Manuscripts and Memories of Minneapolis

W. C. White to D. T. Jones, Apr. 8, 1890

Boulder, Cole. April 8, 1890.
Eld. D.T. Jones.
Dear Brother,-

I was truly glad to learn from your letters of the 18, and 24, that the school closed so well, and I praise the Lord day by day that In his own way he breaks the snares of the enemy, and releases those who have been bound by his deceptions and misrepresentations. I have seen very clearly during the last winter that he has been diligently at work weaving a web about us, carefully intertwining circumstances which he has brought about, with prejudice and false reports, so as to make us distrust each other, and thus weaken our work. I have been astonished at his deceptive power, and amazed to see how he could make me so acute to see the fallings and mistakes of others, and at the same time could make me so blind with reference to the suspicions, and reports, and surmisings about my work and attitude, that I would do things which those under temptation would take as circumstantial evidence that the false charges made against me, which I have denied, were undoubtedly correct. MMM 164.1

I have been very stupid, and have supposed that my brethren would believe my word, and would give me credit for having pure motives, when I might have known that suspicion and distrust once started was not so easily laid aside. I am more thankful than I can express that the meetings you meetings were held, in which full explanations were made of those things which appeared to be crooked, and I thank you with all my heart for the kind frank way in which you have expressed yourself relative to this matter, and that you have told me so plainly how you have felt toward me and my work. I forgive, wherever you have done me injustice, and have misjudged my motive, as fully and as freely as I hope to be forgiven for the greater sins that I have committed. I have loved you as a brother, and up to the time of the last General Conference I enjoyed our association together very much. I have been greatly perplexed over the change which has come during the last winter, and could not understand why it was, that we who had agreed so well a year ago, should so often hold opposite opinions now; but I did not think of tracing it back to the Galatian question. Personally you have always treated me with the greatest kindness and respect, and I have often felt that I ought to apologize for my rudeness severity of criticism, and in one or two instances unkind remarks, on during committee, when plans which I regarded as very important were opposed. I call to mind especially the afternoon when we discussed the enlargement of the Home Missionary, I thought your opposition to the enlargement was unreasonable, and I made remarks and used illustrations which were unbecoming, to a Christian gentleman, for which I beg your forgiveness. MMM 164.2

As regards the controversy over the law In Gal, I have never taken the part, or occupied the position in this matter which Eld. Butler supposed, or which it appears you have thought I did, from the statements in your letter. In the spring of 1885, while walking in the woods with Eld. Waggoner, he introduced two points over which he was perplexed. First was the apparent necessity of taking positions while pursuing his editorial work that would be in conflict with Eld. Canright's writings; the second was with reference to the point in controversy between Elds. Smith, Canright, and my father on the one side, and Elds. Waggoner and Andrews on the other: I expressed my opinion freely that he and the editors of the Signs should teach what they believed to be truth, if it did conflict with some things written by Eld. Canright and others, but with reference to the point which had been up before the Biblical institute I advised that he should avoid it if possible. When his article on Galatians came out in the Signs, we were in Europe, and I did not read them, in fact I never read them until I received a letter from Eld. Butler naming that as one of the subjects to be considered at the Minneapolis Institute. This was in Burrough Valley, in Aug. or Sept. 1888. I took the part I did, because it has seemed to me from beginning, that there has been a desire on the part of some, that Elds. Waggoner and Jones should be condemned unheard. I have not felt that this was just, nor according to the rules of Christianity, and I have worked earnestly that they should have a fair chance. I have been fully convinced that some things which they taught and which others opposed, were right. Many other things which they taught I did not understand, and do not yet, and in a few points I have thought they were wrong; but I thought I had abundant evidence, as I saw the influence of their work in Cal. that God was leading them, and that he was blessing their labors; and under those circumstances I have thought that no man, or committee of men who have studied no more diligently than they, were authorized to say to them—“You may teach this, and you shall not teach that.” I think I should maintain the same attitude towards Eld? Smith, Underwood, or yourself, If you were teaching in Cal, and if some parts of your instruction was contrary to my belief, and contrary to the opinions of the majority of your classes, and to the majority of the Cal. Committee. I am aware that the brethren in Battle Creek think that some of us Californians pressed matters at Minneapolis, I felt that we were simply contending for the life of the Signs and for the future usefulness of two of its editors. As you have been so frank with me, I shall now tell you just how the different steps in this Minneapolis matter appeared to me, for you can never understand my position otherwise. In a recent letter to mother, Eld. Smith, after speaking of the great injury done to the Cause by the publication of Dr. Waggoner’s Gal. articles, says:-“The next unfortunate move, I think, was when the brethren in California met, just before the Minnesota Conference, and laid their plans to post up, and bring their views on the ten horns; and the law in Galatians into that Conference. We were only informed of this by letter from California, a few days before it was time to start for Conference. I could hardly believe that it was so, but the report was soon confirmed after reaching that place.” MMM 165.1

Now the facts are these. The first of July, 1888, it was proposed that the editors of the Signs, C. H. Jones, and myself, and as many of the California ministers as we could get to join us should go out into the mountains and spend a few days in Bible study. Dr. Eld. St John was urgently invited to go, but could not attend. Eld. McClure was with us part of the time. We spent two days tracing down the history of the different kingdoms that acted a part in the dismemberment of Rome, and one day in the examination of Eld. Butler’s law in Galatians and other topics bearing on that question, at the close of which Eld. Waggoner read some MS which he had prepared in answer to Eld. Butler’s pamphlet. I have learned since that you had seen these MSS at Oakland Conference, but I never heard of them until that day. At the close of our study, Eld. Waggoner asked us if it would be right for him to publish his MSS and at the next Gen. Conf. place them in the hands of the delegates, as Eld. Butler had his. We thought this would be right, and encouraged him to have five hundred copies printed. We made no secret of this, nor did we take any pains to make it public. Our study of the ten kingdoms aroused my interest, so that when I returned to Burrough Valley to spend a month or two with my wife, I took along a set of Gibbon, and using the references which I had noted down during our hurried study in the mountains, I carefully went over the ground again, numbering the paragraphs in my book, and marking those which related to the rise and progress of the ten kingdoms. In this study I became satisfied that as far as the testimony of Gibbon was concerned, Eld. Jones had more historical evidence for his position than Eld. Smith. MMM 167.1

You are no doubt aware that I have been an earnest advocate of Institutes in connection with our General Conferences. For many years I have urged that the business of our corporation was allowed to occupy time which should be given to a careful study of the methods of conducting the various lines of labor in our Conferences. I worked very hard in 1883 to secure the appointment of the Bible Reading Institutes which preceded that Conf. Eld. Butler wanted that Institute to follow the Conf. but I pressed the matter until he consented to its coming before and to this I attributed much of its success. Early in 1888 I began corresponding with Eld. Butler about an Institute to precede the Minneapolis Conf. I proposed four or five lines of work, among which were the duties of church officers, new and advanced measures for carrying the Message, the study of Bible doctrines, our Religious Liberty work, and one or two other lines which I cannot now recall. Some day I hope to get possession of my letter book, and letter files, now in Cal., so that I can show you just what I did propose. I thought that two hours might be devoted each day to the study of Bible doctrine. In one of his letters, I think it was the second treating upon this subject, and the last one he wrote me before the Institute was appointed, he said he had been thinking much about my proposition about the Institute and then he gave a list of the subjects which he said he supposed would come up for consideration. Among these he named prominently the Ten Kingdoms, and the Law in Gal. This letter is filed somewhere among my Cal. letters. I shall find it some day and show it to you. Eld. Butler has forgotten it, and does not admit that he ever wrote such a letter. I pass no censure upon him, because I have since learned what I did not know at the time, that he did not remember what he had written or the positions taken in some business matters, he was so worried at that time. I took it all in good faith, not mistrusting that it might have been written to draw me out more fully, but I supposed it was his mind that those subjects should be discussed, and as the matter of selecting subjects and speakers rested with him, for he had suggested that I assist. I supposed it was a settled matter that those were among the subjects to be discussed. I notified Elds. Jones and Waggoner of this letter, and so of course they took with them their reference books. We took it for granted that Eld. Butler [?] had talked up these matters with the Brn. in B. C. and that all understood his plans. At the Cal. C.M. a very bitter spirit was manifested by some toward Elds. Waggoner and Jones, instigated partly, I presume, by the personalities in Eld. Butler’s pamphlet, and arising partly from an old family grudge against Eld. Waggoner Senior. We had a ministers Council in which almost every utterance of these brethren bearing directly or remotely on the Gal. question, was criticized. But the brethren who opposed their teachings would neither consent to a fair examination of the subject nor would they let it alone. They preferred the piecemeal picking process, which I dislike so much. What Eld. Healy wrote to Eld. Butler, I do not know, but it seems to have given the impression that we were secretly working up a scheme, whereas, as we supposed, we were working in perfect harmony with Eld. Butler’s plans. MMM 168.1

I still believe that Eld. Butler expected at the time he wrote to me that these questions would be discussed, and that it was his own sickness which led to a change of policy, but why our brethren from B.C. should oppose the matter, and claim that the proposition to discuss these questions was all a surprise when we could see from their very actions that it was not a surprise, we never could understand. That Eld. Rupert should be furnished with several hundred of Eld. Butler’s pamphlet to place in the hands of the delegates, and other movements of a similar character should be carried on systematically through the meeting, and at the same time claim that it was not expected that these matters should be considered, was truly a surprise to us. MMM 170.1

At the first of the Minneapolis meeting, the committee having the Institute in charge, held some consultations about subjects and teachers. I argued most earnestly for the carrying out of the program I had proposed in my letter to Eld. Butler, which called for a fair division of the time, so that each of the subjects should have its share, and I protested before the committee, and in private with Eld. Waggoner, against hawing the time taken up by his six or seven long speeches. If Elds. Waggoner and Jones had been on the side of the majority I might have said before the committee or in public what I have said to them in private, and criticised their methods and work, but because they were in a hopeless minority, and I have not criticised them openly, I have been set down as more responsible than they; in all they have done that was subject to criticism. I suppose I ought not to be surprised because it is frequently the reward the peace-maker gets to be suspected and condemned by both parties. When I went to the Minneapolis meeting, I was as innocent as a goose, and while my old friends at B.C. and even my own relatives were saying the bitterest things against me, I mistrusted nothing, supposed our brethren were really anxious to get the historical evidence with reference to the ten kingdoms, and in trying to save time by making it easy for them to find the passages in Gibbon, I secured the reputation of being an offensive partisan. But all this will pass away. If the Lord has a work for me to do in his Cause I believe he will give me line upon line, and in his own good way prepare me for it, and open the way so I shall know where my duty is. I am more thankful than I can express for his mercy and patience, and I believe that my present position, isolated from all my brethren and separated from my mother, may be according to his providence, that I may cut loose from all official responsibility, and thus free the work from the suspicion which is attached to me, and give me a chance to prepare for a different kind of labor. The saddest thought in all this matter is that it is necessary for me to separate from mother, that the suspicions which have gathered about me shall now also be attached to her work Since father’s death my principal care and first thought, aside from my direct work in the Cause, has been to care for her, to lock after her financial interests, and accompany her to the meetings, to see that she did not labor unnecessarily beyond her strength; it has been hard for me to accept the truth which has been forcing itself upon me during the past winter, that I must separate from her in order that her testimony be believed. I have been working most earnestly to transfer the management of her business to other hands, and have succeeded to a considerable degree; but I pray most earnestly that the time may come that our brethren will appreciate the fact that my seal for the work, and my fertility of plans, Is because of my connection with mother, and because of what I have learned from her, As to the manner and spirit in which our work should be conducted. I have regarded the information that I have gained by this connection with mother as a sacred trust that mast be used for the advancement of the work, and Oh, I regret so much that self Bas been allowed to appear, and cause a blight over all. But I accept the present situation, and pray that God will help me to learn well the lesson he is teaching for I do not want to see his precious Cause, his glorious work, marred by my imperfection and lack of consecration. MMM 170.2

I try to be thankful every day for the season of quiet I am having here in which I can look over the past and plan for the future. It is something of a relief to be free from so many committee meetings, and it is a great pleasure to me to take part in the work of this little church. I have been watching the success and development of the general plans we have laid, as applied to this church, and I am thankful to say it all works well. I have been brought directly in contact with an intelligent church and Miss. Soc. where the usefulness of the latter was almost killed by the blighting influence of the appointing system. The director having the authority to appoint the local officers, lived here, and being awfully good and fearfully dull, the tract society work had degenerated into the driest formalism that you ever could imagine, But the director has kindly waived his constitutional right to appoint officers. The society has elected, some that will work, and the resurrection of the interest, attendance, and enthusiasm is truly encouraging. MMM 173.1

I thank you for your suggestions about my work. At first I hardly knew what to do. When I left B.C. I did not think it right to involve the Conf. In the expense of bringing a stenographer with me, for I expected to go on to Cal., but after a week I secured the assistance of Sr. Delia Childs, who writes for me about five hours, five days in each week, and since I have decided to stay here I have about completed arrangements with Addie Walling, who has been studying stenography in Chicago, to come out, and spend half her time in writing, and half in taking care of my children. I hope by this means that my writing will cost the Conf. much less than if I had brought an expensive man with me. As soon as the weather gets a little warmer I shall build an office in the from t yard, using rough boards for floor and sides, and double canvass for roof. MMM 173.2

Praying that the lord will guide and prosper you in your work, I am Per C. Yours truly,- MMM 173.3