To the Members of the Theosophical Society:
For Private circulation among members only.
THE LEADBEATER CASE
A REPLY
TO THE PRESIDENT'S LETTER
Of November, 1908
Printed by E.E.MARSDEN, Carr Street, Manchester; and Published by G.R.S.MEAD, HERBERT BURROWS, W.KINGSLAND, & EDITH WARD, at 16, Selwood Place, Onslow Gardens, London.S.W.
-----------------------------------------------
NOTE
At a representative meeting of many of the older and well-known members or the Theosophical Society, held in London, on November 13th, the present situation with regard to the Leadbeater Case was fully discussed. The President's Letter in answer to the request of the Convention of the British Section that she should take steps to put an end to the scandalous state of affairs which now obtains in the Society, was carefully considered. In view of the fact that she refuses to take any steps, but on the contrary would welcome the reinstatement of Mr. Leadbeater, and that, too, without the public repudiation which she promised should be exacted of him, it was decided that a Reply to Mrs. Besant's Letter should be issued, and Miss Edith Ward, Mr. Mead, Mr. Kingsland, and Mr. Herbert Burrows were appointed a Committee to draw up the Reply.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT.
The recent Letter of Mrs. Besant, as President of the Theosophical Society,
which has been sent to all the members of this Section (and also to all the
other Sections of the Society), purports to be her reply to an earnest appeal,
by the British Section in Convention assembled, to the members of the
Theosophical Society, and especially to the President and members of the General
Council - to unite in putting an end to the scandalous state of affairs which
now exists in the Society with regard to what is known as the Leadbeater
teaching, so that the repudiation by the Society of this pernicious teaching may
be unequivocal and final.
By formal direction of the Convention (held in London, July 4 and 5, 1908), a
Special Report of the resolutions and of the proceedings which led up to them
(including a full statement of the facts which necessitated the appeal and the
debate on the subject) was prepared, by a Special Committee (whom the Convention
unanimously appointed), to be issued to the members of the Section. This
Committee consisted of Miss Edith Ward, Messrs. G.R.S.Mead, Herbert Whyte,
Herbert Burrows, and Mrs. Sharpe, General Secretary of the Section. An account
of the proceedings of the Committee will be found in The Vahan of
October, 1908.
-------------------------------------------------------
THE REPLY
This Report, which was duly prepared and passed by the whole Committee, has
been suppressed by the General Secretary, who has been supported by a majority
of the Executive Committee - nine to five.
The nine are: Miss Bright, Miss Green, Mrs. Larmuth, Mr. Leo, Miss Mallet,
Mr. Hodgson Smith, Mr. Wedgwood, Mr. Whyte, and Mrs. Sharpe. (Mrs. Sharpe did
not vote on the actual resolution supporting her action, but voted on all other
resolutions in the same sense.)
The five are: Mr. Burrows, Mr. Glass, Mr. Kingsland, Mr. Mead, and Miss Ward.
Against this solid majority the minority who have endeavoured to carry out the wishes of the Convention have been powerless. This policy of suppression has been vigorously maintained; and now, more than four and a half months after the Convention, the members are still in ignorance of these important proceedings. In spite of a resolution unanimously passed at the Convention that The Vahan, the sectional organ, should be open to the free discussion of all matters of interest to the Section, Mrs. Sharpe refused to print even the following document:
The Report of the Debate, for which two additional sessions of the recent Convention of the British Section of the Theosophical Society were required, and which culminated in the passing of two very important Resolutions, has now been agreed to unanimously by the Special Committee appointed by the Convention to prepare it for publication.
The General Secretary, however, refuses to publish the document, and is supported in her refusal by a majority of the Executive Committee. We, the undersigned members of the Special Committee (of five), are prepared to carry out the instructions of the General Council in Convention duly assembled.
The official means of issuing the Report, however having been denied us, we now apply directly to the members of the Section for the necessary funds and addresses (which may be sent to any of the undersigned), in order that we may carry out the imperative duty of acquainting the Section with the present grave state of affairs.
(Signed) G. R. S. MEAD, HERBERT BURROWS. EDITH WARD.
It has thus been deliberately rendered impossible for the facts of the case
to be placed before the members. And now with only Mrs. Besant's letter before
them, the members are being urged to sign a petition for Mr. Leadbeater's
reinstatement. [Mr. Burrows and Mr.Mead have now printed their speeches
themselves in a pamphlet, and copies may be obtained from them.]
Even in Mrs. Besant's Letter, which has gone out to the whole Society, as
well as to the members of this Section, the very resolution on which she bases
that reply, is not given, and it was only at the last moment that the General
Secretary of this Section found herself compelled to enclose the bare text of
that resolution with Mrs. Besant's Letter as sent out to the Section. [And yet
Mrs. Besant (p. 3) claims that she is submitting "the whole case to the judgment
of the Theosophical Society."]
Even when this opportunity arose Mrs. Sharpe has still suppressed the
following two very important decisions of the Convention.
By 33 votes to 31 the Convention rejected an amendment, moved by Mrs. Sharpe,
and seconded by Mr. Ernest Wood (of Manchester):
Welcoming the President's policy of collaboration with Mr. C. W. Leadbeater
in any work which he is willing to do for the Society.
This amendment was rejected on its merits before the debate on the Van Hook-Leadbeater resolution (moved as an amendment to Mr. Dunlop's resolution) took place. After the protracted debate which resulted in the carrying of this resolution, Mr. Bell (of Harrogate) moved, and Mr. Wilkinson (of Nottingham) seconded:
That this Convention looks on the teaching given by C. W. Leadbeater to
certain boys as wholly evil, and hereby expresses its judgment on this matter.
This was carried nem. con.
The Van Hook-Leadbeater resolution was carried by 38 votes to 4 (all the
latter cast by one Belgian delegate), 22 declining to vote, This resolution,
moved in the form of an amendment, was as follows:
This Convention of the British Section of the Theosophical Society while
affirming its loyalty to the first Object of the Society - namely, "to form a
nucleus of the universal brotherhood of humanity" - strongly protests against
evoking the sentiment of brotherhood to countenance what is wrong.
Whereas Dr. Weller van Hook, the present General Secretary of the American
Section, and so a member of the General Council of the Theosophical Society, in
a recent Open Letter which he has subsequently stated to have been "dictated
verbatim by one of the Masters," has publicly claimed that the corrupting
practices, the teaching of which determined the resignation of Mr. C.W.
Leadbeater, are the high doctrine of Theosophy and the "precursor of its
introduction into the thought of the outer world":-
This Convention declares its abhorrence of such practice, and, in view of the
incalculable harm to Theosophy and of the disgrace which this teaching must
inevitably bring upon the Society earnestly calls upon all its members,
especially the President and members of the General Council, to unite in putting
an end to the present scandalous state of affairs, so that the repudiation by
the Society of this pernicious teaching may be unequivocal and final.
Moved by Herbert Burrows; seconded by G.R.S. Mead; supported by A. P. Sinnett C.J. Barker, J.S. Brown, Dr. C.G. Currie, H. R. Hogg, B. Keightley, W. Kingsland, W.Scott-Elliot, W. Theobald, B. G. Theobald, L. Wallace, C. B. Wheeler, H.L. Shindler, A.P.
Cattanach, Dr. A. King, Baker Hudson, W.H. Thomas, A.B. Green, J.M. Watkins,
E.E. Marsden, H.E. Nichol, by the delegates of the London and Blavatsky Lodges,
and by many others.
Immediately after the vote was taken Miss Dupuis, of the H.P.B. Lodge, read
the following declaration, in which the majority of the representatives who had
declined to vote joined by standing with her:
We cannot vote for this amendment as it is worded. We will not vote against
it as it involves so much. We stand and hereby proclaim that we utterly condemn
the practices alluded to, but refuse to condemn any individual.
Reply to the President's Letter.
This serious and earnest appeal to safeguard the good name of the Society and
to assist in preserving Theosophy from harm, the President now rejects with all
her strength. Mrs. Besant's reply takes the form of special pleading in defence
of Mr. Leadbeater; she withdraws her former unequivocal condemnation of his
teaching and substitutes for it equivocal phrases; humbly apologises to him; and
finally invites the Society to vote for Mr. Leadbeater's triumphant
reinstatement without further guarantee.
The change in Mrs. Besant's attitude is amazing, but still more astonishing
is her forgetfulness of her emphatic pledges given to the Society at the time of
her election to the Presidency.
-----------------------------------------
[Editorial insert, 1998]:
Some readers may wonder (again) what point there is in dredging up these
past "scandals" in the Theosophical Society. The view of masturbation as
"self-abuse" would raise few supporters today, and the fact that the British
Section make such strong condemnation of it simply reflects the views of the
Victorian era of which they were a part.
This, however, although mentioned at length in the literature, is not the
major concern, when one looks beneath the surface of the circumstances. The real
problems arose because the International President, together with other
officials of the T.S., lied to her own members, deniedthem
full access to all the relevant documents, and, with CWL, could be said to
appear to manipulate the Society and its members to her own purposes.
It has been argued, in very recent times, that a similar attitude has
prevailed within the T.S. in America, and it would not be the first time in the
history of the Society that similar allegations have been made.
Th task here, however, is not to draw conclusions, but to present as much
of the evidence as is available in a case which was crucial to the future (and
therefore the present) nature of the Theosophical Society itself.
For the moment, let us read some more of the REPLY to Annie Besant made
by some members of the British Section in November, 1908:
-----------------------------------------
The President's Pledges.
In April, 1907, in answer to a telegram from the Council of the Blavatsky
Lodge in these words: "Would you as President permit X's [Mr. Leadbeater's]
readmission?" - Mrs. Besant replied:
"If publicly repudiates teaching, two years after repudiation on large
majority request of whole Society, would reinstate; otherwise not."
What Mrs. Besant meant by "repudiation," and what we have all understood her
to mean, is quite clear from her public letter to the members of the British
Section, dated March 24, 1907 (p. 5). [This was written nine months after Mrs.
Besant had received the official Minutes of the Advisory Committee, and her
opinion, therefore, was then not based on alleged "false information."]
"As regards his [Mr. L.'s] readmission to the Society - I do not know that he
wishes readmission - I shall continue to oppose it, as I have hitherto done,
until he says publicly that the teaching is wrong [italics Mrs.
Besant's], not only that he will refrain from it, as he promised to do in
February, 1906, and also before the Advisory Board in London." [In his letter to
The Vahan(May, 1907), Mr. Leadbeater himself says that he does not wish
to rejoin.]
At the Convention of the American Section, 1906, Mrs. Kate Buffington Davis
read the following from a letter of Mrs. Besant's, dated from Benares, August 9,
1906. [Mrs. Besant had also already received her official copy of the Minutes by
this date.]
"Any proposal to reinstate Mr Leadbeater in the membership of the T.S. would
be ruinous to the Society. It would be indignantly repudiated here and in
Europe, and I am sure in Australia and New Zealand, if the facts were known. If
such a proposal were carried in America - I do not believe it possible - I
should move all the T.S. Council, the supreme authority, that the application of
membership should be rejected. But I am sure that Mr. Leadbeater would not
apply."
Why Mrs. Besant italicises the word "wrong" in the last quotation but one is
quite evident to all who remember her exceedingly strong, unequivocal, and
repeated acceptance of the phenomenal pronouncements published by the late
President-Founder just prior to his decease.
In his Presidential Address at the Adyar Anniversary Meeting, December 29,
1906 (see General Report, p.3), referring to the Leadbeater case, and to the
specific question as to whether Mr. Leadbeater's teaching was right or wrong,
Col. Olcott stated:
"So when Mahatma M. came to me last Friday night I asked Him the question,
and He replied "wrong.""
In a letter to Mr. Leadbeater, dated January 12, 1907, Colonel Olcott writes
on his death-bed:
"Both Mahatma M. and Mahatma K.H. assured me you did well to resign; that it
was right to call a Council to advise upon the matter, and that I did right in
accepting your resignation; but They said we were wrong in allowing the matter
to be made public, for your sake and the good of the Society. They said you
should have stated in your resignation that you resigned because you had
offended the standard of ideals of the majority of the members of the Society by
giving out certain teachings which were considered objectionable. They have told
both Annie and myself that your teaching young boys to . . . is wrong."
In Colonel Olcott's report of one of the Adyar "interviews," dated January
11, 1907, in reply to a leading question, the answer reported is:
"No, we cannot tell you this, for that concerns himself alone, but it is
different when he teaches things to others that will harm."
And in answer to another question:
"Write and ask him, it is not for us to say. We do, however, affirm that
these teachings are wrong."
Moreover, in her pamphlet on The Testing of the Theosophical Society (one of
her Election addresses), Mrs. Besant writes (p.7), in reference to Col. Olcott's
"Conversation with the Mahatmas":
"I may add that the " Conversation" in no way suggests Mr. Leadbeater's
reinstatement, and that we at Adyar could not read that into it, as we were told
at the same time that the Master, in answer to a suggestion to that effect, has
sternly refused his approval."
We do not cite these utterances as authoritative for ourselves, nor do we
pause to criticise them, we simply place them on record to show why Mrs. Besant
emphasised the word "wrong."
On this point at least we thought we were all agreed on ordinary grounds of morality whether we accepted or rejected the authority of the phenomenal answers reported by Colonel Olcott.
The thing was unquestionably wrong under any circumstances.
"Mahatmic" Contradictions.
In May, however, of this year, Dr. van Hook, the General Secretary of the
American Section, and as such a member of the General Council of the Society, in
Open Letters to his Section, declared that Mr. Leadbeater' s teaching on the
point was right in every respect. (Addendum, May 5th, 1908, p.6):
"No mistake was made by Mr. Leadbeater in the nature of the advice he gave
his boys. No mistake was made in the way he gave it."
It was at the same time widely circulated privately on his own declaration,
that these Letters were not really his, but "dictated verbatim by one of the
Master." These astounding statements obtained the widest credence, and the
result was that Mr. Leadbeater was invited to take the post of editor of part of
the official organ of the American Section, by a large majority referendum vote.
In face of this, many of the members of the British Section could no longer
remain silent; they were bound to protest, and call attention to the very grave
danger that threatened the Society, and in which it is now actually involved.
These "Mahatmic" pronouncements, however, were not the ground of that protest;
it may be left to those who believe in their authenticity to reconcile their
glaring contradictions. No decision on such manifest incongruities was asked
for, and therefore, Mrs. Besant's argument as to official ruling. on pp. 13 and
14 of her Letter is quite beside the point.
The Logical Consequence of Dr. van Hook's Contention.
What was strongly objected to and most energetically protested against was the public declaration by a responsible officer of the General Council that Mr. Leadbeater's teaching is right. If Mr. Leadbeater's teaching is right, and he made no mistake in any way whatever, as Dr. van Hook (or his "Master" if he prefers it) contends, why should not Mr. Leadbeater continue such teachings, as they have proved, according to Dr. van Hook, of the greatest value; and by a parity of reasoning, why should not any pupil of Mr. Leadbeater's or anyone else in the Society who wishes to follow his footsteps, do the same?
Against this hideous prospect we protested and do protest. If Mr.
Leadbeater's teaching is right, then it should he followed. That is the only
logical position. Mr. Leadbeater himself says it would be "dangerous" only "If
promiscuously given"; he as an occultist knows when it should be given, he
claims. It is not really dangerous for him to give it; and he simply bows to
Mrs. Besant's "opinion that it is dangerous." Mr. Leadbeater is consistent in
this, that he has never recanted; he has defended this teaching in the face of
everything. What conclusion is likely to be drawn from this by those who believe
that Mr. Leadbeater is a high adept? Simply that he knows on this subject; and
has only promised not to do it again because of prudish convention, ignorant
"hysterical" uproar, and "insane prejudices." He is the "martyr" occultist
persecuted for his knowledge! What results? That his pupils will think as he
thinks; that they will do as he has done. Why not, if he was and is right?
This view, that Mr. Leadbeater is right, is already being adopted far and
wide in the Society at this moment. In what way does Mrs. Besant's Letter help
us to stem the tide?
Mrs. Besant's Contradictions.
Mrs. Besant's view (pp. 5 and 6) emphasised to a final utterance for those
who accept her authority ("I speak as Occultist. 'He that is able to receive it,
let him receive it'" leaves the door wide open for Mr. Leadbeater's teaching.
But at the expense of what contradiction! Mr. Leadbeater has taught it, and
refuses to repudiate the teaching; yet he is said by Mrs. Besant at the same
time to be "at one " with her in condemning it as being "degrading, unmanly,
unwomanly" (p. 61, while he himself declares that it is "dangerous" only "if
promiscuously given" (The Theosophist, Feb., 1908), and Mrs. Besant
herself elsewhere in her Letter (pp. 7 and 8) expresses only disagreement and
withdraws condemnation.
But H.P.B. did not equivocate on the subject - and she, we suppose - could
speak with as much authority on occultism as Mr.Leadbeater and Mrs. Besant. (She
characterised it to me as "the sin against the Holy Ghost" - G.R.S.M.) [See The
Secret Doctrine, iii. 445 (Diagram).]
Mrs. Besant has now entirely changed her former view on the subject, for in
her Letter,* of June 9, 1906, she writes of her first impression on hearing the
charges in February:
*{This is the " Simla Letter" sent to the E.S. wardens and sub-wardens, with
a covering note in which occur the words: "You may use publicly my view of the
fatal nature of the teaching, should need arise." [The italics are Mrs.
Besant's.]}
"This was the first time I had heard of such a method of meeting the sexual
difficulty, let alone of Mr. Leadbeater's recommendation of it. I had always
regarded self-abuse as one of the lowest forms of vice, a thing universally
reprobated by decent people. To me it was not arguable. But I have since heard
that it is sometimes practised and recommended by ascetics, otherwise good men,
for the sake of preserving chastity - as though self-abuse did not destroy
chastity as much as prostitution, and in an even more degrading way!"
But Mrs. Besant now asserts (pp.5 and 6) that "Occultism" "condemns solitary
vice as only less harmful than prostitution." To us it still remains "not
arguable," and to this we make no exception, either on the ground of the lesser
of two evils, or on the perverted ground of doing evil that good may come. and
therefore we protest and appeal to all who love the good name of the Society, to
pronounce unmistakably on this subject, and to resist the triumphant
reinstatement Into the Society as an injured "martyr" of the man who has brought
all this sorrow and suffering upon us. In a Society like ours, just because of
the deference his many pupils, adherents, and admirers pay to Mr. Leadbeater's
assertions, his obstinate insistence that his teaching is right is the most
potent means of erecting it into a generally recognised Theosophical doctrine,
of the first importance. This is proved by the fact that Dr. Weller van Hook in
one of his Open Letters(Addendum, May 5, pp. 5 and 6) appeals to the
doctrines of reincarnation and karma, as expounded by Mr. Leadbeater especially
to suit his teaching, in justification of it. The boys' statements also that it
was taught as "Theosophical" formed the basis of one of the charges.
This pernicious teaching is not merely "ascribed" to Mr. Leadbeater, as Mrs.
Besant says in her opening words, it is fully and freely confessed by him and
strenuously defended. In what way this teaching, which Mrs. Besant now refuses
to condemn, when taught by Mr. Leadbeater, can make for "purity" and for "the
Society's good name" (p. 3) is beyond us.
The Documents.
On p. 6 Mrs. Besant writes, quoting a previous letter of hers (the "Simla
Letter"):
"On June 7th [1906] I received an account of the acceptance by Mr. Leadbeater before the Committee of the facts alleged in the evidence."
As this might give the unknowing reader the impression that Mrs. Besant had
not had previously before her any of the "facts alleged in the evidence," or any
knowledge of the "acceptance by Mr. Leadbeater" of them, to make it clear we
recite the facts.
In February, 1906, Mrs. Besant herself was the first to receive the charges
and original evidence on which they were based, from America, drawn up and laid
before her by the two chief officials of the Section (in their private
capacity), and also by the two chief officers of the E.S. there, in a letter
dated January 25.
Mr. Leadbeater, to whom also a copy had been forwarded, was then with Mrs.
Besant at Benares. After consultation with her, Mr. Leadbeater wrote a letter of
confession and excuse (dated February 27) to the then American General
Secretary; and Mrs. Besant also sent a letter to the chief officer of the E.S.
in which she repeated Mr. Leadbeater's excuses, but expressed disagreement with
his teaching; in view of Mr. Leadbeater's promise to abstain from this teaching
in future, however, she did not favour the "searching investigation" demanded,
and said she saw no reason why he should be withdrawn from activity.
So far all had been kept as silent as possible. Mr. Leadbeater's letter and
Mrs. Besant's reply being entirely unsatisfactory, the Executive Committee of
the American Section then felt themselves compelled to lay the whole matter
officially before Colonel Olcott, the President-Founder of the Society, who
promptly called together an Advisory Committee consisting of the then Executive
Committee of the British Section, to which Section Mr. Leadbeater belonged. The
members of this Committee were: Mr. Sinnett, Dr. Nunn, Mr. Mead, Mrs. Stead,
Miss Ward, Miss Spink, Mrs. Hooper, Mr. Bertram Keightley, Mr. Thomas, and Mr.
Glass. There were also present Mr. Burnett, as representative and delegate of
the Executive Committee of the American Section, and M. Bernard, the
representative of the Executive Committee of the French Section.
The documents submitted by the American Executive consisted of: (1) The
charges and evidence already laid before Mrs. Besant; (2) Mr. Leadbeater's
letter of confession and excuse; (3) rebuttal statements of the boys to some of
the statements made by Mr. Leadbeater in his letter. and (4) corroborative
evidence and testimony in two further cases obtained after sending to Mrs.
Besant the first evidence on which the charges were brought.
The original charges, based on the evidence of two boys, were:
FIRST: That he is teaching young boys given into his care habits of
self-abuse and demoralizing personal practices.
SECOND: That he does this with deliberate intent and under the guise of
occult training or with the promise of the increase of physical manhood.
THIRD: That he has demanded, at least in one case, promises of the utmost
secrecy.
It was with regard to the rebuttal evidence (3) and the further corroborative
evidence (4), that Mr. Leadbeater said at the beginning of the inquiry, as
quoted by Mrs. Besant (p.7):
"I have only just now seen anything at all of the documents, except the [read
"that"] first letter."
This "first letter" is the first lengthy document containing the charges and
evidence laid before Mrs. Besant in February. Below, in parallel columns, will
be found Mrs. Besant's version of what took place, together with the full text
of the Minutes from which she is supposed to be quoting.
{1996 editorial note: in preparing this text for Internet use, the parallel
columns could not originally be placed as such, and the text of these two
columns follow as separate paragraphs - A.B.}
MRS. BESANT'S LETTER (p. 7).
As to the "evidence," he stated at the time: "I have only just now seen
anything at all of the documents, except the first letter"; on his hasty perusal
of them, he stated that some of the points "are untrue and others so distorted
that they do not represent the facts"; yet it was on these points, unsifted and
unproven, declared by him to be untrue and distorted, that he was condemned, and
has since been attacked.
MINUTES OF THE ADVISORY BOARD.
I have only just now seen anything at all of the documents except that first
letter. There have been other supposed rebuttals and other documents which I had
only seen to-day and while there are a number of points I should challenge as
inaccurate, yet all those are minor points and do not affect the great
question.* It is simply that there are points of so-called rebuttal which are
untrue and others so distorted that they do not represent the facts of the
case but these do not affect the central points.*
It will be seen that the important qualifying phrases italicised by us are
omitted by. Mrs. Besant.
This was Mr. Leadbeater's statement at the beginning of the inquiry, before
he was questioned and had to make some damaging further admissions.
Mrs. Besant's statement that it was on the points in the second batch of
documents only that "he was condemned and has since been attacked" is not the
fact.
The Committee unanimously advised Col. Olcott to accept Mr. Leadbeater's
resignation, which was written only just before it met, because of his own
confession in the first place, and because to their amazement he still persisted
in defending his teaching, and made even further admissions.
At that time in the Society we were unanimous that it was wrong. Mr.
Leadbeater's teaching had not yet been introduced into the "thought of the
Theosophical world."
Denunciation of the Committee.
To weaken this unanimous advice Mrs. Besant now denounces some of the members
of the Committee as unfit to advise Colonel Olcott, with whom the ultimate
decision rested and whose impartiality Mr. Leadbeater freely acknowledged at the
end of the inquiry.
In reply to the late President-Founder's question: "I should like to ask Mr.
Leadbeater if he thinks I have acted impartially?" - Mr Leadbeater replied:
"Absolutely." (See Minutes.)
Mrs. Besant, nevertheless, declares that "the so-called trial of Mr.
Leadbeater was a travesty of justice" (p. 7), and so asperses the memory of the
late President-Founder.
Mr. Leadbeater was not tried judicially; the nature of the Committee was
twice laid down by Colonel Olcott as follows:
"(a) Of course you know the executive power is vested in me. You are here to
advise me and to hear what Mr. Leadbeater has to say, and to act according to
your judgment after hearing him."
"(b) We should not keep in anything, but have frank disclosure. You are not
sitting judicially, but to advise me what to do."
Mr. Leadbeater was given every opportunity to explain his position and
justify his conduct; unless, of course, questioning him on the evidence is to be
considered unfair and a "travesty of justice."
To show the baselessness of Mrs. Besant's denunciation, it may be stated that
the apparently most telling point she tries to make - the shooting story - seems
to have arisen from a rumour we heard at the time, that if the matter became
public, and Mr. Leadbeater were to return to America, it was likely that a
relative of one or the boys might "go for him with a shot-gun." (E. W.; G. R. S.
M.). As to psychic influence, though this is quite news to the two of us who sat
on the Committee, we may be permitted to remark that it is hardly consistent of
Mrs. Besant to denounce belief in psychic testimony as a disqualification.
The unanimous opinion of the Committee was that such teaching should not be
given under any circumstances whatever, not even to depraved boys, much less
therefore to boys who had no knowledge of such practices. The only real
difference of opinion among the members of the Committee was as to whether they
should advise expulsion or acceptance of resignation only, as commensurate with
the offence, after Mr. Leadbeater's further admissions. They finally took the
more lenient course. The unanimous decision of the Committee was given in the
following resolution:
"That having considered certain charges against Mr. Leadbeater, and having
listened to his explanations, this Committee recommend the acceptance by the
President-Founder of his resignation already offered in anticipation of the
Committee's decision."
On p.8, Mrs. Besant now expressly withdraws the condemnation of Mr.
Leadbeater's advice which she had put on record in her very important letter of
June, 1906, on the ground that the "information" on which she had based it was
"false." Its falsity is alleged on two points.
First Point of Alleged "Falsity."
(1) With regard to the first (the "fouling" of the mind), it is sufficient to
quote Mrs. Besant's own words of condemnation, in parallel columns with Mr.
Leadbeater's own admissions before the Advisory Committee.
{Again, the nature of the original Internet version required that the
parallel columns mentioned be listed in sequence - A.B.}
MINUTES OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE.
Mr. THOMAS: Your reply as to scarcely recollecting suggests that there were
so many cases. I should like to know whether in any case . . . there was
definite action? Mr. LEADBEATER: You mean touch? That might have taken place. *
* * Mr. MEAD: I want to ask whether this advice was given on appeal or not? Mr.
LEADBEATER: Sometimes without, sometimes with. I advised it at times as a
prophylactic.
MRS. BESANT'S LETTER OF JUNE 9. 1906.
He [Mr. Leadbeater] denied none of the charges, but in answer to questions,
very much strengthened them. for he alleged that he had actually handled the
boys himself, and that he had thus dealt with boys before puberty "as a
prophylactic." So that the advice which was supposed to be given to rescue a boy
as a last resort, in the grip of sexual passion, became advice putting foul
ideas into the minds of boys innocent of all sex-impulses.
Still further than this, Mrs. Besant condemned Mr. Leadbeater's teaching in
all respects.
M. BERNARD: Since Mr. Leadbeater was teaching these boys to help them in case
of need, considering that men may be in the same difficulty, has he taught this
to any grown-up men? Has he taught the same thing in the same personal way to
grown-up men as to children? Mr. LEADBEATER: I believe that at least on two
occasions in my life I have given that advice to young men as better than the
one generally adopted. Col. OLCOTT: Since you came into the Society? Mr.
LEADBEATER: I think not, but one case might have been. You are probably not
aware that one at least of the great Church organisations for young men deals
with the matter in the same manner[!]
MRS. BESANT, IN THE SAME LETTER AS ABOVE.
Let me here place on record my opinion that such teaching as this given to
men, let alone innocent boys, is worthy of the sternest reprobation. It distorts
and perverts the sex-instinct, implanted in men for the preservation of the
race; it degrades the ideas of marriage, fatherhood, and motherhood, humanity's
most sacred ideals; it befouls the imagination, pollutes the emotions, and
undermines the health.
It will thus be seen that Mrs. Besant's original condemnation was based not
on "false information," hut on her own interpretation of Mr. Leadbeater's
admissions.
That the reason for giving the "advice" was sometimes other than that
professed, may he seen from the fact that, in his letter of confession, Mr.
Leadbeater admitted that he had told one of the boys "that physical growth is
frequently promoted by the setting in motion of these currents, but that they
need regulation." The boy's evidence on this point ("the promise of the increase
of physical manhood") formed the basis of one of the charges. The cipher letter
further corroborates this evidence.
In the face of the opinion she placed "on record" in 1906, Mrs. Besant now
denies (p.8) that there was any "fouling" of the "imagination" even of the
"minds of boys innocent of all sex-impulses." Yet (on p.9) she admits it was
taught not only to boys not yet addicted to the practice, but also to one or two
"before what is called the age of puberty."
The plea of justification now urged for this extraordinary change of opinion
is that "certain symptoms had already shown themselves either on the physical
plane or in the aura."
The giving of this teaching then even to children Mrs. Besant now refuses to
condemn in Mr. Leadbeater's case; and thus opens the way for any psychic in the
Society to justify the teaching of it on his bare assertion that he has seen
this or that "symptom " in a child's aura.
All such excuses and subterfuges we emphatically reject, for the practice
under any circumstance can never lessen lust but only enhance it.
Second Point of Alleged "Falsity."
(2) The second point on the "falsity" of which Mrs. Besant withdraws her
condemnation is the question of frequency. Here Mr. Leadbeater's denial, quoted
by Mrs. Besant (p. 9), and the testimony of the mother of boy No. 3 as to the
"original interval" are in direct conflict.
In the letter to the boy, the genuineness of which Mr. Leadbeater
acknowledges, he writes :
"There may be this much reason in what he [the Doctor] says, that while you
are not quite well we should spend no force that can be avoided. You will
remember that when we met in --- I suggested longer intervals until you were
completely recovered."
It is to be noted that this "suggestion" was made because the boy was ill.
The "original" interval to which the mother refers was advised prior to this
meeting.
The most striking point in Mrs. Besant's plea is her appeal for "utter
confidence" in Mr. Leadbeater's statements and denials; frequently she says with
regard to evidence "it is not true that. . ," when this simply means "Mr.
Leadbeater says it is not true." Mr. Leadbeater is always to be believed no
matter what the testimony against him of the boys and mothers (or even of his
own letters) may be, for Mrs. Besant has "utter confidence in his candour."
But one of the main points against Mr. Leadbeater is that he taught these
practices without the knowledge of the parents and bound the boys to secrecy, as
has been fully admitted by himself. Mrs. Besant writes, in her Simla letter of
June 9, 1906:
"Nothing can excuse giving to young boys instructions on sexual matters to be
kept from their parents, the rightful protectors of their children."
Why then, if Mr. Leadbeater is so candid with Mrs. Besant, did he not breathe
a word to her of his teaching before he was detected? For in the same letter
Mrs. Besant writes:
"This was the first time I had heard of such a method of meeting the sexual
difficulty let alone Mr. Leadbeater's recommendation of it. I had always
regarded self-abuse as one of the lowest forms of vice, and a thing universally
reprobated by decent people. To me it was not arguable."
Now we are not labouring this point as to precisely "daily" practice, but
Mrs. Besant knows, as we know, that the cipher letter says, "twice a week is
permissible," preceded and followed by words that make it impossible to put a
curative construction upon the "advice." How then does Mrs. Besant deal with
this most important document, which, unfortunately, came into the hands of the
American Executive only a day before the meeting of the Advisory Committee in
London, too late to be included in the evidence? No contemptuous words can brush
aside this document.
The Cipher Letter.
The "fragment of paper" is sufficient to accommodate not a note only but a
letter of 229 words, beginning with "My own darling boy," and ending with "
Thousand kisses darling" (in cipher). It is true that the first half of this
letter refers to a psychic experience, but the second, of equal length, begins
with the words "Turning to other matters," and these matters are sexual; it is
in the latter part that the Cipher sentences occur, and it is in the body of the
cipher, towards the end, that the sentence referred to by Mrs. Besant ("glad
sensation is so pleasant") is found.
If, as Mrs. Besant says (p. 11), the boy replied to the letter (though his
reply was not sent), the letter can hardly be a forgery to "go with the Coulomb
and Pigott letters." If the boy himself did not understand the sentence in the
sense implied, as Mrs. Besant says - the mother (in a covering letter addressed
to one of the members of the Investigating Committee in America) says she so
understands it, and makes it an additional ground of complaint. As the letter
stands it is impossible to read the sentence otherwise than as applying to its
immediate context. It could not apply to the psychic experience, for that was
not of a pleasant nature.
Mrs. Besant, however, says that Mr. Leadbeater states he does not "recognise
it [the letter] in its present form." Who then has changed the "form" of the
letter - the boy or the mother? And if so, what possible purpose could be served
thereby? Will Mr. Leadbeater himself venture to assert that the letter or any
part of it is a forgery?
But even if the sentence in question were entirely eliminated, there is that
in the rest of the letter which calls for the most searching inquiry, and its
genuineness is further corroborated by the identity of its very peculiar
phrasing with that of the other letter in evidence which Mr. Leadbeater has
acknowledged as his.
It is, therefore, impossible to join Mrs. Besant in letting it "go with the
Coulomb and Pigott letters."
As to this document we agree with Miss Ward in her recent circular that:
"If it is genuine it settles for us [me] the whole question of Mr.
Leadbeater's attitude: if it is not genuine it is a piece of inconceivable
wickedness, which leaves Mr. Leadbeater grossly wronged and of which the
perpetrator should, by every code of honour and justice, be unveiled and
punished."
It is remarkable that Dr. van Hook himself has nowhere published this
"repudiation," but from a copy of a letter written by him to Mr. Whyte, which
Mrs. Besant has had printed in "Theosophy in India" (Sept., 1908], we find that
Dr. van Hook expressly states that "in the Letters published over his [my]
signature" the "general problem" has not been dealt with, but only the "specific
question" of Mr. Leadbeater's "solution" of it.
We may here point out that it is not the fact that the Convention had before
it only a "garbled account," as Mrs. Besant says (p. 13), of Dr. van Hook's
utterances; every sentence that could be used to persuade the Convention that
Dr. van Hook did not mean what he wrote, was insisted on by Dr. van Hook's and
Mr. Leadbeater's supporters; his paragraphs were read repeatedly in full, and
the sentences Mrs. Besant quotes (p. 12) were especially insisted on.
In his Open Letter (Addendum, May 5) Dr. van Hook speaks of nothing else but
Mr. Leadbeater's teaching and method and "solution" of the problem. And if the
following paragraphs in it do not refer to Mr. Leadbeater's "solution," to his
"system," to the blessing he is conferring by it, then to what on earth do they
refer? Dr. van Hook's "repudiation" of his own plain meaning simply makes
nonsense of his whole contention. Dr. van Hook (or, if he prefers it, his
"Master") writes:
"Hence the "crime" or "wrong" of teaching the boys the practice alluded to
was no crime or wrong at all, but only the advice of a wise teacher who foresaw
an almost limitless period of suffering for his charge if the solution for his
difficulties usually offered by the World were adopted and relief obtained by an
associated instead of by an individual and personal act.
"The introduction of this question into the thought of the Theosophical World
is but the precursor of its introduction into the thought of the outer World. Mr
Leadbeater has been the one to bear the persecution and martyrdom of its
introduction. The solution of the question can only be reached by those who
study it from the Theosophic standpoint, admitting the validity of our teachings
in regard to thoughts and their relations to acts. Hence the service of
Theosophy to the world in this respect will be of the most far-reaching
consequence, extending into the remote future of the progress of Man.
"No mistake was made by Mr. Leadbeater in the nature of the advice he gave
his boys. No mistake was made in the way he gave it. Nor did he make any mistake
in the just estimation of the consequences of any other solution of the terrible
problem which was presented to him.
"If any mistake was made it was a mistake of judgment in trusting too much to
the confidence of the parents of the boys who, he thought, knew and loved him so
well that they would accept his judgment on matters about which ordinary people
have little or no knowledge and about which he, by the nature of his occult
training, had a full comprehension.
"Betrayal of confidence on the part of some parents of the boys resulted in
the scandal which brought this problem to the attention of Theosophists as a
preliminary to its introduction to the world. Woe to those who violated their
vow's in making disclosures in this case. All honor to those parents who,
braving the opinion of the World, have boldly set themselves against the current
of the World's prejudice and have avowed themselves and their sons under undying
obligation to the great teacher who aided their sons in overcoming difficulties
which without his aid would not only have been insuperable in this life but
would have led them into almost inconceivable complications in future lives."
If this does not mean the introduction into the thought of the Theosophical Society, and thus into the thought of the outer world, of Mr.Leadbeater's "solution" of the problem, what can it possibly mean? Mr. Leadbeater's "martyrdom" is not because of his introducing the general sex problem with regard to young people; that has been introduced into the thought of the world
for many many centuries. It is because of his "solution" of it that Dr. van
Hook calls on us to exalt Mr. Leadbeater to the highest pinnacle of honour, for
he gives "all honour" to the parents who entrust their children to Mr.
Leadbeater to receive such teaching, and who avow their undying obligation for
this high favour!
Against the introduction of this "solution" of the sex problem into the
"thought of the Theosophical world" and against Dr. van Hook's glorification of
it, we protest with all our energy; we characterise the teaching of it in any
case as a "corrupting practice" and "wholly evil," no matter who gives it, not
excepting occultists and psychics; and we call for the public repudiation of it
by the man who has confessed to teaching it practically, before he is invited to
return in triumph as a "wise teacher" to the Theosophical Society.
The Main Issue Evaded.
As to the main issue, then, Mrs. Besant evades it when she says (p. 14):
"The Theosophical Society, as a whole, cannot be committed to any special
solution of this [the sex] problem, and its members must be left free."
This we have not asked; what we do ask our fellow-members to do, is to
condemn one special and corrupting practice as a solution of the problem. Advice
to break off gradually this corrupting habit when once it had been contracted,
is not the ground of our protest. It is the teaching of this thing to men who
have never practised it, and to boys and children who have never heard of it
even, against which we protest.
The Real Cause of the Present Dissension.
Mrs. Besant says (p. 15) that Mr. Leadbeater:
"resigned two and a half years ago in the vain attempt to save the Society
from this dissension."
As to a magnanimous resignation there was little choice; the wording of the
unanimous resolution of the Committee shows that clearly enough.
There was, however, only one way in which Mr. Leadbeater could save the
Society from dissension, as he himself said before the Advisory Committee:
"Since this has come forward it would be undesirable that I should appear
before the public." [Italics ours.]
The trouble has not been made by those who accepted Mr. Leadbeater's
resignation as the natural sequence of his conduct, but by those who have
persistently forced him into ever greater and greater prominence; and although
he has once stated that he does not seek re-entry, he has lent himself in every
way to being pushed forward publicly, and has thus aided most powerfully in
keeping this scandal and this dissension alive in the Theosophical Society with
ever greater and greater intensification. The Letter of the President in answer
to our earnest appeal will only bring more dissension, and help the more to
ventilate the unsavoury subject of Mr. Leadbeater's "solution" and methods in
the Theosophical Society. Under such circumstances how can people be invited to
join our ranks? It is manifestly unfair to allow outsiders to involve themselves
in such a scandalous state of affairs without warning, and that means stating
the facts. Just the very people whom we desire to welcome will be kept out, and
that, too, even with Mrs. Besant's Letter alone before them, much more when they
come to know the whole matter. What folly is this to sacrifice the welfare of
the Society in the vain attempt to re-establish the public reputation of an
individual who has lost it on his own confession and by his persistent refusal
to repudiate his pernicious teaching and practice!
Combined Action Necessary.
Already many have left because of the policy pursued by Mr. Leadbeater's
supporters. In America hundreds, it is said as many as a thousand, have gone out
in the last two and a half years; and here, among a number of other good
members, we have lost two old General Secretaries and one former Acting General
Secretary. Why, we ask, should old and valued members, or even the latest
recruit, be driven out of the Society for the sake of one man, who has taught
self-abuse to men, boys, and children, and refuses to repudiate his corrupting
system? Combined action being now forced upon us, we earnestly appeal to our
fellow members not to resign individually, but to join us in our present
protest, and register their names with us; so that if still further action is
forced upon us we may take it together as a united body. We appeal not only to
the members of our own Section, but also to all members of the Society who
sympathise with our protest, to give us their support by also registering their
names.
We would further ask our sympathisers to let our protest he known as widely
as possible in the Society. For while the President has at her disposal not only
the official organisation of the whole Society but also the good services of a
widespread inner order, we are dependent on unorganised effort.
True Loyalty.
Finally, Mrs. Besant calls on us to be "loyal" to the Masters, and "to Their
choice," and "to work for Them." Is it, we ask, loyalty to Masters to tolerate
and to refuse to condemn the teaching of self-abuse?
We say that it is because of our loyalty to all the Masters of Morality who
have taught the world throughout the ages that we protest, and that in so doing
we work for Theosophy, and should fail in our plain duty were we not to protest.
It is the best loyalty, therefore, to the Theosophical Society, and also to its
elected President, no matter how "chosen," to protest, and resist the
introduction of this teaching into the thought of the Theosophical world, and
therewith also the reinstatement of Mr. Leadbeater in the Society without his
full public repudiation of this teaching.
We cannot do better than conclude with the following words, quoted from the
leaflet entitled Occultism and Truth, issued in 1894, at the time of
the Judge crisis, and signed by H.S.Olcott, A.P. Sinnett, Annie Besant, Bertram
Keightley, W. Wynn Westcott, E.T. Sturdy, and C. W Leadbeater:
"A spurious Occultism dallies with truth and falsehood, and argues that
deception on the illusory physical plane is consistent with purity on the
loftier planes on which the Occultist has his true life; it speaks
contemptuously of "mere worldly morality" - a contempt that might be justified
if it raised a higher standard, but which is out of place when the phrase is
used to condone acts which the "mere worldly morality" would disdain to
practise. The doctrine that the end justifies the means has proved in the past
fruitful of all evil; no means that are impure can bring about an end that is
good; else were the Good Law a dream and Karma mere delusion. From these errors
flows an influence mischievous to the whole Theosophical Society, undermining
the stern and rigid morality necessary as a foundation for Occultism of the
Right Hand Path."
G. R. S. MEAD.
HERBERT BURROWS.
W. KINGSLAND.
EDITH WARD.
16, Selwood Place,
Onslow Gardens,
London, S.W., Nov., 1908.
[Copies of all the documents may be seen by Members of the Theosophical
Society on application to Mr. Mead or Miss Ward.]
[END OF TEXT]