The cross-examination is just brutal. Franz definitely understood the implications of perjuring himself...
Q: I may assume, may I, that you, yourself, have anxiously and carefully studied the whole literature of your movement from the beginning?
A: Yes.
Q: Am I right that you put what is described as the end of the time of the Gentiles in October, 1914?
A: Yes.
Q: Is it not the case that Pastor Russell put that date in 1874?
A: No.
Q: What date did he fix?
A: The end of the time of the Gentiles he fixed as 1914.
Q: Did he not fix 1874 as some other crucial date?
A: 1874 used to be understood as the date of Jesus' Second Coming spiritually.
Q: Do you say, used to be understood?
A: That is right.
Q: That was issued as a fact which was to be accepted by all who were Jehovah's Witnesses?
A: Yes.
Q: That is no longer now accepted, is it?
A: No.
[...]
Q: So that I am correct, I am just anxious to canvas the position; it became the bounden duty of the Witnesses to accept this miscalculation?
A: Yes.
Q: In what form was the miscalculation corrected?
A: When we reached the date 1914 and the world developments went forward, then we say that we had not understood some of the prophecies correctly. Therefore, we saw that there was a need for a review of our beliefs respecting how the prophecies would be fulfilled.
[...]
Q: I thought, correct me if I am wrong, that you had agreed that between the matter being considered by the editorial committee and finally by the Presidend it was a matter of consideration by the Board of Directors, am I right in that?
A: The Board of Directors read the publications and they conform to them.
Q: Do you mean they must accept the editorial committee's interpretation?
A: That is true. There is to be no disharmony among the members of the Board of Directors both as members of the Board and also as Christians.
Q: Do you mean by disharmony that there can never be any difference of view as to interpretation?
A: If there is not an understanding that is in accord then there is the discussion in order to arrive at agreement.
[...]
Q: Are [Russell's Studies in the Scriptures] still issued as authoritative by the Society?
A: No.
Q: Why not?
A: Because we have advanced in the greater life, and there have been corrections in our understandings of the Scriptures.
Q: In other words again some of those pronouncements of Pastor Russell as to interpretation of the Scriptures were in error?
A: Yes.
[...]
Q: And [Rutherford] took the view, did he not, that Satan is the God of this world?
A: Certainly.
Q: And that the British Empire was the sent of this beastly organization?
A: I heard him say that very thing in the Royal Albert Hall in 1926.
Q: Does the Society still take that view?
A: No.
Q: So that once again Judge Rutherford preached error?
A: He didn't preach the full round-about truth of the matter.
Q: In that particular, not putting too fine a point upon it, he was in error?
A: He was in error.