in
The Watch Towers
from 1908 to 1916
Some have even gone so far to make a story, totally contrary all historical evidence, that Brother Russell "was found guilty of selling phony 'Miracle Wheat' through his publication Zion’s Watch Tower and Herald’s of Christ’s Presence.."
Did Russell "discover" this wheat? Was Russell the one who named this wheat "Miracle Wheat"? Did any court ever find Russell guilty of selling phony wheat?
Additionally, many make it appear that it was Russell who named this wheat "miracle wheat." Russell reported that this name was appearing in the public press in the introduction of the article cited. While we cannot be certain who actually first called this wheat "miracle wheat," it appears that it may have originated from one of the newspaper reporters. Oddly, the wheat developed by Norman Borlaug in the 1960s is also referred to as "miracle wheat."
Much of the article Brother Russell presented quotes a report written by one identified as "Assistant Agriculturalist H. A. Miller." Mr. Miller evidently was with a branch of the United States government. One can find written works presented by H. A. Miller, so this was not just a made-up person. One can also find various newspaper articles relating to Miller's visit to Stoner's farm in Virginia.
At least one newspaper, The Perry County Democrat, claimed that Stoner had prayed for this wheat, stating of Mr. Stoner: "In answer to the prayers of many years, he [Stoner] says he has been rewarded with wealth -- nothing less remarkable than a mysterious kind of wheat which grows in poor ground and yields many times as much grain as the ordinary variety." In 1913, however, Stoner in court denied that he had prayed for this, or that he had called this wheat "miracle wheat." He stated he did not know who named the wheat "Miracle Wheat."
ALASKA WHEAT
Nevertheless, we should again note that Russell himself is not the one making these claims; Russell simply quoted a newspaper article wherein these claims are made by others. Brother Russell, however, evidently -- at that time -- believed the claims regarding this wheat were true.
Again, it should be noted that it was not Russell who was making any of these claims, but rather Russell was simply quoting newspaper articles where others are making claims concerning these varieties of wheat.
The next article is found in The Watch Tower, June 15, 1910, page 203. It may be found online at: https://htdb.space/1910/r4634.htm.
In this article, Brother Russell only mentioned “miracle wheat” briefly, noting that “The new ‘miracle wheat’ sometimes produces more than two hundred grains from one.” This is stated as an illustration of good fruit bearing much fruit, as spoken of in the Bible. In what Russell stated regarding "miracle wheat," he was not making any new claim concerning this wheat that had not already been stated by others, as reported in the news media.
The only part that actually originates from him is the application of the blessings of restitution that is yet to come upon the world of mankind.
The Watch Tower
THE GREAT AND ETERNAL EDEN
“Referring to the ‘times of restitution’ of Messiah’s reign the Prophet declares, 'The earth shall yield her increase.' (Ezekiel 34:27) Behold preparations for the fulfillment of this promise: About three years ago a Virginia farmer found one abnormal bunch of 120 stalks of wheat from one root–the offspring of one grain of wheat. Under the name of ‘miracle wheat’ it is now being developed slowly in various parts–the average yield appears to be about 1,200 grains from one kernel. And this very year the same peculiarity in oats has been found–a bunch growing wild by the roadside.
According to the reports, however, the "miracle wheat" did indeed produce much greater quantities than regular wheat. The report from Bohnet does shows the superior yield from miracle wheat as compared to the regular wheat.
One, however, may ask: Doesn't this article have Russell's own admission that he received money from the sale of this wheat? The idea that Russell personally kept the $100 mentioned has to be presumed. Most of the regular readers of the Watch Tower would know that Brother Russell referred to himself as receiving this money as editor of the Watch Tower on behalf of the Watch Tower Society.
In this short notice is the offer that is alleged by many to be Russell’s fraudulent sale of bogus "miracle wheat," by which it is alleged that Russell made himself rich by defrauding “his flock” with a deception, allegedly giving a name “Miracle Wheat” to ordinary wheat, allegedly making false claims for that wheat and selling that wheat at an exorbitant price. In reality, the claims of the Miracle Wheat had been long been presented in the news media, and there was no reason for Russell to have any doubts regarding those claims. Although many cite this notice and claim that Brother Russell called this when "mracle wheat", in reality, it was not Russell who named the wheat “Miracle Wheat”. As to the claims made for the wheat, Brother Bohnet had reported that from the two grains of wheat he had produced 1,312 grains of wheat, which is much more that Brother Russell spoke of.
Nevertheless, it was not Russell who offered the wheat for sale, nor was he souce of the claims made for the wheat. In reality, it was not Russell who set the price for the wheat. It should also be noted that Brother Bohnet offered the wheat seeds for sale at a price lower than he had purchased such wheat from Mr. Stoner. Nevertheless, in the notice given in the Watch Tower, it was expressly stated that the proceeds from the sale of the wheat was to be donated, not to Russell himself, but rather to the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society. There was definitely no intent on Brother Russell's part to defraud anyone or to deceive anyone. Nor do we have any reason to believe that Bohnet sought to deceive anyone. We have no reason to think that he falsified the yields he reported.
MIRACLE WHEAT IN DEMAND
The notice in THE WATCH TOWER of June 15 that Brother Bohnet has “miracle wheat” in abundance now, and that he will sell it at $1 per pound and donate the entire proceeds to our Tract Fund, has brought in many orders. These will be filled between August 15 and September 1. No limit as to supply has been noted. Sent by Express, prepaid, the price will be twenty-two pounds for $20; fifty-five pounds for $50; larger quantities at the latter rate. The merits of this wheat over the common variety have been mentioned in previous issues of THE WATCH TOWER.
This announcement may be found online at; https://htdb.space/ZWT/zwt0267.htm
The above is a follow-up of the announcement made in the June 15 issue, letting those who placed orders for the wheat know when the orders may be filled. Again, it shows that it was Brother Bohnet, not Russell, who was selling the wheat. Again, it is noted that the proceeds were to be donated, not to Brother Russell, but to the Watch Tower Tract Fund.
ABNORMAL STOOL OF WHEAT
In the Watch Tower, July 1, 1912, an article appeared in the Watch Tower entitled, "The Christian Church and Her Mission." In that article, it was stated "A few years ago a Virginia farmer found an abnormal stool of wheat — one hundred and forty-two stalks, each bearing a well-developed head — the offspring of a single grain of wheat! Under the name of “Miracle Wheat” it is now being developed slowly in various parts of the country." This statement does not offer anything new about Stoner's "miracle wheat," but simply repeats what Stoner claimed for the wheat.
The entire article may be found online at: https://htdb.space/1912/r5057.htm
EASY MONEY PUZZLE
At this point, we should note that on September 23, 1911, The Brooklyn Daily Eagle published a cartoon of Brother Russell and the sale of miracle wheat, as:
As a result of this cartoon, Brother Russell filed suit against the Eagle for libel. Some have wrongly reported that he filed for slander; this is incorrect. He filed suit for libel. Some have incorrectly claimed that Russell was sued, which is, of course, false. And some falsely claim that Russell was arrested.
AS DECEIVERS AND YET TRUE
The next article, entitled "As Deceivers and Yet True", is found in The Watch Tower, February 15, 1913, page 62. One may find the entire article online at: https://htdb.space/1913/r5189.htm
In this article, Brother Russell summarizes the results of his suit against the Eagle. Brother Russell first explains briefly why he became interested in Stoner's "miracle wheat. He then summarizes the court case explaining why he felt that the verdict given was "unjust." Brother Russell spoke of Jesus' appeal to the Law when he had been smitten (John 18:23), and he wrote about how the apostle Paul appealed to law for justice. (Acts 25:10) Like them, Brother Russell stated, he had "been refused the Law's protection." But Brother Russell reports that it is divine will "throughout this Gospel Age to allow his faithful servants to suffer reproaches and losses," and quotes or cites 1 Peter 2:23; John 18:11; Luke 22:42; 1 John 4:17; 2 Corinthians 6:8-10; Galatians 6:17; 2 Timothy 3:12; John 15:18,19.
Brother Russell stated: "Everything that was said respecting the wheat was fully proven at this trial by expert witnesses, interested and disinterested, and their testimony was not shaken." Of course, most people know nothing about those who testified regarding the veracity of the claims made for the wheat. Many do make much ado about the testimony of government experts who had done some "tests" on the wheat and found it to be inferior.
Brother Russell reported:
The Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society was held up to scorn because it did not have any hospital work nor draw any revenue from taxation, and because the female members of the Society do not visit the workshops of the land weekly or monthly on pay-day, and exact donations to its work. Our society was held up to scorn also because we do not send a wagon around the city collecting groceries and provisions for the up-keep of our work; because we do not take up collections even on Sunday; because we have never solicited a penny or a dollar from anybody; and because we never have fairs, grab-bags, “chances” or “raffles.” Our Society was held up to scorn and ridicule because it offers its literature free to the poor, while other similar Societies charge both rich and poor for their tracts and other publications. The Eagle was pictured by its attorney as a dove, a bird of Paradise. For defending it the Protestants on the Jury were led to hope for escape from eternal torment through “the pearly gates” of heaven, welcomed with the words, “Well done!” for giving The Eagle the verdict. Neither I nor my attorneys could offer such inducements conscientiously.
MIRACLE WHEAT TAKES PRIZE
The next is a letter which appeared in:
The Watch Tower, March 3, 1915, page 79
This letter certainly seems to affirm that the wheat was not "inferior to standard wheat" as some have claimed. Brother Russell certainly had no reason to disbelieve what Brother Jarrett reported. Please note, however, that again it is not Brother Russell who was making the claims for the wheat. He only reported what others said.
PROPER AND IMPROPER ADVERTISING
The final article appeared in:
The Watch Tower, July 15, 1915, page 218
In this article, Brother Russell only briefly mentioned "Miracle Wheat," in reference to the notice that had been put in the Watch Tower concerning the offer to sell that wheat. He stated, "We believe we did right in putting that notice in."
We will say that if the claims for this wheat were false as many have claimed, then Brother Russell himself was deceived by those who made such claims. Did Stoner make false claims for this wheat? I don't think so. But if he did, then it was Stoner, not Russell, who made such claims. Did Bohnet report false information to Russell about his experience in growing this wheat? We have no reason to think so. Nevertheless, if Bohnet lied, Brother Russell's fault was that he trusted Bohnet. If Bohnet misrepresented the wheat, then Russell himself was deceived by such deception and he was not the source of such deception. Were all the others who reported extraordinary yields from this wheat lying? Again, we have no reason to think so. Nevertheless, IF they were lying, then Brother Russell had no reason to think that they were not telling the truth. Russell was NOT the originator of the claims; he was simply conveyed what others had claimed.
JUDGE RUTHERFORD'S SPICY DEFENSE
We will now be presenting some excerpts from a booklet entitled: A Great Battle in the Ecclesiastical Heavens, by Joseph Franklin Rutherford. Rutherford published this in 1915, about a year before Brother Russell died. It was not an official publication of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society, but a notice appeared in the Watch Tower, May 1, 1915, entitled "Judge Rutherford's Spicy Defense." Brother Russell stated: "Brother Rutherford, grieved by the various untruthful, slanderous attacks upon the Editor, has prepared a pamphlet in my defense. A copy of it has just been handed me. I have not yet read it, though, of course, I knew of its preparation and in a general way of its contents. I prefer not to have anything to do with its publication." Brother Russell then goes on to present the price of this booklet and the address to purchase a copy.
One may find Rutherford's booklet online at:
https://archive.org/details/AGreatBattleInTheEcclesiasticalHeavens
This booklet presents a lot of details related to "miracle wheat" and what happened in court when Russell sued the Eagle for libel.
There were then and still are those who refer to this wheat as "Russell's Miracle Wheat," which makes it appear that Brother Russell invented this wheat. One claims that Brother Russell "had, in 1908, discovered a particular strain of wheat, which he called 'Miracle Wheat.'" There are two misleading thoughts presented by this statement: (1) It leaves readers with the impression that Russell himself claimed to have discovered this wheat, and (2) that Russell himself gave it the name of "Miracle Wheat." Rutherford stated in his booklet: "Pastor Russell did not discover the wheat, nor did he name it, nor did he receive any personal benefit therefrom. Nor was the Society of which he is president guilty of the slightest misconduct. Had this same transaction occurred with some Catholic or Protestant church no one would ever have thought of making any fuss about it. But the Preachers’ Union seized upon it as another means of persecuting Pastor Russell." This simply confirms what we have already found. Rutherford claimed that Brooklyn Daily Eagle was being used as a tool of what he called, "the Preachers' Unholy Alliance." Rutherford mentions that the attack began on March 22, 1911, and reference is given (fol. 936), evidently referring to the court record archives. We have not found this article online anywhere. If anyone knows anything about this article, please let us know in the comments below.
Rutherford then states, regarding The Brooklyn Daily Eagle:
On September 23, 1911, it published an article announcing that the United States Government was about to take up the matter of Miracle Wheat, intimating that the Government Inspector would ask to be furnished with a sample of Miracle Wheat sold at Pastor Russell’s Tabernacle, to be tested, “that the faithful and a waiting world may learn more fully of the astonishing merits of this precious grain” (fol. 981).
This article may be found online at:
https://bklyn.newspapers.com/clip/15943202/skeptical-uncle-sam-seeks-to-know-more/
Concerning this article Rutherford stated:
As a matter of fact, the Government had been experimenting with Miracle Wheat for more than three years at that time, which shows that The Eagle was trying to mislead its readers and prejudice them against Pastor Russell by inferentially charging that he was selling a fraudulent wheat.
This was in the same issue that the Daily Eagle presented the cartoon we reproduced earlier.
Rutherford then goes into what happened in court, and he states:
The facts given here are taken from the record of the trial of that case in the Supreme Court of Kings County, New York. Figures appearing in parentheses, thus (fol. 774, etc.), refer to folios of the printed record of the case now on file in the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York.
Because of this, we have no reason to question what Rutherford presents about what happened in court. A point to note here is that if one is focusing on what the Daily Eagle presented about what happened in court, one is not getting the full picture. The Daily Eagle left out much, and focuses on whatever could be slanted against Brother Russell.
Rutherford reported that much of the trial focused on whether this wheat was actually superior to other wheat. Rutherford reports that "Eleven witnesses testified to its superior quality over other wheat." He then lists the names these witnesses. For those who might think that these "witnesses" were all friends of Brother Russell and thus that they falsified testimony to support their friend, one should note that Rutherford reported: "The eight first named never heard of Pastor Russell or his religious teachings prior to the trial of this case, but had been experimenting with Miracle Wheat and found it far superior to any other wheat." Rutherford further reported: "The testimony showed that in the year 1904 Mr. K. B. Stoner noticed growing in his garden in Fincastle, Virginia, an unusual plant, which at first he mistook for a kind of grass known as parlor grass, but which, upon further observation, proved to be wheat. The plant had one hundred and forty-two stalks, each stalk bearing a head of fully matured wheat." We have no reason to think that these witnesses bore false testimony about their results in miracle wheat. Usually, however, this testimony is ignored by those who seek to promote some kind of wrong-doing on the part of Russell regarding this wheat. Most focus on the testimony of the "government expert" who claimed that the quality of "miracle wheat" was "low."
Rutherford reported: "The first plant found by Stoner had over 4,000 grains to the stool. In the Fall of 1904 he planted 1,800 grains, and each gram yielded an average of 250 grains. The average return from ordinary wheat in this section was about ten grains for each grain of seed (fols. 75- 78). Mr. Stoner found that a peck to the acre, that is 15 pounds of Miracle Wheat, produced over forty bushels (fol. 88). He has raised as high as 80 bushels of Miracle Wheat to the acre (fol. 92). Thus it is seen that Miracle Wheat produced twenty-five times as much as ordinary wheat in proportion to the amount sown. Mr. Stoner had experimented with Red Wonder, Fuldz and Old Mediterranean wheats. The productiveness of Miracle Wheat was found to be due to its large stooling qualities (fol. 95). For these stooling qualities it needs more room than the average wheat, requiring 16 inches between the rows, and about four times the space of ordinary wheat. If sown like ordinary wheat Miracle Wheat was a failure, for room was essential (fols. 97-99, 104). A four by four-inch space, such as the Government allows, is too small to allow for the normal stooling of Miracle Wheat (fol. 104)."
Rutherford also reported of how the Eagle's attorney "severely ridiculed the religious teachings of Pastor Russell." Rutherford notes that the jury was largely composed of men with strong religious prejudices, with a least one atheist. Evidently, Rutherford was endeavoring to show how the Eagle was misusing Brother Russell's teachings in such a way as to sway the jury against Russell. At any rate, Rutherford stated that the jury "disregarded the testimony of the 11 practical farmers and wheat raisers, and the several exhibits of Miracle Wheat actually produced and shown to them, and decided the case in favor of the Brooklyn Eagle, upon the unsupported testimony of one Government official who never raised a grain of wheat in his.life."
At times, it sounds as though Russell was put on trial for what he believed, and this was used to turn attention away from the real issues and gave an emotional slant to rule against Russell.
Nevertheless, it appears quite probable much of the enormous amount of unfavorable publicity being spread about Brother Russell related to "miracle wheat" may have led farmers to not follow Stoner's instructions related to how this wheat was to be planted, which resulted in its gradual disappearance.
Russell owned 990 of the 1,000 shares of Watchtower Society stock. By this figure, 99% of every “contribution” for “Miracle Wheat” was in effect a contribution to Russell himself.
In 1907, in his last Will and Testament, Brother Russell stated: "I have already donated to the WATCH TOWER BIBLE AND TRACT SOCIETY all my voting shares therein, putting the same in the hands of five Trustees, as follows: Sr. E. Louise Hamilton, Sr. Almeta M. Nation Robison, Sr. J. G. Herr, Sr. C. Tomlins, Sr. Alice G. James." Thus, Russell no longer held any voting shares in the Watch Tower, but his shares were put in the trust of several sisters, evidently with the thought that they would use them wisely after his death. (After Russell died, Rutherford claimed that those shares died with Russell and were not valid). Nevertheless, in 1915 Rutherford reported in his booklet, A Great Battle in The Ecclesiastical Heavens, the following: "While there are nearly two hundred thousand shares, and it would be an easy matter to elect some other man as president, there never has been cast a vote against Pastor Russell."
https://reslight.boards.net/post/2083/thread
While the motives of Russell can only be judged by God Himself, few would argue that such “Miracle Wheat” claims today would be more at home in the National Enquirer than in the Watchtower – a magazine claiming to be produced by God’s only true organization on the earth.
Before he got his religious career well underway, Russell promoted what he called “miracle wheat,” which he sold at sixty dollars per bushel.
You may know of the court case in which Charles Taze Russell, founder of the Watch Tower Society, was on trial for mail fraud (he had claimed that his "miracle wheat" would produce ten times as much as regular wheat).
And:
Russell made a critical mistake. He started selling the grain via interstate mail, with explicit claims about what it would do. And that lead to his being hauled into court on the charge of mail fraud.
Some farmers also commenced proceedings against him on the grounds of fraud and swindling because he sold to them wheat which he called, `miracle wheat’ at a very high price, claiming that it was from the holy land and that it was many times more abundant than the normal harvest. {Of course non of this was true, the wheat was normal American wheat. -- The Heresy of Jehovah's Witnesses, by H.H. Pope Shenouda III, page 8.
[[Charles Taze Russell]] was certainly an expert at making money, whether in the drapery business until he sold it, or by investments in mines and real estate, or by the selling of his books, and of “miracle wheat.” Unfortunately he was legally compelled to restore to the purchasers the money he had obtained for his miracle wheat, on the score that it had been dishonestly extracted from them.
Russell certainly sought find ways to raise money to support the work of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society. I cannot say that he was "an expert" as this, since not all of his ventures proved very successful. We have found no evidence that Russell was ever in the drapery business, so this statement is probably in error. Possibly the author confused Russell's haberdashery business as being a "drapery" business.
The Society was prosecuted for selling Miracle Wheat at sixty times the going rate for wheat, and which was found to be inferior to ordinary wheat.
Charles Russell was convicted of fraud for advertising “miracle wheat” in an early watchtower.... Charles Russell, a former 7th day Adventist constantly changed tact when his predictions for the end of the world didn’t happen.
He [Russell] claimed it would grow five times as well as regular wheat. In fact, it grew slightly less well than regular wheat, as was established in court when Russell was sued.
Russell, however, was not sued, but rather Russell was the one who brought the suit against the Eagle.
http://www.freepress.org/columns/display/2/2003/702
http://www.agbioworld.org/biotech-info/topics/borlaug/special.html
https://reason.com/2000/04/01/billions-served-norman-borlaug/
Taking the Mexican "Miracle Wheat" to the Farmers
https://borlaug.cfans.umn.edu/borlaug/1961-1969
Tribute to Dr. Norman Borlaug
http://www.isaaa.org/kc/cropbiotechupdate/article/default.asp?ID=3925
No comments:
Post a Comment