCA BUILDING - RADIO CITY
NEW YORK, N.Y.
November 15, 1938.
Mr. Joseph F. Rutherford,
124 Columbia Heights,
Brooklyn, N.Y.
Dear Sir:
Several times during the past few months Mr. Sidney Weiss of the Acorn Agency applied to us on your behalf to sell time to broadcast your religious speeches or to take the program on a sustaining basis. You cannot be unaware of the reasons we gave for declining to broadcast those programs, yet in your letter of October 31st you ask why we refuse to broadcast what you characterized as truths about certain religious and political organizations.
We repeat what undoubtedly you already know. The National Broadcasting Company does not sell time to anyone to discuss religious matters and it will not permit its facilities to be used upon any basis to attack or reflect upon any religious faith or denomination. No deviation from that rule will be countenanced. Concretely applied, this means that our facilities are not open to others to attack your religious philosophies or principles and by the same token they are not available to you to attack religious organizations with which you are not in sympathy.
Faithfully yours,
A. L. Ashby
Reflections on Hypocrisy
The contribution just preceding covers all the ground, and covers it well, but a few reflections on the art of public hypocrisy, now one of the greatest and most shameless industries or occupations of earth, may be in order.
In previous generations it was considered unfortunate if a man in public life showed no evidences of manhood, no ability to face the facts, no courage. But those days have largely passed, and things in trousers parade as men that their forefathers would be ashamed to own as such.
A case in Germany comes to mind.
Prior to the Munich triumph of German arrogance, the Protestant (Confessional) churches of Germany had agreed to offer the following public prayer:
Lord God, we confess our sins and the sins of our people before Thee. May God forgive us and avert His wrath. But if, according to His inscrutable decision, He punish us with war, we shall seek comfort in His promise of salvation.
To be sure, that is a silly prayer, because it dishonors Almighty God and makes Him the author of wars and all other bedevilment afflicting mankind; but it was not because of this that the Nazi Government objected to it. Three bishops, Mahrarens, Wurm and Meiser, were dragged before the Nazi minister of Church Affairs and were told that the proposed prayer was treason to the German state; and they were saps enough, and cowards enough, to sign a declaration against the prayer, under threat of being confined in a concentration camp.
NATIONAL BROADCASTING COMPANY, INC.
RCA BUILDING - RADIO CITY
NEW YORK, N.Y.
December 5, 1938.
Mr. J. F. Rutherford,
124 Columbia Heights,
Brooklyn, N. Y.
Dear Sir:
We have patiently endeavored to fully and fairly acquaint you and your representatives with our broadcasting policies. In view of this, you have all the information necessary to answer the questions contained in your letter of November 26th.
Faithfully yours,
Behold the valor! Behold the virtue! Behold the veracity!
--But America need not boast. Manhood in the United States is down to the German level; and that means that in this country, too, are many in high positions that are beneath contempt. What is more unmanly than public professions of courage and fairness and honesty in the public interest, and private acknowledgment, by silence or otherwise, that none of their public statements are to be believed?
Many of the readers of Consolation suspected long ago that the management of the National Broadcasting Company is hypocritical, cowardly and unfair, and is, at heart, a traitor to American interests. So, because it is a matter of interest, readers will be amused to see the cuts shown herewith. Compare the signature to the letter of November 16 with the one to that of December 5.
Those three German bishops, Mahrarens, Wurm and Meiser, should haste to chuck their jobs, and get out of Germany if they can, and while they can, and should apply to the National Broadcasting Company for jobs. They would make 'courageous and intelligent additions' to its present staff.
Never Put Up a Cent
About 155,000,000 acres of public land have been granted to railroads and actually passed into railroad possession. This equals 242,000 square miles; four times the area of New England, more than the combined area of France, Belgium and the Netherlands, not quite twice the area of the British Isles.
To build the Northern Pacific, the American people invested 41,875,924 acres, or 65,431 square miles; about the area of the states of New York, Vermont and New Hampshire.
To build the Union Pacific and Central Pacific, the American people invested, besides bonds and cash, 29,533,922 acres, or 46,131 square miles; about the area of the states of Pennsylvania and Delaware.
To build the Santa Fe, the American people invested 19,406,740 acres, or 30,323 square miles; about the area of the state of South Carolina.
To build the Southern Pacific, the American people invested 10,807,786 acres, or 16,887 square miles; not much less than the area of the states of Maryland and New Jersey.
The investment of public lands in other railroads were heavy enough to astound Europe. Thus the Texas Pacific got 11,280 square miles; about the area of Belgium. The International-Great Northern got 10,050 square miles—a quarter the area of Ohio. The Missouri-Kansas-Texas, better known as the "Katy", drew a prize of 4,888 square miles—a little more than Massachusetts. Even when dealing with lines not generally reckoned as land grant railroads, the public investment of acres is huge. One may get a grip on it in this way.
The State of Connecticut contains 3,084,800 acres. But the American people, through state and national governments, granted 3,816,785 acres to the roads now included in the Seaboard Air Line; 3,766,994 acres to the roads now included in the Louisville & Nashville; 3,760,980 acres to the roads now included in the Illinois Central; 3,631,177 acres to the roads now included in the Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha; 3,402,885 acres to the roads now included in the Burlington; 3,236,720 to the roads now included in the Great Northern, and 3,113,146 acres to the roads now included in the Chicago & Northwestern.
All told, as previously stated, the government of the U. S. and those of the states presented the railroad promoters with 150,000,000 acres of land, including timber and mineral resources; and figuring only $10 per acre, that represents the generous gift of $15,000,000,000, or considerably more than the present net value of all the railroads of the United States!—Oscar Ameringer, in The American Guardian.
Animal Husbandry
Humans Could Learn from a Dog
Humans that betray their parents, friends and benefactors could learn something from the Birmingham, Alabama, dog that, when the house caught fire during the night, deserted her six puppies, then only three weeks old, that she might arouse the household and so bring about the rescue of the two boys and one girl of the home that are her constant companions. As a result of her faithfulness all hands were rescued, including the six puppies. Once in a great while, in this world, something works out all right.
The Poultrocutor
◆ The poultrocutor, invented by a Massachusetts man, electrocutes poultry intended for the market. The feathers do not set, and are more easily removed. When the bulk of them have been taken off, clean hot wax is allowed to cool on the body, and when the wax is pulled off in a single motion all the pin feathers are swept clean. It is claimed by the inventor that the use of this unscriptural strangulation method cuts the cost of poultry raising by one-fourth.
Giving the Beavers a Tip
◆ Giving the beavers a tip on where to build their dams CCC workers in Idaho build temporary dams to give the beavers a start and then turn loose about twenty trained beavers, which go ahead and finish the job in ten days. At present the government is using some 800 beavers in Idaho alone, and it is calculated that each one of these busy little workers does about $300 worth of work a year in preventing soil erosion and improving watering facilities and forage crop conditions on Federal grazing lands. It costs about $5 to catch and train a beaver.
…