Hello Everybody,
Many allready know the story, but for those that don't it goes like this. The Watchtower magazine (1909-1911) was publishing articles and ads for a product called 'Miracle Wheat', a wheat that was supposed to bring forth lots more crop than regular wheat. This was sold in the Watchtower magazine. $20 for 22lbs and $50 for 55lbs. Don't forget that with inflation the real cost as we would understand it would have been almost $400 for 22lbs and almost $1000 for 50lbs. So this just wasn't chump change.
I've got the quotes from the watchtower about this Wheat (the ads where in the 1911 Watchtower). What I wanted to know was if anybody had links to the documents that dealt with the lawsuit and newspaper articles surrounding the scandal. I've searched the web but haven't been able to come up with much. Thanks for your help.
The Miracle Wheat Scandal, anybody have documents???
by drew sagan 8 Replies latest watchtower scandals
-
drew sagan
-
VM44
Rutherford talks about Miracle Wheat in his 1915 publication,
A Great Battle in the Ecclesiastical Heavens (right click link to download)
--VM44
-
Atlantis
Try this: (cut and paste into browser if necessary)
1.Saturday-September-23-1911 and second link is from 2.Wednesday-November-1-1916
http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F20612F93E5517738DDDAA0A94D1405B818DF1D3 http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F10E1EFC3F5412738FDDA80894D9415B868DF1D3 Cheers! Atlantis-
-
VM44
New York Appellate Division Reports - RUSSELL v. BROOKLYN DAILY EAGLE, 168 App. Div. 121 (1915)
The action is for damages for libel. The defendant is the publisher of a daily newspaper. The plaintiff professes to be an interpreter of the Bible, and is an unordained preacher. The libel alleged was published in a cartoon. The headline of the cartoon is "Easy Money Puzzle." In the cartoon is shown a building on which is printed "Onion Bank." The figure of a man appears at the door of the building. He is represented as saying: "You're wasting time, Come on in here." In the foreground is an effigy of the plaintiff, portrayed as carrying a small package. There is this subscription: "If Pastor Russell can get a dollar a pound for Miracle wheat, what could he have got for Miracle stocks and bonds as a director in the old Union Bank?"
-
betterdaze
The Brooklyn Public Library has all the editions of the Brooklyn Daily Eagle in their collection. Unfortunately, they only have 1841 up to 1902 digitally archived online.
You may want to contact BPL directly to request copies of the Miracle Wheat ads/articles you're researching.
http://www.brooklynpubliclibrary.org/eagle/
~Sue -
RR
This is what Russell stated in his own words:
"As respects my business dealings, ... I need not remind you that American Courts are very strict and that if anybody feels that I have wronged him out of a dollar, he would have no difficulty in haling me into Court. You have my assurance dear Brother, that I do not owe any man on earth a penny and that I have never taken a penny from anyone unjustly. On the contrary, as you know, I have spent several small fortunes in seeking to do good to my fellow-man in helping them to a better understanding of God and the Bible. Having once been an infidel myself, and having subsequently found that I had confused the teachings of the Bible with the teachings of creeds, and that the Bible's teaching is a glorious, grand doctrine, it has since been my business and pleasure to do all in my power to help fellow-mortals out of darkness and into true light... Really I care little for what men may say or think about me. Of course, such things are painful; but they are only what the Bible tells us will be more or less the experience of all who would be loyal to God and His Word." —1914; "Zion's Watch Tower", 15 September 1914, pg. 286 "'Miracle Wheat' is a new variety of wheat discovered and so named by a farmer at Fincastle, Va. I copied an item about it from a newspaper in my religious journal, which carries no advertisements. Three years later one of the readers wrote me that he had bought some of the miracle wheat at $1.25 per pound and found it very prolific - up to 3,000 grains from one seed. He sold some of it and donated to the society of which I am the president.
"The following year he and another donated 18 bushels, fixed the price at $1 per pound and asked that it be mentioned in my journal and that we bear the trouble of mailing it. I merely gave their reports and a copy of a report by a United States government expert. The wheat was sold and in all $1,800 was thus donated by these two friends to the work done last year amongst the heathen. No one ever complained of the wheat, and all were offered "money back" if not satisfied.
"If anybody has a microscope that will show anything wrong with this, we would like to have a look through it. We presume the wrong was that it was not 'raffled at 10 cents per grain,' or grab-bagged for at a church fair!" —1913; Tacoma (Washington) Tribune, 20 June, 1913
"When about 13 and connected with the Congregational church I had an experience which made a lasting impression. Our congregation held a church fair, in connection with which the 'sheep' worked hard, giving their own time and money so that they might have an opportunity also of fleecing and milking the 'goats'—their worldly neighbours and friends who had no particular interest in religion. Amongst other novelties incidental was a voting contest for a lady's watch. One of the subscription books was given to me, with the suggestion that I get some votes. Having few wealthy friends I cast about in my mind with whom I should begin to get my book properly started. I thought of Dr. Hostetter, of stomach bitters fame, as a man of whom I had heard as being wealthy, but whom I did not know. I went to his office, explained my errand, and was promptly handed $2, the gentleman evidently appreciating the privilege. As I walked from his office the thought bore upon me, 'You have begged two dollars.' I felt so mean about the matter that I wished that $2 back in Dr. Hostetter's pocket. I started to return, but concluded that I would be making a bad matter worse by so doing. Resolving that I would never beg another cent under any conditions, I rendered up my accounts. I feel as strongly in the matter today as I did then, and am determined never to make an appeal for money, either directly or indirectly—not even making a 'poor mouth.'
"My conclusion that the Lord is fully able to supply whatever money he needs for his own work is fully borne out by my experiences. It is mine to use carefully, economically, every dollar which the Lord puts under my control directly or indirectly, and to leave to him to decide what are the necessities of his work. I neither beg nor go into debt." —1910; Jamestown (New York) Evening Journal, 06 August, 1910
"Pastor Russell prefaced his remarks by saying that with no doubt the best of intentions, the London Press had erred in declaring him wealthy, deluged with money. This they inferred, no doubt, from the fact that no collections were asked, and no admission fees charged at his services. He declared that the majority of 'God's' people were not well-to-do financially, and that his friends frequently stinted themselves to sustain his message of God's love. The Bible declares 'My God shall supply all your needs,' and his experience confirmed this. Without resorting to bazaars, collections, etc., sufficient money is pressed upon him to sustain a large work amongst Bible students all over the world." —1910; The (London) Morning Leader, 24 May 1910
"We sell all the translations, the English, the French, the German, the Greek, the Norwegian and the Swedish, etc., at one price, and the foreign editions that are small necessarily cost a good deal more. The English books we sell to the colporteurs at sixteen cents cost sixteen, sometimes a fraction over, according to varying circumstances, and the foreign ones, some cost twenty, some twenty-five, and some thirty-cents apiece, so that last year, the Society lost nearly four thousand dollars just on the price of the books alone... Our money is not all eaten up by salaried officers, large buildings, interests on mortgages, etc., that are very heavy. The money is going out in the work, and is done economically and as wisely as we know how." —1907; Convention Sermon ("Convention Report Sermons", pg. 27)
-
RR
In 1904 Kent Stoner of Fincastle, Virginia (USA) discovered an unusually hearty strain of wheat growing in his field. He named it "Miracle Wheat". When presented at the Appalachian Exhibition, and the Tennessee State Fair in 1910, it won first prize both times. When Pastor Russell came to hear about this "Miracle Wheat" in 1908 he was excited! Having the "restitution of all things", (Acts 3:19) and the restoration of earth to perfection always on his mind, he believed this was another proof that "restitution" had begun. An associate of Pastor Russell's purchased a large amount of this "Miracle Wheat," and desired to have it sold and the proceeds donated to the spread of the truth. A notice appeared to this effect in The Watch Tower, where Bible Students, and any others interested, could purchase a pound of it for $1. Ultimately $1,800 was raised. Nobody was defrauded. Everyone was well informed. Even the US Government recognized something was special about the wheat. When ministers began to criticize Pastor Russell, he offered a return of money to anyone who requested this. Nobody asked for their money back. If Pastor Russell can be accussed of dishonesty for allowing the sale of wheat for $1 a pound, then how much more guilty are Churches who raffle off items to raise money for their Church? How many Churches would willingly give back money to someone who donated it? Can we see the hypocrisy from the critics?
-
lovelylil
Russell was not the creator nor seller of miracle wheat. He advertised it in his journal for another party as RR said. but was not the originator of it. I do not agree with all that Russell taught but many things that are attributed to him are simply not true and this is one of them. Lilly
-
VM44
The whole "Miracle Wheat" affair has been blown out of proportion.
Charles T. Russell was up front about everything, that the wheat was donated, that it was unusually bountiful, that the monies collected would be used for publishing tracts, and so on.
His opponents just couldn't get over the high price for the wheat. They forget that people were not forced to buy it, and Russell did say that if anyone wanted their money back he would return it. (In the Russell vs. Brooklyn Eagle court case it was stated by Van Amburg that only one person who had fell upon hard times had asked for his money back.)
Russell should not have sued the newspaper over the cartoon they published, it only brought more publicity to the whole "Miracle Wheat" thing than it deserved, and guaranteed that it would never be forgotten as it is still being talked about today, almost 100 years later!
--VM44