Consolation, June 26, 1940
Download: PDF — Consolation, June 26, 1940
Contents
Propagation of Falsehoods 3
Miscellany 8
The New Government 8
Northern Rhodesia 9
Witnessing in Belgium 23
Under the Totalitarian Flag 12
The Cross in Brazil 12
How Crosses Came to Be Put on Roads 24
Right This Way to the Divorce Counter 25
The Deceased Cardinal’s Ambition 26
Maybe She Will Smile 26
South African Gestapo 27
Gathering About the Crib 27
Thanked at Least Seventeen 27
Earth’s Chief Industry 13
Britain Talks Up to Japan 14
Counsel by J. F. Rutherford 16
Safe Hiding 16
Pius XII’s and Stalin’s Comrade (Part 3) 18
Talk About Subversiveness! 19
Who Wrote Mein Kampf? 19
Other Nations and the War 20
In the Midst of the Fire 21
British Comment
War-Consciousness 28
Religion 28
Preachers of the Word 29
Clergy Trades Union 29
Three-Year-Old Tobacco Addict 31
Published every other Wednesday by
WATCHTOWER BIBLE AND TRACT SOCIETY, INC.
117 Adams St., Brooklyn, N. Y., U. S. A.
Editor Clayton J. Woodworth
Business Manager Nathan H. Knorr
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 Afrikaans, Bohemian, Danish, Dutch, Finnish, French, German, Greek, Hungarian, Japanese, Norwegian, Polish, Portuguese, Spanish, Swedish, Ukrainian; also special Australian edition in English.
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
The Retort Discourteous
The two little colored boys had had a falling out, and were saying unkind things to and about each other, their kinfolk, their friends, anything that would leave a sting.
“An’ look at you’ mammy,” added Sambo. “She takes in washin’, don’ she?”
“Sho she do,” replied Hambone, defiantly. “You don’ think she’s lev it out on de line lessen you’ pappy wuz in jail, does you?”—Labor.
Agin the Government
“My friend, I think that Franklin D. Roosevelt is the greatest man this country has seen.”
“I’m agin him.”
“Don’t you know that behind this man there is an unconquerable power which controls and influences him?”
“I am agin her, too. . . .”—Kellygram.
Reason for the Delay
A weekly newspaper, clearing up a misunderstanding, explained that, “Owing to the lack of space and the rush of editing this issue, several births and deaths will be postponed until next week.”
Correct English
Teacher: Tony, what does responsible mean?
Tony: If you had two buttons on your pants and one came loose, the other would be responsible.
Move On
Mr. Jones: Good night! Out of gas right here in the middle of traffic!
Mrs. Jones: Well, you can’t stop for that now; here comes a cop.
An Unreasonable Customer
Customer: That suit you sold me for $8, when I got home I found moths in it.
Dealer: Vell! Vat do you expect to get in an $8 suit—hummingbirds!
Why Pick on India?
Boy: Dad, do you know that in some parts of India a man doesn’t know his wife until he marries her?
Dad: Why single out India?—Lyre.
CONSOLATION
“And in His name shall the nations hope.”—Matthew 12:21, A.R.V.
Volume XXI Brooklyn, N. Y., Wednesday, June 26, 1940 Number 542
Propagation of Falsehoods
IT HAS many times recently been well said that no credence can be given to the word of the Nazi leaders. They delight to indulge in falsehoods. The Roman Catholic Hierarchy, and particularly the Roman Catholic Press, is exactly in the same class, preferring to resort to lies rather than to tell the truth. This they do in order to prejudice the public in their own behalf. This is exactly what Jehovah God in His Word, the Bible, said about that institution long ago, to wit: “Ye have said, We have made a covenant with death, and with hell are we at agreement . . . for we have made lies our refuge, and under falsehood have we hid ourselves.” (Isa. 28:15) Members of the Hierarchy, and particularly their newspapers, believe they can tell anything and get away with it. Here is a case exactly in point:
Before the United States Supreme Court the case of Cantwell vs. The State of Connecticut was being heard on appeal. It is usual for members of the Court to propound questions to counsel during argument for the purpose of clarifying the issues before the Court. This case was being argued by counsel before the full Supreme Court in April last. In the course of the argument Chief Justice Hughes propounded this question to counsel: “Is there no limit at all to what you can do when you think you are worshiping God?” Counsel replied: “Not in this case; because defendants are clearly within their rights.”
Based upon this question and the answer, the Catholic Press throughout the United States and in many foreign countries has recently repeatedly stated that Chief Justice Hughes rebuked counsel because of insulting the Hierarchy and criticizing their religion. Nothing could be farther from the truth.
During the presentation of his argument for the State of Connecticut counsel for the State was asked the question by Mr. Justice McReynolds, “Was it not true that the message that Christ Jesus proclaimed was unpopular in his day?” The attorney replied, “It was, and, if I remember my Bible correctly, it also tells what happened to Jesus for proclaiming that message.”
There is no evidence whatsoever that any member of the Supreme Court expressed his view or took sides during the argument. The statements of the Catholic Press that Chief Justice Hughes was rebuking Jehovah’s witnesses is an insult to the chief justice. No man in America stands higher than Chief Justice Hughes, and no one could properly accuse him of such things as the Catholic Press has attributed to him.
The best rebuke, however, to the Roman Catholic Hierarchy and its press is the Opinion of the entire Court handed down in this case on May 20, 1940. The opinion is unanimous and speaks for itself and brands the Catholic Press as deliberate falsifiers. Let those who are interested in truth and righteousness read this Opinion and see that the Catholic Hierarchy and the Nazi leaders are in the same class, both being members of the Ananias Club. The unanimous opinion of the Supreme Court follows: SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
No. 632.—October Term, 1939.
Jesse Cantwell, Newton Cantwell and Russell Cantwell, Appellants,
vs.
The State of Connecticut.
On Appeal from and Certiorari to the Supreme Court of Errors of the State of Connecticut.
[May 20, 1940.]
Mr. Justice ROBERTS delivered the opinion of the Court.
Newton Cantwell and his two sons, Jesse and Russell, members of a group known as Jehovah's witnesses, and claiming to be ordained ministers, were arrested in New Haven, Connecticut, and each was charged by information in five counts, with statutory and common law offenses. After trial in the Court of Common Pleas of New Haven County each of them was convicted on the third count, which charged a violation of § 6294 of the General Statutes of Connecticut,¹ and on the fifth count, which charged commission of the common law offense of inciting a breach of the peace. On appeal to the Supreme Court the conviction of all three on the third count was affirmed. The conviction of Jesse Cantwell, on the fifth count, was also affirmed, but the conviction of Newton and Russell on that count was reversed and a new trial ordered as to them.²
By demurrers to the information, by requests for rulings of law at the trial, and by their assignments of error in the State Supreme Court, the appellants pressed the contention that the statute under which the third count was drawn was offensive to the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment because, on its face and as construed and applied, it denied them freedom of speech and prohibited their free exercise of religion. In like manner they made the point that they could not be found guilty on the fifth count, without violation of the Amendment.
We have jurisdiction on appeal from the judgments on the third count, as there was drawn in question the validity of a state statute under the federal Constitution, and the decision was in favor of validity. Since the conviction on the fifth count was not based upon a statute, but presents a substantial question under the federal Constitution, we granted the writ of certiorari in respect of it.
The facts adduced to sustain the convictions on the third count follow. On the day of their arrest the appellants were engaged in going singly from house to house on Cassius Street in New Haven. They were individually equipped with a bag containing books and pamphlets on religious subjects, a portable phonograph and a set of records, each of which, when played, introduced, and was a description of, one of the books. Each appellant asked the person who responded to his call for permission to play one of the records. If permission was granted he asked the person to buy the book described and, upon refusal, he solicited such contribution towards the publication of the pamphlets as the listener was willing to make. If a contribution was received a pamphlet was delivered upon condition that it would be read.
Cassius Street is in a thickly populated neighborhood, where about ninety per cent of the residents are Roman Catholics. A phonograph record, describing a book entitled "Enemies", included an attack on the Catholic religion. None of the persons interviewed were members of Jehovah's witnesses.
The statute under which the appellants were charged provides:
"No person shall solicit money, services, subscriptions or any valuable thing for any alleged religious, charitable or philanthropic cause, from other than a member of the organization for whose benefit such person is soliciting or within the county in which such person or organization is located unless such cause shall have been approved by the secretary of the public welfare council. Upon application of any person in behalf of such cause, the secretary shall determine whether such cause is a religious one or is a bona fide object of charity or philanthropy and conforms to reasonable standards of efficiency and integrity, and, if he shall so find, shall approve the same and issue to the authority in charge a certificate to that effect. Such certificate may be revoked at any time. Any person violating any provision of this section shall be fined not more than one hundred dollars or imprisoned not more than thirty days or both."
The appellants claimed that their activities were not within the statute but consisted only of distribution of books, pamphlets, and periedicals.
¹ General Statutes § 6294 as amended by § 860d of the 1937 supplement.
² — Conn. —; 8 A. (2d) 533.
--The State Supreme Court construed the finding of the trial court to be that "in addition to the sale of the books and the distribution of the pamphlets the defendants were also soliciting contributions or donations of money for an alleged religious cause, and thereby came within the purview of the statute." It overruled the contention that the Act, as applied to the appellants, offends the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, because it abridges or denies religious freedom and liberty of speech and press. The court stated that it was the solicitation that brought the appellants within the sweep of the Act and not their other activities in the dissemination of literature. It declared the legislation constitutional as an effort by the State to protect the public against fraud and imposition in the solicitation of funds for what purported to be religious, charitable, or philanthropic causes.
The facts which were held to support the conviction of Jesse Cantwell on the fifth count were that he stopped two men in the street, asked, and received, permission to play a phonograph record, and played the record "Enemies", which attacked the religion and church of the two men, who were Catholics. Both were incensed by the contents of the record and were tempted to strike Cantwell unless he went away. On being told to be on his way he left their presence. There was no evidence that he was personally offensive or entered into any argument with those he interviewed.
The court held that the charge was not assault or breach of the peace or threats on Cantwell's part, but invoking or inciting others to breach of the peace, and that the facts supported the conviction of that offense.
First. We hold that the statute, as construed and applied to the appellants, deprives them of their liberty without due process of law in contravention of the Fourteenth Amendment. The fundamental concept of liberty embodied in that Amendment embraces the liberties guaranteed by the First Amendment.2 The First Amendment declares that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. The Fourteenth Amendment has rendered the legislatures of the states as incompetent as Congress to enact such laws. The constitutional inhibition of legislation on the subject of religion has a double aspect. On the one hand, it forestalls compulsion by law of the acceptance of any creed or the practice of any form of worship. Freedom of conscience and freedom to adhere to such religious organization or form of worship as the individual may choose cannot be restricted by law. On the other hand, it safeguards the free exercise of the chosen form of religion. Thus the Amendment embraces two concepts,—freedom to believe and freedom to act. The first is absolute but, in the nature of things, the second cannot be. Conduct remains subject to regulation for the protection of society.4 The freedom to act must have appropriate definition to preserve the enforcement of that protection. In every case the power to regulate must be so exercised as not, in attaining a permissible end, unduly to infringe the protected freedom. No one would contest the proposition that a state may not, by statute, wholly deny the right to preach or to disseminate religious views. Plainly such a previous and absolute restraint would violate the terms of the guarantee.5 It is equally clear that a state may by general and non-discriminatory legislation regulate the times, the places, and the manner of soliciting upon its streets, and of holding meetings thereon; and may in other respects safeguard the peace, good order and comfort of the community, without unconstitutionally invading the liberties protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. The appellants are right in their insistence that the Act in question is not such a regulation. If a certificate is procured, solicitation is permitted without restraint but, in the absence of a certificate, solicitation is altogether prohibited.
The appellants urge that to require them to obtain a certificate as a condition of soliciting support for their views amounts to a prior restraint on the exercise of their religion within the meaning of the Constitution. The State insists that the Act, as construed by the Supreme Court of Connecticut, imposes no previous restraint upon the dissemination of religious views or teaching but merely safeguards against the perpetration of frauds under the cloak of religion. Conceding that this is so, the question remains whether the method adopted by Connecticut to that end transgresses the liberty safeguarded by the Constitution.
3 Schneider v. State, 308 U. S. 147, 160.
4 Reynolds v. United States, 98 U. S. 145; Davis v. Beason, 133 U. S. 333.
5 Compare Near v. Minnesota, 283 U. S. 697, 713.
--The general regulation, in the public interest, of solicitation, which does not involve any religious test and does not unreasonably obstruct or delay the collection of funds, is not open to any constitutional objection, even though the collection be for a religious purpose. Such regulation would not constitute a prohibited previous restraint on the free exercise of religion or interpose an inadmissible obstacle to its exercise.
It will be noted, however, that the Act requires an application to the secretary of the public welfare council of the State; that he is empowered to determine whether the cause is a religious one, and that the issue of a certificate depends upon his affirmative action. If he finds that the cause is not that of religion, to solicit for it becomes a crime. He is not to issue a certificate as a matter of course. His decision to issue or refuse it involves appraisal of facts, the exercise of judgment, and the formation of an opinion. He is authorized to withhold his approval if he determines that the cause is not a religious one. Such a censorship of religion as the means of determining its right to survive is a denial of liberty protected by the First Amendment and included in the liberty which is within the protection of the Fourteenth.
The State asserts that if the licensing officer acts arbitrarily, capriciously, or corruptly, his action is subject to judicial correction. Counsel refer to the rule prevailing in Connecticut that the decision of a commission or an administrative official will be reviewed upon a claim that “it works material damage to individual or corporate rights, or invades or threatens such rights, or is so unreasonable as to justify judicial intervention, or is not consonant with justice, or that a legal duty has not been performed.” It is suggested that the statute is to be read as requiring the officer to issue a certificate unless the cause in question is clearly not a religious one; and that if he violates his duty his action will be corrected by a court.
6 Woodmont Assn. v. Milford, 85 Conn. 517, 522; see also Connecticut Co. v. Norwalk, 89 Conn. 528, 531.
7 Near v. Minnesota, 283 U. S. 697.
8 Compare Lewis Publishing Co. v. Morgan, 229 U. S. 288, 306-310; New York ex rel. Bryant v. Zimmerman, 278 U. S. 63, 72.
To this suggestion there are several sufficient answers. The line between a discretionary and a ministerial act is not always easy to mark and the statute has not been construed by the State court to impose a mere ministerial duty on the secretary of the welfare council. Upon his decision as to the nature of the cause, the right to solicit depends. Moreover, the availability of a judicial remedy for abuses in the system of licensing still leaves that system one of previous restraint which, in the field of free speech and press, we have held inadmissible. A statute authorizing previous restraint upon the exercise of the guaranteed freedom by judicial decision after trial is as obnoxious to the Constitution as one providing for like restraint by administrative action.
Nothing we have said is intended even remotely to imply that, under the cloak of religion, persons may, with impunity, commit frauds upon the public. Certainly penal laws are available to punish such conduct. Even the exercise of religion may be at some slight inconvenience in order that the state may protect its citizens from injury. Without doubt a state may protect its citizens from fraudulent solicitation by requiring a stranger in the community, before permitting him publicly to solicit funds for any purpose, to establish his identity and his authority to act for the cause which he purports to represent. The state is likewise free to regulate the time and manner of solicitation generally, in the interest of public safety, peace, comfort or convenience. But to condition the solicitation of aid for the perpetuation of religious views or systems upon a license, the grant of which rests in the exercise of a determination by state authority as to what is a religious cause, is to lay a forbidden burden upon the exercise of liberty protected by the Constitution.
Second. We hold that, in the circumstances disclosed, the conviction of Jesse Cantwell on the fifth count must be set aside. Decision as to the lawfulness of the conviction demands the weighing of two conflicting interests. The fundamental law declares the interest of the United States that the free exercise of religion be not prohibited and that freedom to communicate information and opinion be not abridged. The state of Connecticut has an obvious interest in the preservation and protection of peace and good order within her borders. We must determine whether the alleged protection of the State’s interest, means to which end would, in the absence of limitation by the federal Constitution, lie wholly within the State’s discretion, has been pressed, in this instance, to a point where it has come into fatal collision with the overriding interest protected by the federal compact.
Conviction on the fifth count was not pursuant to a statute evincing a legislative judgment that street discussion of religious affairs, because of its tendency to provoke disorder, should be regulated, or a judgment that the playing of a phonograph on the streets should in the interest of comfort or privacy be limited or prevented. Violation of an Act exhibiting such a legislative judgment and narrowly drawn to prevent the supposed evil, would pose a question differing from that we must here answer.* Such a declaration of the State’s policy would weigh heavily in any challenge of the law as infringing constitutional limitations. Here, however, the judgment is based on a common law concept of the most general and undefined nature. The court below has held that the petitioner’s conduct constituted the commission of an offense under the State law, and we accept its decision as binding upon us to that extent.
The offense known as breach of the peace embraces a great variety of conduct destroying or menacing public order and tranquillity. It includes not only violent acts but acts and words likely to produce violence in others. No one would have the hardihood to suggest that the principle of freedom of speech sanctions incitement to riot or that religious liberty connotes the privilege to exhort others to physical attack upon those belonging to another sect. When clear and present danger or riot, disorder, interference with traffic upon the public streets, or other immediate threat to public safety, peace, or order, appears, the power of the state to prevent or punish is obvious. Equally obvious is it that a state may not unduly suppress free communication of views, religious or other, under the guise of conserving desirable conditions. Here we have a situation analogous to a conviction under a statute sweeping in a great variety of conduct under a general and indefinite characterization, and leaving to the executive and judicial branches too wide a discretion in its application.
Having these considerations in mind, we note that Jesse Cantwell, on April 26, 1938, was upon a public street, where he had a right to be, and where he had a right peacefully to impart his views to others. There is no showing that his deportment was noisy, truculent, overbearing or offensive. He requested of two pedestrians permission to play to them a phonograph record. The permission was granted. It is not claimed that he intended to insult or affront the hearers by playing the record. It is plain that he wished only to interest them in his propaganda. The sound of the phonograph is not shown to have disturbed residents of the street, to have drawn a crowd, or to have impeded traffic. Thus far he had invaded no right or interest of the public or of the men accosted.
The record played by Cantwell embodies a general attack on all organized religious systems as instruments of Satan and injurious to man; it then singles out the Roman Catholic Church for strictures couched in terms which naturally would offend not only persons of that persuasion, but all others who respect the honestly held religious faith of their fellows. The hearers were in fact highly offended. One of them said he felt like hitting Cantwell and the other that he was tempted to throw Cantwell off the street. The one who testified he felt like hitting Cantwell said, in answer to the question “Did you do anything else or have any other reaction?” “No, sir, because he said he would take the victrola and he went.” The other witness testified that he told Cantwell he had better get off the street before something happened to him and that was the end of the matter as Cantwell picked up his books and walked up the street.
Cantwell’s conduct, in the view of the court below, considered apart from the effect of his communication upon his hearers, did not amount to a breach of the peace. One may, however, be guilty of the offense if he commit acts or make statements likely to provoke violence and disturbance of good order, even though no such eventuality be intended. Decisions to this effect are many, but examination discloses that, in practically all, the provocative language which was held to amount to a breach of the peace consisted of profane, indecent, or abusive remarks directed to the person of the hearer. Resort to epithets or personal abuse is not in any proper sense communication of information or opinion safeguarded by the Constitution, and its punishment as a criminal act would raise no question under that instrument.
We find in the instant case no assault or threatening of bodily harm, no truculent bearing, no intentional discourtesy, no personal abuse. On the contrary, we find only an effort to persuade a willing listener to buy a book or to contribute money in the interest of what Cantwell, however misguided others may think him, conceived to be true religion.
* Compare Gitlow v. New York, 268 U. S. 652, 670-1; Thornhill v. Alabama, No. 514 Oct. T. 1939, pp. 6-11.
--In the realm of religious faith, and in that of political belief, sharp differences arise. In both fields the tenets of one man may seem the rankest error to his neighbor. To persuade others to his own point of view, the pleader, as we know, at times, resorts to exaggeration, to vilification of men who have been, or are, prominent in church or state, and even to false statement. But the people of this nation have ordained in the light of history, that, in spite of the probability of excesses and abuses, these liberties are, in the long view, essential to enlightened opinion and right conduct on the part of the citizens of a democracy.
The essential characteristic of these liberties is, that under their shield many types of life, character, opinion and belief can develop unmolested and unobstructed. Nowhere is this shield more necessary than in our own country for a people composed of many races and of many creeds. There are limits to the exercise of these liberties. The danger in these times from the coercive activities of those who in the delusion of racial or religious conceit would incite violence and breaches of the peace in order to deprive others of their equal right to the exercise of their liberties, is emphasized by events familiar to all. These and other transgressions of those limits the states appropriately may punish.
Although the contents of the record not unnaturally aroused animosity, we think that, in the absence of a statute narrowly drawn to define and punish specific conduct as constituting a clear and present danger to a substantial interest of the State, the petitioner’s communication, considered in the light of the constitutional guarantees, raised no such clear and present menace to public peace and order as to render him liable to conviction of the common law offense in question.10
The judgment affirming the convictions on the third and fifth counts is reversed and the cause is remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.
So ordered.
10 Compare Schenck v. United States, 249 U. S. 47, 52; Herndon v. Lowry, 301 U. S. 242, 256; Thornhill v. Alabama, No. 514, Oct. T. 1939.
Miscellany
Anglicisms Bewilder Americans
The English call a spool of thread a “reel of cotton”, a house wrecker a “house breaker”. They “mend” the fire, and think they compliment a lady when they tell her she adds “homeliness” to an occasion. When they speak of “gum” they have in mind glue or paste, and use the expression “lifting a collection in church”, which latter is not altogether inappropriate. In America a homely woman is lacking in beauty, a house breaker is a robber, gum is something chewed to keep the jaws occupied, lifting a thing is taking it surreptitiously; mending is confined to wearing apparel and other things that may be in need of minor repairs; and a reel is a rotary device for winding film, etc.
How to Start a Riot
◆ It costs about $250 to start a riot; but there is lots of fun in it, if you have the cash on hand. In Los Angeles a man converted his worldly wealth into quarters (25c pieces) and started giving it away. He had managed to get rid of about 1,000 pieces and had gathered a mob of 2,000 when the police arrived and took him to the central police station. There he was warned that he must not give away any more money, at least not in Los Angeles. There were too many people that wanted to be close to him when he did it.
Cruelty to Children
◆ The London Referee names recent instances in which a British woman of 18 burned the hands of her stepson, aged three, with a cigarette lighter and then threw him downstairs; she is doing six months at hard labor for this. A father beat his 20-month-old baby boy senseless in his cot. A stepfather punched and kicked his five-year-old stepson, and got six months for it. A mother bit her crying child, shook it like a rat, and flung it on the ground.
Uncle Sam’s New Gun
◆ Uncle Sam’s new field gun throws a 100-pound shell 15 miles and when the shell lands it blows a hole 16 feet deep in the ground. The gun weighs 15 tons.
Northern Rhodesia
NORTHERN RHODESIA is a comparatively young country to the European settler, and its rich mineral deposits and strategic position make it a valuable and important asset to the British Empire, and to the great financial interests which are connected with the mines. It also holds a fascination for nature-lovers, and, unfortunately, for those who follow the cult of Nimrod and wantonly destroy game, impelled by the lust of taking life. Here there is a great variety of animal life, ranging from the elephant, lion, and buffalo to the small and graceful buck, and in one district alone there are about 260 different kinds of birds.
The first white men to visit the country came from Nyasaland in 1798, but it was not until 65 years later that Livingstone discovered the Victoria falls and traveled to Barotseland. In the year 1899 North Western Rhodesia, including Barotseland, and in the year 1900 North Eastern Rhodesia, were placed, by order in Council, under the control of the British South African Company. Later, in 1924, Northern Rhodesia passed under the control of the Crown and was administered as a British colony.
The total area of the country is approximately 300,000 square miles, and much of this lies at an altitude of from 3,000 to 4,500 feet above sea level. This area, in the main, is covered by country roads which are in fair condition during most of the year; but unreliable during the heavy rains, due to the fact that they have no proper foundation. The population in 1936 was 9,913 Europeans and 1,366,425 Africans; a proportion of 1 to 138.
The mineral resources seem boundless, and the principal exports for the year 1938 were as follows: copper, 213,031 tons; cobalt, 3,221,357 pounds; gold, 1,113 ounces; manganese ore, 2,735 tons; mica, 8,620 pounds; silver, 88,237 ounces; tin, 4.25 tons; vanadium, 823,626 pounds; zinc, 10,215 tons; selenium, 4,078 pounds; silica rock, 2,076 tons; iron ore, 205 tons; and lead, 273 tons. The approximate value of these minerals was £10,683,611. The profits of the large mining corporations are counted in millions of pounds, and the British South African Company, like a huge octopus, spreads forth its tentacles to receive huge sums of money, and well can the expression be used of it, “Thou takest up that thou layedst not down, and reapest that thou didst not sow.”
The whole territory is divided into seven provinces, each under the control of a provincial commissioner and various other government officials; but the seat of government is at Lusaka, the capital. The governor is appointed by the crown, and, in addition, there is an Executive Council. The Legislative Council consists of eight elected members, eight members appointed by the government (who naturally cannot voice an opinion contrary to the government’s policy), and the governor. One of the elected members of the Legislative Council, a European, is chosen to represent native interests.
Jehovah’s Kingdom publishers, Matala Mine, Northern Rhodesia, South Africa
General conditions in the territory are favorable to the European, who is able to obtain labor at a very small cost.
Employers are compelled to give their house boys a minimum of 14 pounds of meal and 2 pounds of meat per week. Wages vary from about £6 per month with a free hut and food for the competent native clerks, to about 8/- per month with a hut and food for the most unskilled labor on farms. Out of this amount the grown male, except under special circumstances, is compelled to pay an annual poll tax which varies from 7/6d in the country districts to 15/- in the industrial areas. It was the increasing of this tax in the mining districts, without first properly explaining the matter to those directly affected, that caused the Copper Belt riots in 1935 for which the Watch Tower was blamed as a contributing factor. A famous English opera writer wrote, “A victim must be found. . . . I’ve got a little list”; so there was common consent amongst the Commission of Enquiry as to whom they should make the scapegoat. The chairman was reputed to be a Roman Catholic. Some men of character both inside and outside of the Government service have refused to accept the Commission’s report, but it served its purpose in reducing to a minimum the blame which should have rested squarely upon the shoulders of responsible officials, and putting the Society’s adherents in an unfavorable light.
The European who works at the mines, generally speaking, lives a life of comparative ease unknown to his English brother in Britain. His wages are higher, his home is, as a rule, much better, and the medical treatment received from the mines is really good. The Luanshya mine has provided a magnificent open-air swimming bath for Europeans, costing about £14,000, and other mines are following suit. Several recreation grounds and mine clubs are spacious and make provision for healthy recreation and leisure. To offset these benefits one has to keep in mind the blight of malaria and other tropical diseases which, together with the hot climate, sap vitality and sometimes make for permanent ill health.
The mine hospitals for Africans are run by conscientious and efficient medical staffs and their service is a reflection on the general provision made by similar Government institutions.
General progress amongst the Africans is slow and the majority of them are underfed and badly provided for, particularly outside of the mining areas. The schools, mostly run by the mission stations, have certainly done something to educate the native and to provide medical treatment, but a quotation from the director of native education in his report for 1936 states: “Religious instruction (according to denomination) is given daily in the schools.” This, of course, is the traditional fly in the ointment of the scholastic apothecary in the territory, and it is generally agreed by practical men of experience, who have no ecclesiastical bias, that all training should be undertaken by the Government itself. In actual fact, during 1936, the Government granted £14,340 towards missionary schools, of which the Roman Catholic Church received approximately £2,450. About 8 per cent of the native population attended schools during that year; and of this number, 109,000 of these went to Government-aided mission schools and 1,543 to schools run directly by the Government. The general standard of education is poor, due to lack of facilities and the smallness of the grants for native education, and, in addition, it is, of course, a difficult task to teach several of the offspring of the backward tribes anything that involves inductive reasoning, although the African’s memory is good and he is a clever linguist. In most cases there is little doubt that education in the proper methods of agricultural husbandry, sanitation and other practical subjects, including social hygiene, would prove more beneficial to the average African, living under his present conditions. That the advent of the European has been advantageous to the African and that many conscientious men both inside and outside of the Government service strive to help him and give him justice cannot be denied, but that he is still exploited is equally true, and only the kingdom of God in full operation will meet all needs and provide that which is required.
The life of the African in his village is not disturbed by the troubles which are so common to the rest of mankind. He generally works in his garden with the help of his wife and his children, and he sells what grain he has to spare, together with some chickens or fish. He takes a holiday when he feels so inclined and lives in a poorly constructed hut made of wood and mud with a thatched roof, which, in many districts, has to be moved and rebuilt every year or two because the garden soil becomes devitalized. The hut contains little furniture in most cases.
Land transport service, Northern Rhodesia
Carriers on the march, Northern Rhodesia
A broad view of charity is shown in native life in the provision for widows and fatherless children, and those who have nothing to eat. The hungry stranger, or relative, is given a share of the food in the house or village he visits, while the widow and her children are absorbed either by a form of levirate marriage into the household of the dead man’s brother or she returns with her children to her own family. The liberality to the stranger often gives rise to serious abuse amongst those who are lazy; they live on their brothers (in an easier way than do the share-pushers and profiteers), and would not approve of Paul’s dictum that those who will not work should not eat. Witchcraft is also by no means dead, and it raises its dangerous head from time to time in some wretched crime.
The native chief has some authority under the system of indirect rule in force in this territory. The arrangement has its advantages, but some of the chiefs are lazy (loving beer-drinks as they pass from village to village), ignorant, arrogant, and unsuited to rule. These, and there are fortunately many exceptions, often demand a form of salute which involves more than a respectful and friendly greeting, and the refusal of Jehovah’s witnesses to accord it has brought scorn, unjusti-
(Continued on page 15) UNDER THE TOTALITARIAN FLAG
The Cross in Brazil
◆ The history of this country shows that Brazil and the cross are inseparably linked together, so that without the cross Brazil does not exist. The claim is made that Brazil was discovered on April 28, 1500, but, being near the third of May, when the Catholic church celebrates “the day of the Holy Cross”, it was decided to postpone the date of discovery to the third of May, the date on which Brazil now celebrates its discovery. In this it is noted that no importance is attributed to the discovery of Brazil; that is to say, the important thing was not the discovery of Brazil, but the cross which it should support from that time on; so this is what they try to magnify.
When the Hierarchy discovered Brazil, its first act was to raise up a huge cross in the discovered land. Thinking that the discovered land was but an island, it was named “Island of the Holy Cross”; later, after it was found that this was a mistake and that the discovered land was a big country, it was named “The Land of the Holy Cross”. The meaning of the cross, according to the lexicographers, is “punishment” or “torture”. Reasoning on the matter, the first act performed upon the discovery of Brazil would seem to say: “Poor country! you have had the misfortune to fall into our hands. There is your sentence, a cross. From now on you have to carry your cross, just as all other countries under our control, including the mother land whence we came. See now, your cross is a heavy one, but this is the cross you have to carry on your back.” Since that time until now Brazil is dragging its cross.
There were then organized expeditions to explore the country discovered; these were very much like the European crusades. Wherever the Jesuits arrived, because they took part in the expeditions, immediately they raised a cross and started teaching the natives something about it,—not very good news to the natives, because the latter were very superstitious and believed that many symbols were bearers of misfortune, even going so far as to make great sacrifices, including the killing of their children, in order to get rid of such fictitious things.
Plain roadside crosses, Brazil
Wherever a member of the expedition died, a cross was raised. It was thought thus to ward off demons because “demons shun the cross”. From this superstition started the proverb, “To run away from a thing as the devil runs away from the cross.” The custom of raising a cross at any place became general among the ever-increasing population of the land, so that it got to the point in which it is found today; now, however, the custom is falling into disuse and is limited to keeping the existing crosses, “to respect the traditions of the forefathers.”
At any old place in the road the passer-by meets crosses of all sizes, shapes and kinds; sometimes a high cross of wood with two or three other smaller ones alongside, all bedecked with silk ribbons of various colors, wreaths of real or artificial flowers, candles, etc.; again, only one cross made of wood or iron of a regular size with less ornamentation, covered with “sape” (a kind of Brazilian straw used to cover houses), tile, or zinc; some are seen with walls around, either of wood or of brick, while still others, being less fortunate or better able to resist the inclemencies of the weather, are uncovered.
The history of these crosses is nothing but the superstition implanted by Satan to direct the minds of men to anything but the worship of God, keeping them in complete ignorance as to the purpose of the Most High to bring blessings to all obedient ones who worship Jehovah in spirit and in truth. Even now, when the natives pass by a cross, they show profound adoration for it; if a man, he takes (Continued on page 24) Earth’s Chief Industry
The New Attack Planes
◆ The ships strike so swiftly and fly so close to the ground that effective defense against them is virtually impossible.
At 1,000 yards from their target the ships begin to spray 2,000 bullets a minute. Split seconds later they unloose their sheafs of parachute-bombs, and as they roar over their target at 300 miles an hour the rear machine gun pours out a deadly rain of lead at the fast-receding objective.
The bombs carry parachutes for the reason that if they were dropped from the planes so close to the ground the instantaneous explosion would blow the wings off the attacking planes. The parachutes delay the bomb flight only sufficiently to enable the speeding planes to get safely out of the way of their concussion.
A flight of nine attack ships can cover an enemy airfield completely with the effectiveness of a barrage of field artillery in one swooping attack. — Copyrighted dispatch of International News Service, in Birmingham News.
Welcoming the Invaders
◆ Welcoming the invaders, Uncle Sam laid rows of mines up and down the Atlantic and Pacific coasts, 19 mines to a row. The mines are 100 feet apart, suspended 30 feet below the surface. When the visiting battleship arrives, if Uncle Sam’s boys on shore don’t like its looks, somebody presses a button and 200 pounds of TNT goes off, caving in the sides of the visitor, and making the men aboard wish that they had never left home.
Result of Satan’s rule over the affairs of men
The Way Wars Are Started
◆ The way wars are started is by making people mad, and the United States is now doing what it can to make Russia just that way. The anniversary of the Union of Socialist Soviet Republics is usually a grand affair in Washington. Everybody of consequence goes and has a good time. In 1939 it was different. There were present none from the White House, none of the Cabinet, none of the Supreme Court, none of the United States Senate, and only two of about six hundred of the House of Representatives. The intent was to convey the hint to Russia that the United States of America does not appreciate the dirty deal given to Poland, and the hint probably soaked in.
Nearly 70 Percent at War
◆ At the first of the year 1940 the governments or misgovernments that preside over the destinies of 1,480,000,000 human creatures were at war and there were left but 613,000,000 not yet engaged in this latest madness. Most of these are in the Western Hemisphere and liable to be drawn in sooner or later, as before.
The Kellogg Peace Pact
◆ Of the nine nations that ten years ago renounced war for ever, five are now at war: Germany, France, England, Japan, and Belgium. Two have been wiped out: Poland and Czechoslovakia. Italy has had two wars since that time, and the United States is expecting at any time to be dragged into the new world war. That’s all.
Britain
Britain Talks Up to Japan
His Majesty’s Government infer that it is the intention of the Japanese Government to establish a tripartite combination, or bloc, composed of Japan, China, and Manchuria, in which the supreme authority will be vested in Japan, and subordinate roles will be allotted to China and Manchuria. So far as China is concerned, it is understood that the Japanese Government is to exercise control, at least for some time, through the Asia Development Council in Tokyo, which is charged with the formulation and execution of policy connected with political, economic, and cultural affairs in China.
Your Excellency’s own communication to the press indicates that the tripartite combination is to form a single economic unit, and the economic activities of other Powers are to be subjected to restrictions dictated by the requirements of national defence and the economic security of the proposed bloc.
According to Prince Konoe the hostilities in China are to continue until the present Chinese Government have been crushed or will consent to enter the proposed combination on Japanese terms. China, he said, will be required to conclude with Japan an anti-Comintern agreement, and Japanese troops are to be stationed at specified points in Chinese territory for an indefinite period, presumably to ensure that the Japanese conditions for the suspension of hostilities are observed.
Moreover, his Excellency stated that the Inner Mongolian region must be designated as a special anti-Communist area. It is not clear what is meant by this, but in the absence of fuller information it can only be assumed that Inner Mongolia is to be subjected to an even greater degree of Japanese military control than other parts of China.
His Majesty’s Government are at a loss to understand how Prince Konoe’s assurance that Japan seeks no territory and respects the sovereignty of China can be reconciled with the declared intention of the Japanese Government to compel the Chinese people by force of arms to accept conditions involving the surrender of their political, economic, and cultural life to Japanese control, the indefinite maintenance in China of considerable Japanese garrisons, and the virtual detachment from China of the territory of Inner Mongolia.
For their part his Majesty’s Government desire to make it clear that they are not prepared to accept or to recognise changes of the nature indicated which are brought about by force. They intend to adhere to the principles of the Nine-Power Treaty and cannot agree to the unilateral modification of its terms.
They would point out that until the outbreak of the present hostilities the beneficial effects which the treaty was expected to produce were steadily being realised. The Chinese people were maintaining and developing for themselves an effective and stable government, and the principle of equal opportunity for the commerce and industry of all nations was bringing prosperity to China and to her international trade, including that with Japan.
His Majesty’s Government therefore cannot agree, as suggested in Japan, that the treaty is obsolete or that its provisions no longer meet the situation except in so far as the situation has been altered by Japan in contravention of its terms.—Manchester Guardian.
Television in Britain
♦ Britain continues far ahead of the United States in television. The best television sets, with screens two feet square, cost 220 guineas (about $900), however, and are still away out of reach except for a very few. Moreover, the present range of television is set at thirty miles, though this is exceeded in actual practice. The lowest-priced television set costs 23 guineas, but its screen is only four inches by five inches and not large enough to satisfy a single observer.
The Woolsack
♦ It is quite comical that the famous woolsack was found stuffed with horsehair instead of the wool which was supposed to be an emblem of Britain’s stability. The woolsack is the name given to the seat of the lord chancellor in the House of Lords. It is a large square bag, without back or arms, and covered with red cloth.
Good Advice
♦ A noted teacher of the nineteenth century, Benjamin Jowell, told Mrs. Asquith (then Margot Tennant): “If you want to believe in God, don’t believe what clergymen tell you about Him.” Jowell was himself a clergyman.
The New Government
(Continued from page 11)
fied opposition, and sometimes imprisonment.
A brief article such as this dealing with Northern Rhodesia would not be complete without mention of the “Watch Tower”; indeed, the word is almost as closely associated with the territory as copper, its chief product. Unfortunately the name has been, and still is, associated with a class who have “gone in the way of Cain . . . run greedily after the error of Balaam for reward, and perished in the gainsaying of Core”. This movement, which has no right to the good name of the Society, and which has deliberately misconstrued the Bible and given daring misinterpretations to several Bible texts (as an excuse for evil-doing), is fortunately waning, due to the opposition of the Society, directed from its depot in Lusaka, and the activities of the Government. The Devil has succeeded in sowing tares even in these scattered parts of the earth, but in spite of this opposition, and the difficulty which has arisen through the unjustified banning of several of the Society’s publications by the Government, an increasing number of Kingdom publishers are passing on the gospel message in several different languages. It is interesting to mention here that considering the small population the number of languages and vernaculars here is phenomenal. Study meetings are held in huts and in open spaces and the sound machines are used in spreading the gospel message in Chinyanja as well as in English, bringing comfort to many who have never heard the real meaning of the Kingdom or understood the difference between religion and Christianity.
That the religionists hate the message and the messengers goes without saying; in many parts their preserves are being disturbed and some of their flocks deserting them. There are instances of a mild form of bribery practised by some of the missionaries, who make presents to the chiefs and give free salt to the adherents of their form of religion. This method of catering for those who are after the “loaves and fishes” is not satisfactory, because it only develops hypocrites, and, as a general rule, Europeans are of the opinion that the mission-trained African is far less reliable than one who has been kept from contact with mission efforts. The words of Jesus, therefore, still find force, when He said that the religionists would search sea and land to make one proselyte, and he would be turned out seven times worse than before he received their attention.
Water transport service, Northern Rhodesia
Wooden drum, Northern Rhodesia
The Catholic Hierarchy has greatly increased its hold over the people in Northern Rhodesia during the past few years, both by means of its convent schools (and it is reported that in at least one of them all pupils are expected to stand up while the Angelus is rung—and this applies to both Catholics and non-Catholics) and by mission schools. This institution has ever been the opponent of education, but the schools serve as a useful instrument for getting into touch with and obtaining the control over many unsuspecting people who are blind to its ulterior political purpose to gain control of the world powers. Its position of favor with the authorities is clearly indicated by the fact that a great many of the Government officials send their children to convent schools and not to the schools controlled and run by the government’s own ap-
(Continued on page 23) COUNSEL by Rutherford
Safe Hiding
MODERN physical facts marking the fulfilment of ancient inspired prophecies concerning our day show that the great battle of Armageddon is rapidly approaching. The great issue now is: Who shall rule the world? not merely this earth, but also the invisible heavens. Who is God? The peoples of earth must learn that He, “whose name alone is Jehovah,” is God. He will make a name for himself; which must mean that He makes His name known to those who have heretofore not known Him or acknowledged Him. Therefore says the inspired prophet: “For, behold, Jehovah cometh forth out of his place to punish the inhabitants of the earth for their iniquity; the earth also shall disclose her blood, and shall no more cover her slain.” (Isaiah 26:21, Am. Rev. Ver. Bible) Jehovah is not known to the people outside of His organization. He is now having His witnesses tell the people of the world who He is, and few of them will hear, believe and heed, as the Scriptures indicate. The above prophecy indicates that up to a time certain Jehovah keeps himself secret, unrevealed, unknown and unrecognized. When the due time comes the glory and power of Jehovah God shall be revealed to all. Then Jehovah comes out of His place, in this, that He makes himself known outside of His organization.
“Therefore shall the earth unveil her shed-blood, and throw a covering no longer over her slain.” (Isaiah 26:21, Rotherham) For centuries the rulers of the earth, supported by many of the people, have shed the blood of innocents and have covered up their evil deeds; but the time comes when Jehovah tears off the covering and discloses all the wickedness that has been done by man at the instance and instigation of the “prince of this world,” the Devil. Manifestly the time for this is after Satan is cast out of heaven and when he is hurrying all the nations on to the battle of Armageddon. Referring to that time, which is now, it is written: “Therefore rejoice, O heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe for the earth and for the sea: because the devil is gone down unto you, having great wrath, knowing that he hath but a short time [till Armageddon].”—Revelation 12:12, Am. Rev. Ver.
“The earth,” as above used, has reference more particularly to the governing factors of the nations. Explaining why Jehovah has come out of His place to take action against the wicked organization, the prophet says: “The earth also is defiled under the inhabitants thereof, because they have transgressed the laws [of Jehovah God], changed the ordinance, broken the everlasting covenant [concerning the sanctity of the blood of creatures]. Therefore hath the curse devoured the earth, and they that dwell therein are desolate: therefore the inhabitants of the earth are burned, and few men left.”—Isaiah 24:5, 6.
The entire human race is of one blood because God made all nations of one blood to dwell upon the face of the earth. (Acts 17:26) For centuries the ground has literally drunk up the lifeblood of many millions, unjustly shed; and to those who are guilty of spilling that blood God says as He did to Cain: “The voice of thy brother’s blood crieth unto me from the ground.” (Genesis 4:10) Among those whose lifeblood has saturated the ground are men and women who were slain because of their faithfulness in bearing witness to the name and goodness of the Almighty God, to wit, the witnesses of Jehovah. Referring to this it is written, in symbols, at Revelation 6:9, 10: “And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held: and they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?”
Manifestly that scripture refers to the fact that the Lord will lay bare the bloody record of the “earth” by calling universal attention to the fact, as well as taking note thereof himself, and bringing the guilty ones to account. The official earth has thrown a covering of false patriotism over her slain and has builded monuments to their memory as another means to blind the people to the truth. The Lord declares that He will tear the veil of covering away and make manifest the guilty ones. That part of the earth which has hypocritically and falsely made war a “holy” thing to blind the people and has urged the guiltless to kill each other is made up of the ecclesiastical element.
To such God says: “Even in thy skirts is there found the blood of the lives of the helpless innocents, not [shed] in the act of breaking in [that is, not shed because they were at the time committing a crime as does a thief] didst thou find them, yet [the blood is] on all these.” — Jeremiah 2:34, Rotherham.
This text means that the young men who have been urged on by the sanctimonious harangue of the religious clergy, and whose warm blood the ground drank up, died not in the act of committing a crime of breaking in. Helplessly innocent, they were forced, and therefore the responsibility for that crime is laid by Jehovah upon the men of religion who urged them to go. This prophecy is proof that the clergy who have taken the name of the Lord God and misrepresented Him are a part of the Devil’s organization. Jehovah comes out of His place to express His indignation against the evildoers.
Within very recent years the “abomination of desolation” has appeared, the totalitarian monstrosity subject to the will and purposes of the religious Hierarchy. As the hideous and unsightly monster Goliath terrorized the Israelites upon the field of battle, even so the monstrosity and fiendishness of the enemy’s organization now strikes terror into the mind and heart of everyone who has but little faith in the Almighty God, the great Theocrat. Not so, however, with those who are clad with the Scripturally provided armor and who are “strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might”. These know that they are imperfect and would quickly fall at the hands of the enemies of The Theocratic Government, but their trust is absolute in the Lord God. For their encouragement and for their full assurance in this hour of peril in the time of God’s wrath, Jehovah speaks to them through His prophet and says: “Come, my people, enter thou into thy chambers, and shut thy doors about thee: hide thyself as it were for a little moment, until the indignation be overpast.” — Isaiah 26:20.
…