Theos-Talk Archives (March 1999 Message tl00077)

Part II---Commentary on Mr Crosbie's Post-1904 Account of his 
Association with Mrs Tingley

Mr Crosbie wrote----

"As to my part in it [the Tingley 1896-99 affair]--I was in Boston, and 
saw no reason to doubt the [positive] statements [about Mrs Tingley] of 
those [T.S. members] in N.Y. whom I believed to be sincere and of good 
training and judgment.  I should have known by other means the true 
state of affairs...."

"The attitude assumed by Mrs. T[ingley] soon began to estrange those 
members who were brought in close touch with her in New York, but those 
at a distance had no inkling of the true state of affairs and kept on in 
full confidence...."

The impression which Mr Crosbie apparently wanted to convey in these two 
statements is that he was *not* in "close touch" with Mrs Tingley in New 
York. Since he lived "at a distance" in Boston, Mr Crosbie (so he 
contended) "had no inkling of the true state of affairs and kept on in 
full confidence [with Mrs Tingley]."

I've previously quoted several documents that appear to negate Mr 
Crosbie's revisionist account.  These documents show that Mr Crosbie 
personally knew Mrs Tingley, worked closely with her, wrote warm,
devoted & personal letters to her,  and vigorously defended Mrs Tingley 
in 1898 against the attacks of Hargrove, Spencer and Griscom, Jr.  There 
is more evidence to negate Mr Crosbie's post-1904 assertions of not 
"being in close touch" with Mrs Tingley during the years 1896-1899.  The 
entire evidence will be included in my finished paper.  I quote only 
selected items at this point.

(1)  In 1898 Mr Crosbie in a letter to Mrs Tingley recounted his first 
personal encounter with her in these words---

"I remember that the day I first saw you, I recognized you as the 
O[outer] H[ead] without hint or instruction as such, and in spite of the 
fact that I was not looking for a woman's form in that connection.
During that day you and I were the only ones in the E.S. room, and you 
came and sat down at the table at which I was working, and told me a 
great many things, saying that you did not know why you told me these 
things but that it was doubtless for some purpose. . . ."

This memorable day in Mr Crosbie's life must have occurred *prior* to 
the public disclosure of Mrs Tingley as the Outer Head of the E.S. 
Preliminary study leads me to conclude that public disclosure of Mrs
Tingley's status occurred around May 17 or 18, 1896.  (New York Tribute, 
May 18, 1896).  Also disclosure of Mrs Tingley's status as Outer Head 
was published in "Theosophy" magazine, June 1896, pp 67-69.

(2)  On June 7, 1896, Mrs Tingley and the other members of her worldwide 
Crusade were at a meeting held in Boston at the Tremont Theatre.  "Mr. 
Robert Crosbie, President of Boston T.S., presided at the meeting, and 
introduced as the first speaker Mr. A.H. Spencer. . . .[Later after 
several other speakers had given their lectures, ] Mrs. Tingley followed 
with a paper on the 'Blessings of Theosophy.'  This was listened to with 
the utmost attention, and evoked great applause." "Theosophy" magazine, 
July, 1896, p 127.

(3)  The next year, on May 22, 1897, Mr Crosbie and a few other E.S. 
members took pledges of "unquestioning loyalty, devotion and obedience" 
to Mrs Tingley.  Did Mr Crosbie take such a momentous oath to a person 
about whom he knew so very little? 

The pledge reads----

"I . . . recognizing the person called Purple [Mrs Tingley] as being the 
agent of the Master I serve . . . do hereby unreservedly pledge myself, 
by my Higher Self, to unquestioning loyalty, devotion and obedience to 
her and to her support and defence as such agent, under any and all 
circumstances and conditions to the extent of my available means, utmost 
exertion, and with my life if need be. . . .

So Help me my Higher Self.    (Signed)  Robert Crosbie 

Witness my hand, this 22d day of May, Eighteen hundred and 
Ninety-seven."

(4) In Mr Crosbie's later revisionist account, he wrote---

"Mrs. T[ingley] took advantage of the situation, and most plausibly and 
shrewdly strengthened her position for two years after her advent, then 
formed [in early 1898] the "UNIVERSAL BROTHERHOOD" with herself as 
absolute dictator;  carrying with her by far the greater number of the 
members throughout the country."

Mr Crosbie conveniently forgot to mention a number of important facts 
which would have thrown a different light on this portion of his 
post-1904 account.

Dr Emmett A. Greenwalt in "California Utopia:  Point Loma: 1897-1942," 
2nd revised ed. (1978) described an important meeting that occurred in 
connection with the new society "UNIVERSAL BROTHERHOOD."

"Upon hearing of a plot to challenge her control of the Society, 
Katherine Tingley decided not only to defeat her foes in the convention, 
but to make it impossible for such a situation to arise again.  Her 
version of how she came to rewrite the Society's constitution is 
interesting. . . .

"In mid-January, 1898, about a month before the convention, she called
in ten influential members who had shown no signs of wavering, and
revealed the constitution in its entirety.  It was received, as she had 
hoped, in a devotional spirit. 'Never shall I forget the solemnity of 
that night...,' wrote Fussell, one of the faithful.  'Although the
Constitution of the Universal Brotherhood may appear ironbound, yet all 
who know our Leader will realize that her one desire is to give freedom 
to all and to aid the progress of the work.' "

Besides J.H. Fussell, who were the other nine "faithful" members who 
attended this important & private meeting at Mrs Tingley's home?

Last year in his article on "Colonel Arthur L. Conger, "  Alan Donant 
revealed more names of the persons at this January 1898 meeting---

"...On January 13, 1898, a constitution for a new theosophical 
organization was presented to a meeting of prominent Theosophists at the 
home of Katherine Tingley. The new organization was called The Universal 
Theosophical Brotherhood, which a month later was changed to the 
Universal Brotherhood. Among the signators were Basil Crump, E. August 
Neresheimer, Robert Crosbie, Joseph H. Fussell, and Arthur L. Conger, 
Jr.. . . .[From the original minutes of the January 13, 1898,
meeting and the Resolutions, Preamble and Constitution of the Universal 
Brotherhood adopted at the Chicago Convention of February 18, 1898.]"

Mr Donant's account discloses that Mr Robert Crosbie was one of the 
prominent Theosophists invited to Katherine Tingley's home.  This event 
shows Mr Crosbie's personal involvement with Mrs Tingley as well as Mr 
Crosbie's intimate knowledge of Mrs Tingley's activities.

Some twelve days later, back in Boston, Mr Crosbie wrote the following 
devoted letter to Mrs Tingley---

"ROBERT CROSBIE 
24 MOUNT VERNON STREET
BOSTON, MASS.

Feb. 2d 1898

Dear P[Purple, Mrs Tingley]:

I received your good long letter of Sunday, it was a good one indeed. . 
. .

I will arrange a "Friends in Counsel" for Boston, and have them get to 
work along the lines suggested and hope to start on Saturday. . . .

I remember that the day I first saw you, I recognized you as the 
O[outer] H[ead] without hint or instruction as such, and in spite of the 
fact that I was not looking for a woman's form in that connection.
During that day you and I were the only ones in the E.S. room, and you 
came and sat down at the table at which I was working, and told me a
great many things, saying that you did not know why you told me these 
things but that it was doubtless for some purpose. . . .

All is well here.  We are steady, confident and patient, yet ready to 
act at the word.

With heart's love yours
as ever
Robert"

The Chicago Convention of the Theosophical Society was held some sixteen 
days later (February 18, 1898).  At this convention most of the members 
in attendance voted to adopt the new constitution.  As Mr Crosbie 
related in his revisionist account, Mrs Tingley carried "with her by far 
the greater number of the members throughout the country." She certainly 
"carried" Mr Crosbie who became one of her staunchest defenders in the 
months ahead.  On the other hand, Mr Hargrove, Mr Spencer, Mr Griscom, 
Jr. & a small minority "bolted" the convention.  Finally they went to 
court contending that what had transpired at the convention was illegal.

In the April, 1898 (first) issue of "The Searchlight", a pro-Tingley 
magazine, Mr Crosbie defended Mrs Tingley in an article "The Sifting 
Process".  In the course of the article he attacked the motives of the 
"bolters"---linking them to "the dark forces of disintegration."  Mr 
Crosbie's relevant words are---

"The third great Leader, Katherine A. Tingley, established [February 
1898] the organization called 'Universal Brotherhood,' or 'The 
Brotherhood of Humanity,'. . . .

It is not difficult to see what 'An Ark of Safety' the Universal
Brotherhood is for the work, and to realize the wisdom of the Leader
[Mrs Tingley] in sounding the key-note, when it was not generally known 
that the dark forces of disintegration were so close to us, and which 
aroused us to action, and disclosed the imminent danger. . . .

Foolish are those who are attempting by legal technicalities to hinder
the work. . . who never were workers in the true sense; for all who know 
the Leader [Mrs Tingley] best, who have worked the closest to her, are 
the ones who are most energetic in carrying on the work at Headquarters, 
and the most unswerving in their allegiance to the Leader, and certainly 
their judgment is worthy of the most weighty consideration, for no 
others are so well qualified to judge.

Some names, like those of Messrs. Spencer and Griscom, Jr., have 
appeared in print so often in connection with the New York activities, 
that it might be supposed that they were workers of the Headquarters'
staff, and being now connected with the disintegrating faction, it might 
appear that the staff was weakened by their disaffection, but they were 
not part of the staff, nor were they workers in the true sense, 
especially since the return of the Leader [Mrs Tingley] from the Crusade 
[around the world]. . . . It seems necessary to call attention to this 
point, for the part taken by them in the attack upon our Leader, (for no 
matter how  much it is disguised, that is the real issue), might lead 
members to suppose that they were very essential to the work, and person 
whose opinions might appear to be of more weight than they really are. . 
. ."

Compare these statements with Mr Crosbie's revisionist account quoted at 
the beginning of this posting.

In my next email I'll analyze more misleading statements found in Mr 
Crosbie's post-1904 account of his association with Mrs Tingley.

David Green