CHAPTER 4 - THE SIDERSKY EFFECT

The reason we can now establish a key part of what happened in the courtroom  on March 17, 1913, in the case of THE KING vs. J J ROSS is the activity of one of CTR’s foremost critics, Philip Sidersky.

Philip Siderksy was born in Russia, and some papers suggest he had once thought of training as a rabbi. Instead, he came to the United States and was reinvented as the “Reverend Philip Sidersky,” author, editor, and speaker to various denominations on converting Jews to Christianity. He also became an extremely active critic of Pastor Russell and the Bible Student movement. He was to become such a public face of opposition to CTR’s work that he even gets a mention in modern Watchtower literature (Yearbook 1979, page 95). CTR must have responded at some point, because the Sidersky then tried to sue him in a counter response. From The Washington Post, September 7, 1911:

The Evening Sun for September 6, 1911, gave a bit more detail:

 This came to nothing. But undaunted, Sidersky produced a whole magazine just to attack CTR and Watch Tower teaching. It was called Searchlight on Russellism and ran from late 1915 to at least the end of 1916. Three issues are known to have survived. The first, volume one number one, is in the Harvard Divinity School library. The second, volume one number six, is interesting because it contained a letter from Sidersky to the President of the United States, asking him to clamp down on CTR’s writings being sent to members of the National Guard. This, along with volume one number seven, was to end up in the files of what ultimately became the FBI, as part of the package of difficulties the Bible Students faced during World War 1.

 

So what is the connection with the J J Ross libel trial? Numbers 1 and 6 of Sidersky’s paper (page 2 and then continued on page 7) contain a transcript of the Ross hearing. In the absence of the original trial transcript this provides us with probably all that can now be obtained of the case.

We have to assume that the transcript is accurate, but there is no way to check. We also have to note that Sidersky selected what suited his purpose. None of the prosecution material aimed at Ross appears; rather, it is the defence counsel, Staunton, grilling CTR, which makes up the surviving selective extracts. However, they do give us a flavor of the proceedings.

The complete transcript that survives is in the next chapter, without any editorial comment. However, I strongly recommend reading the following background material first.

It starts off with Counsellor Staunton being somewhat insulting, and CTR being less than willing to volunteer information. It is a lively exchange. However, it soon settles down, and there is a little verbal sparring between the two individuals, with CTR even questioning Staunton at one point.

The section in Searchlight volume 1 number 1 covers the initial stages of the examination. This includes CRT's schooling and the key section on languages. We will come back to that shortly. The second section from Searchlight volume 1 number 6 covers financial matters. This includes the case of William Hope Hay, a pilgrim who made a financial donation to the Society, then some time later had a breakdown and had to be hospitalised. The Society paid the hospital fees. And then the investigation covers the different corporations used by the Society. Ross had accused CTR of running a money-making scheme and basically hiding affairs behind various corporations. It was explained quite clearly by CTR how the Society’s affairs worked, and how the different linked corporations were simply needed to legally operate in Pennsylvania, New York, and also the far-flung corners of the British Empire.

There was no smoking gun there.

But let’s return to the claim that CTR lied on the stand about his “qualifications” in Biblical languages, particularly Greek.

What actually was said? Here on the next page is a direct scan from the Sidersky transcript:

But when Ross wrote his second booklet, as shown in a previous chapter, his account of the exchange said this (direct scan again):

In Ross’s account, the question was do you know the Greek? However, the “quote” doesn’t actually make sense. “Do you know the Greek?” The Greek what? Would an educated man like Staunton speak like that?

We can see from the Searchlight on Russellism scans that Ross leaves out that crucial word “alphabet.” CTR had already stated clearly he had no schooling in Latin or Greek. So he did not “know” Greek. But yes, he knew the alphabet, but might make a mistake on some of them. (This writer can relate to that).

Losing the word “alphabet” is a very unfortunate typo in the circumstances. It is either that, or a deliberate attempt by Ross to mislead. Well, you, the reader, can decide.

So that is the background to the transcript we have. In the next chapter, we will just reproduce the surviving transcript without comment.