Setting things straight

            A seminar on Jehovah’s Witnesses was held April last in Antwerp, sponsored by CESNUR. It drew colleagues and friends. I have five children and other responsibilities which explains why, though I was invited, I did not attend.

            Separate Identity, our book, drew some comment, some positive and some negative. Not everyone will like what they read regardless of who wrote it. Some won’t like the writing style. Some will reject conclusions that differ from their own. The criticism to which I object is the claim we do not cite opposition writers. This is false on its face. And it reflects a lack of understanding of the nature of original research. Original historical research is not based on secondary sources. It is based on original sources. These are memoirs by event participants, contemporary documents and articles in contemporary periodicals. Few opposition writers represent original sources. Reliance on them is an affectation derived from the writing style of sociologists. It is not, nor should it be, part of a historian’s kit, except when their statements are challenged or a shared conclusion is referenced.

            Contrary to the claim made by a conference attender, we reference opposition writers at least twenty-two times. Some of these are former adherents; some are not. Some claimed academic credentials but are truly polemicists. One in the final edition of his book met a high academic standard but is still an opposition writer.

            Why anyone would trash our book, no matter how politely, with this false claim puzzles me. Herewith is the list of opposition writers we cite in footnotes and text:

1. R Bowman and A. Gomes – page 81; 2. G. Burns – page 256. 3. W. T Conner – page 178; 4. C. C. Cook – page 178; 5. J. V. Coombs – page 51; 6. R. W. Coon – page 51; 7. M. D. Curry, Jr. – page 175; 8. C. G. Falkner – page 306; 9. W. Gavin – page 232; 10. D. Graham – page 60; 11. E. Gruss – pages 210, 329, 332; 12. J. Haughlen – page 234; 13. C. O. Johnson and J. Penton – page 168; 14. Morris and Kross – page 232; 15. A. T. Rogerson – page 179; 16. J. J. Ross – page 51; 17. T. T. Shields – Page 314; 18. F. Springmeir – page 193; 19. E. Young – page 51.

            With the exception of Wikipedia nonsense, we felt no need to footnote controversialist web pages of little to no worth. We stand by that decision. None of them are original source material. In those few cases where original source material is reproduced online, we cite it in the usual way.

            There may be more examples but my memory suggests only three: On page 185, footnote 12 we cite Lottie F. Warner’s diary which is found online; on page 203 we cited Early Lives of Andrew and Lydia Ann Beeman, reproduced online; on page 257 we cite a Davies family memoir also found online. These are original sources.

FORTHCOMING ATTRACTION!

THE SEQUEL TO THE PHOTODRAMA

PRODUCED BY THE MENA

FILM COMPANY

(see WT March 15, 1918 page 94)

See Alfred Garcia (as Satan) tempt F.A. Turner (as King Herod)

An article on this film, premiered at an IBSA convention in 1918 is to follow in due course.

WATCH THIS SPACE

Card from Russell to Edith Weber, Daughter of WT Vice President

Selling this on ebay to help pay for medical expediences.

French language Songbooks

Miquel has kindly sent me some photographs of historical French language Songbooks that have come to hand.

This songbook, a second edition printing from 1919 corresponds to one of the Zion's Glad Songs series.

This 1928 songbook corresponds with the 1928 Songs of Praise to Jehovah, which basically replaced Hymns of Millennial Dawn for IBSA meetings.

This 1948 songbook corresponds with the 1944 Kingdom Service Songbook, which was the book released for when singing was reintroduced at general congregation meetings.

While I'm busy with other things ...

You can get excited over this one ...

http://www.ebay.com/itm/222173541433?ssPageName=STRK:MESELX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1555.l2649

We're selling this to pay Aunt S's medical expenses. 

Don't get TOO excited...

As seen on Ebay

The blurb reads:

Don't get TOO excited, this is a nicely bound copy of a photocopy (of a photocopy) of the original 1880 volume. Check the photographs carefully. Someone had a photocopy of the book (two pages to a sheet) and it was heavily underlined. The photocopies were all then folded in two and "perfect bound" together. It means that you have two pages of text, and then two blank pages throughout the book, so the width of the volume is twice the normal size. What you are buying here is basically a nicely bound volume to go in the bookcase; something that LOOKS good, but ultimately is just a so-so copy of J H Paton's work.

Just for Fun

Use Once Only

We need some help with this

A Witness newsletter from Baltimore, 1935. We're told that this was put out by Anton Koerber and that Rutherford objected. It was stopped shortly afterward. We cannot verify this. It is too big for my scanner, so part of it is missing. What can you tell me?

Click on image to see entire.

Temporary Post

This is a rough draft of a chapter from volume 2. The usual rules apply. You may copy it for your own use. Do not quote from it or rely on it. It will change. References to Second Adventists will change to Age-to-Come, a different system. Wording will change. Some issues need verification. Do not circulate it. Do not reproduce it. It is copyrighted material as is. I'm posting it for comment. It will go down quickly. Now is the time to comment.

The Publishing Ministry

            The first publication to come from Zion’s Watch Tower was Songs of the Bride, a 134 page hymnal containing 144 songs. Russell and William I. Mann were joint editors. All of the hymns would have been familiar to Watch Tower readers, but almost all of them were revised to reflect their unique doctrinal mix. Some were radically changed, and some received a one or two word revision. Russell explained the rational behind their choices:

photo

William Imre Mann in 1880

We have long felt the need of a Hymn Book containing a larger number of spiritual songs free from objectionable theology, and this is our reason for publishing “The Songs of the Bride.” We have selected according to our judgment they hymns best suited to the wants and desires of the more matured and consecrated Christians, the “little flock,” … the true “Church of the first-born whose names are written in Heaven,” … hence the perhaps peculiar name “Songs of the Bride.” They are not the songs of the world, nor of cold or half dead Christians, but of the Chaste Virgin Church, waiting and longing for her union with the heavenly Bridegroom.[1]

Illustration

Title Page – Songs of the Bride

            We do not know how great a part Russell played in developing this songbook. He pointed to William Mann, thanking him for “valuable assistance” in arranging and revising the songs. It appears to have been a joint effort with Mann taking the lead. As would be true with the later Hymns of Millennial Dawn, most of the songs were taken form Gospel Hymns No. 1, The Jubilee Harp, and Winnowed Hymns. They also drew from C. C. Barker’s Hymns of the Morning, the basis for the abbreviated hymnal published by the Herald of the Morning. The authors’ names were omitted, as were many of the original titles. Russell explained that he “would gladly give credit of the hymns to their composers, but have been obliged to alter many of them to such an extent that we feared their authors would feel offended if their names were associated with them as they now are.”[2] Advertising matter in the back promoted Russell’s Object and Manner and Zion’s Watch 

The remainder of this post is deleted.

We need a much clearer scan or photo of this ...

This is the best my scanner will do. I need a better scan or photo. Can you help?

Bruce is selling this on ebay ....

I'm posting the pictures before it leaves our collection forever. Bruce attended this convention.

Bruce is selling this on ebay. I'm posting a photo before it leaves our collection.

Jonathan Ling

In recounting the very early years of Bible Students in Britain, Bruce and Rachael wrote about Tom Hart and Jonathan Ling. Both names were mentioned in the 1973 Yearbook history of Britain. A paragraph about Ling was extended as a result of research made on Ancestry and also a reference found in Tony Byatt’s book on the history of Bible Students/Witnesses in London.

The combined information reads:

(quote) Thom Hart was born in Calcutta, India, in 1853. At the time of the 1881 Census he had moved his family from the Islington address to 5 Lavinia Grove, Middlesex, London. He was “a carman” for one of the railroads. In another place he called “a railroad shunter.” He and his wife had three children, two sons and one daughter, all under the age of four. Jonathan Ling was born in Blaxhall, Suffolk, early in 1858. The 1891 census has him as a railway guard at Islington, an occupation he still had in 1901. He was married Elizabeth, maiden name unknown, and they have seven children, ranging in ages from one month to 17 years old. He died June 20, 1922. We lack an exact date for Ling’s conversion, but it appears to be early. Ling’s daughter Ruth remembered that their meetings were held in the common room of the King’s Cross hostel, a layover spot for railway workers. (end of quote)

As a result of contacts via Ancestry, I have made contact with one of Ling’s great grand-daughters, Elizabeth. Although the census return referred to above gave Jonathan Ling seven children, it appears he eventually had ten. His wife, Elizabeth, was originally Elizabeth Moody and lived to be 100. The modern Elizabeth’s branch of the family did not remain with the Bible Students.

Great grand daughter Elizabeth (from the line through Jonathan’s son, Lewis Charles Ling) has very kindly supplied the two photographs below, and has given permission for them to be reproduced here. I have not cropped them but just reproduced them as received. Elizabeth has also given permission to reproduce the photographs in the second volume of Separate Identity if required, with just an acknowledgement requested.

An article by Roberto

The name in Italy

The question of group designation was an issue for the first Italian Watch Tower believers. All the Italian publications, letters and documents, inside and outside the movement,  avoided the name “Bible Students” until 1915.

The most used name was the generic “Church”, but there are some exceptions. In 1903 the first number of “La Vedetta di Sion” – Italian Zion’s Watch Tower -  called themselves with the generic name “Church”, but also “Christian Church"  and “Faithful Church” [1]. In 1904 besides the name “Church” they called themselves “Church of the Little Flock of Believers” and “Evangelical Church” [2]

In 1904 the Waldensians pastor Giuseppe Banchetti wrote a positive review of the Italian Divine Plan of the Ages in a periodical [3], and avoids any name but “the Present Truth”.

In 1905 a letter of Daniele Rivoire was published in the Zion’s Watch Tower French edition (Le Phare de la Tour de Sion), he said: “Next Sunday afternoon I will go to S. Germano Chisone for a meeting with five or six people deeply interested in the Present Truth”. He used also the the expressions “Holy Cause” and “Work”, and avoided any name [4].

In 1908 Lara Lantered (widow Chantelain) in a long letter called the Watch Tower believers, “Readers of the Dawn and Tower”. She wrote: “May God grant us to be frank and honest in our testimony of the present truth and in the unfolding of our glorious flag. May he give to all the readers of the Dawn and Tower to rejoice in the Lord. He desires that our joy may be complete and would not allow anyone to take it away from us” [5].  In 1910, in another long letter, Lanteret evaded any name and used the expressions “Light” and “Precious Truth”. She said: “I am glad to announce that Mr. M., a former old Baptist Minister, after frequent discussions with the two of us (Lara Lantaret and Fanny Lugli) has fully entered into the light and accepted joyfully the precious truth that God has well revealed through his dear and faithful servant Russell” [6]

In May 1910, four members of the Waldensians Church resigned,  joining with the Watch Tower Movement. They were Henriette Bounous, Francois Soulier, Henry Bouchard, and Luoise Vincon Rivoir; In their long letters of resignation they avoided any name. Henri Bouchard alone used the phrase “Church of Christ” one time [7].

This continuous change of names, or absence of a name, generated confusion outside the movement. The Consistory of the Waldensias Church disfellowshipped Henriette Bocenous, Cesarine Bocenous, Francois Soulier together with his wife and daughter, Henry Bouchard and Louise Vincon Rivoire (or Rivoir) with the following words that we find in the minutes of the meeting:

“The President reads the letters that he has written in the name of the Consistory, to those individuals that from many time or lately two years ago, have left the Waldensian Church to join the Darbysts, or to set up a new sect ……… while Louise Vincon Rivoire has become a Baptist” [8].
As a matter of fact they were all Watch Tower believers.

In its May 21, 1915, issue the Waldensians paper L’Echo des Vallees an article entitled “Courrier Anglo-American," saying: “Doctor Nixon, fights to the bitter end, the millennial movement that is becoming a dangerous movement, and Pastor Russell is the leader of this new religious agitation started in the United States” [10]

Also, in 1915 the Catholic priest at Bagnolo Piemonte, wrote an article against the booklet The Triumph of the Bible published by  the Italian Branch of the International Bible Students Association. The priest called them Protestants and Waldensians [9] . In January 1916, the Italian branch replied saying that they were neither Protestants or Waldensians:

“We of the International Bible Students Association want to free them from that charge, declaring that we are out of any religious sect or renowned nominal church, Catholic or Protestant, and that the brothers of the Association although in the past were members of those religions, they harried up to go out, because they (Catholic and Protestants) are part of the Great Harlot Babylon, so well drowned in Revelation chapters 17 and 18” [11].

After 1915 the name Bible Students became common inside and outside the movement .
 
Footnotes - all the references can be found in the book “Enciclopedia storica sui Testimoni di Geova in Italia” (Historical Encyclopedia on the Jehovah’s Witnesses in Italy, vol. I) by Emanuele Pace, 2013.

[1] Vedetta di Sion vol. 1, n.1, October 1903 p.2, §7; and p.3 column 2, line 4 
[2] Vedetta di Sion vol. 2, n. 1, January 1904, p.3, column 4, line 4; and p.3 §3.
[3] Letter wrote in 1904 July 13 and published in La Rivista Cristiana 1904, September, vol. VI, pp. 351-354.
[4] Le Phare de la Tour de Sion 1905, January-March edition, p. 117
[5] Le Phare de la Tour de Sion 1908, May, p. 139
[6] Le Phare de la Tour de Sion 1910, April, p. 79
[7] Archivio della Tavola Valdese (Archive of the Waldensian Table) – Torre Pellice, Turin
[8] Archivio della Tavola Valdese (Archive of the Waldensian Table) – Torre Pellice, Turin
[9] Bollettino Mensile della Chiesa (Montly Bulletin of the Church) 1915, September
[10] Clara Cerulli Lantaret replied to the charge, with a letter published in the paper “Il Pellice” dated 1915 June 4. The dispute is reported in the Italian Watch Tower tract “Giustizia” (Justice), page 6
[11] “Il Vero Principe della Pace” (The True Prince of the Peace), Associazione Internazionale Studenti Biblici, 1916, January, p. 14 

Currently reading Emily's book

.... and so far I'm extremely impressed. After I read it twice or thrice, I'll post a review.

Film frames of C T Russell from Photodrama

This was recently sold on eBay.

The blurb read:

This is a genuine strip of 35mm film from the Photodrama of Creation, taken from one of the introductions, featuring Pastor Russell. There are seven frames in this strip, although only six are shown. (The bottom frame had the seller’s thumb in the way.) I have resisted the commercial temptation to cut the film into smaller pieces to sell individually. That was the fate of other Photodrama films of Russell that ended up on cards as souvenir bookmarks.

The provenance of the strip of film goes back well over 40 years, when someone gave it to me. It had gone through various hands but came originally from an elderly JW who was a projectionist at Princes Theatre, Shaftsbury Avenue, London, when the Photodrama first came to Britain in 1914. I traced this person and where he lived and after some correspondence travelled to meet him. During his time as projectionist he was normally entombed in a metal projection box because of fear of fire. Under carbon lighting of the day, he would strip down somewhat, but still roasted.

When the showings ceased he somehow ‘inherited’ a two minute reel of film which languished in his attic for decades. But he’d now taken to cutting off little bits as souvenirs for friends. I was able to climb into his attic and borrow what was left of the film. Although the sprocket holes were considerably damaged in places, I got a colleague in a London laboratory to run me off 35mm and 16mm prints for the minute or so that remained. The original reel then went back to its owner, and I don’t know what happened to it. I used the reprinted film in several projects, and if you obtain a DVD of the Photodrama today, or just watch it online, my minute or so of reprinted film is incorporated into that restoration.

So that is the story behind these few frames. Although most 35mm film of the date was highly dangerous nitrate stock - leaving safer film for the substandard gauges (17.5mm, 9.5mm, 16mm etc.) - the film of CTR was actually produced on a safer version of stock. That is why it could be copied safely and legally and it is why these few frames can now be offered on eBay.

It sold for 206 GBP.

Russell Discource - 1913

Des. Res.

Modern photos courtesy of : Instagram: watchtower_of_allegheny_tour

Two years ago when I visited Pittsburgh I was taken to see the former residences of the Russells, father and son. At that time this was the photograph I took.

The properties were on the market, and the owner was offering to turn them into whatever you wanted for over $400,000 per plot.  Much of the interiors had to be gutted, because all new floors were needed. However, the aim was to restore the homes as sympathetically as possible. So the double spiral staircases on each side were to be fully restored.

Now they are completed, and here is another recent photograph to show what the exteriors now look like.

So any collectors with too much money can forget about bidding on eBay for rare bits of paper and perhaps collect some historic real estate instead.

For any new readers, these two houses were at one time owned by the Russell family. Joseph L Russell owned the house on the left, and Charles T Russell owned the one on the right. Joseph L died in his property in 1897. and left it to his wife, Emma.

When Maria left CTR, she moved back into the house on the right, and rented rooms out to lodgers. Her mother Selena died there in 1901. When CTR ultimately took back the property, Maria simply moved in with Emma next door. The two women would live together at various locations in Pittsburgh and later Florida until Emma died in 1929. Maria lived on until 1938.

Storrs

George and Miguel Contributed to This

And Donald who also reads this blog. Soon:

Ernest Charles Henninges

Ernest Charles Henninges was born on 12 July, 1871. He became a Bible Student c. 1891. He married Rose Ball on 11 September 1897. He died on 2 February 1939.

He was a Society director from 4 January 1896 to 2 January 1909. During this time he was the secretary/treasurer of the Society on two occasions.

The first occasion was from 13 May 1898 to 12 February 1900. He then travelled to the United Kingdom to organize a branch there. He was in Britain from April 1900 to November 1901 (and can be found in the British census for 1901). Back in the States he again became secretary/treasurer from 2 February 1902 to 24 March 1903. He was then on his travels again, first to organize matters in Elberfeld, Germany, from June to October 1903, and then in Australia, arriving in Melbourne on 10 January 1904. His replacement as a director in January 1909 officially severed his relationship with CTR.

(With grateful thanks to Bernard who supplied the picture and most of the dates)

From Zion's Glad Songs

Much Improved. Thanks.

A response ...

My comments about another's research drew an email response. In fairness to the author, I reproduce it here:

Dear Rachel,

Your recent attack on my research is not to your credit. I have researched this subject since the 1970´s and I don´t bring any preconcieved ideas into my writing. I started trying to figure out what happened and why and I now know the answers. One has to stick to a high level of ethics, that´s for sure. That Is why I will not claim that  Rutherford had extra-marital affairs as so many others have done.

In the nature of things the brief response to Chryssides new book that I made public couldn´t give justice to my thorough research. I stated that Macmillan  was not reliable and said his old age was the reason. Since he made so many astonishing mistakes in his presentation my verdict was a charitable one. The alternative is that he lied knowingly. I can demonstrate over and over and over again how unreliable his testomony was. His testimony is condtradicted by all the contemporary sources, even Rutherford´s writings, and that is the real reason why I don´t accept much of what he stated. However,  I accept one  interesting piece of information that he brought forward, and that in spite of the fact that there is no corroboration from the contemporary material.  But generally his long life in an ever changing organization has affected his memory.

I believe you were wrong when you stated that the corporate law under which the Society was incorporated was formulated in 1876. It was formulated in 1874. [He's right.] Also, the legal arguments used by Rutherford did not date only from 1906, as you seem to suggest. They were part of the Pennsylvania Corporate law much earlier as an earlier Pennsylvania law book that I have shows. But that does not mean that the issues of of 1916-1918 are given a new color. It is still true, moreover, that Rutherford NEVER tried to explain how the charter could contain illegal clauses. It would be most useful for him to do so. If new laws had the effect that the charter was superseded , why not say so? Why not give the dates and details of such new laws? Even the Philadelphia lawyer he mustered did not say a word about this and so the ousted board members remained convinced that they were the legal directors of the Society.

It is clear that you don´t have any real knowledge about this, and if the thoughts you presented came from your father, he is ignorant, too. That you stated that you are Schultz´s daughter was good. It explains a lot. [I'm not Bruce Schulz' daughter. He misread what I wrote.]

English Version is Song 9 in 1928 Songbook

Pay attention to the words ...

            There are, I think, things you do not understand. Let me clarify issues for you.

            Some of you believe this project depends on me. You think that because I am principal blog editor. What is posted here appears under my rather silly post-it name. From the beginning this project has depended on B. W. Schulz – not on me. He conceptualized it. He was and remains the principal author and guiding light of this work.

            We often write in tandem, writing the same chapter or parts of the same chapters. We mold our separate writing into a unified presentation which we hope (and I believe) our readers cannot easily assign to either of us. So when you praise me for this work, your adulation is misplaced.

            Some of you misread my comments. I usually write exactly what I mean. I expect that my words have meaning; injecting contrary understanding into them is at least irritating and at its worst it abuses the gift of language, occasionally an unforgivable sin. I did not say I was withdrawing from the current project. I said that after it is finished, I will not remain to complete book three. So all the distress expressed in private emails is misplaced. And one of you said that you would not support Mr. Schulz if he moves on to book three, tentatively called On the Cusp of Fame.

            I am lead on this blog to relieve Mr. Schulz of some burdens. He is aged, infirm, and stubborn as a mule. He also continues to research, write, and guide this project. Some of you act as if he has turned vegetable. Stop it.

            Without being offensive, I cannot clearly tell you how upsetting it is when you attribute Bruce’s work to me. I take credit for my own work; I do not take credit for the genius of others.

            Another issue must be addressed. One of the friends of this research, a retired history professor, lives across the Columbia River from me. He pointed me to comments on a controversialist chat board. Nice things were said about our work. I appreciate the kind comments. However, there was other nonsense there that exemplifies the ethical and procedural issues attendant on historiography. Another writer, I think not a trained historian, is writing about the post-Russell controversies. Someone should write about that, but the approach noted there is faulty.

            He rejects A. H. MacMillan’s testimony as given in Faith on the March because MacMillan was ‘old’ and his memory faulty. MacMillan wrote exactly 40 years ante. He was not particularly old. And if he was, age is not reason to question memory. Mr. Schulz, my father, and others of my acquaintance are far older than MacMillan was in 1957. No-one can fairly describe them as mentally challenged. If you read hardcore science, you’ve probably read one or more of my father’s books, many of them written when he was well-past MacMillan’s age.

            Discounting evidence because it does not support your point of view is unethical. Don’t do it.

            The same writer fell into the trap that lures many. He hasn’t followed the trail to the end. He separates some issues that cannot be separated. He comments on the nature of the Watch Tower board of directors and the election process. The Society was incorporated in 1884 under the laws of Pennsylvania as formulated in 1876. Corporate law changed in 1906. The new laws changed Watch Tower Society legal obligations. This gives the issues of 1916-1918 a new color.

            If we write to our pre-conceived ideas, our history will be flawed. Seriously flawed. Go where honest research takes you. Do not write to an agenda.

            Now ... do you all feel scolded?

            I see that I’ve omitted a thought. Most of you know that I am not a Witnesses. I’m a professional historian and educator. I write to be read. I do not write to further a religion, not even my own. I do not write out of ‘principle.’ I’m a storyteller at heart. That’s what I do. Storytellers want to be read and appreciated.

1896

J F Rutherford's First Book

(revised)

I didn’t realize, until I did a search, but I have actually posted something on this several years ago - J F Rutherford’s very first book. But having lost an hour of my life actually reading it earlier today, I decided to post again.

In 1895 the Boonville Advertiser, the official paper of Cooper County, gave away a free 128 page book entitled Laws of Missouri - Business Manual. The author and compiler was one J F Rutherford of the law firm of Wright and Rutherford.

The book is not dated as such, but one of the advertisements for the Cooper Institute announced that its 26^th year of operation would begin on Tuesday, September 3, 1895, so we can reasonably assume that the volume came out earlier that year.

In the main, only the right hand pages contained text, the left hand pages contained full page advertisements for the various services available in a rural area. There are thirteen law firms in the area for example, but top of the list is Wright and Rutherford, with offices in the Windsor Block. There is a glowing endorsement of Rutherford in the Publisher’s Preface:

“THE ADVERTISER has had Mr J F Rutherford, one of the leading members of the Boonville bar, to compile and arrange the laws herein. His fitness for such work is a guarantee of its usefulness to the farmers and businessmen.”

The table of contents shows the scope of legal matters that Rutherford covered.

One might note such subjects as Conveyance of Real Estate, Divorce and Alimony, Mortgages and Deeds of Trust, and Wills are covered. Knowledge in some of these areas would make J F Rutherford very useful to CTR when he became the Watch Tower’s legal counsel.

Of course, there is nothing whatsoever theological in this volume; Rutherford’s first foray into scriptural interpretation would not come until 1907 with the publication of Man’s Salvation, from a Lawyer’s Viewpoint. But still, for completionists, this is a volume to obtain. As you can tell from the grainy opening picture, alas, I do not have an original.

Don't expect

Don't expect much from us for a few weeks. It's end of term and we're both busy with that.

This blog's readership is declining, and the blog appears to be irrelevant. We may not continue it. Few read it and fewer comment in a meaningful way. As I assess it, all our work since we started our book on Barbour has been a waste of time best spent on other, more important things.

If it continues past the finish of Separate Identity, vol 2, it will be without me.

R. M. de Vienne