---

The Theosophical Movement 1875-1950

By

---

The Death Of William Q . Judge

NEVER, SINCE HIS TRIP to South America, a strong man, Mr. Judge began to fail in the autumn of 1893, when the attacks upon his character became virulent. By the Boston Convention of April, 1895, his condition was such that he could take little active part in the proceedings. Later in the year he had grown so weak that at the insistence of friends and physicians he went south in a vain endeavor to recuperate. This measure proving fruitless, and it becoming increasingly evident that his life could not be prolonged, he returned north by easy stages, spending a fortnight in Cincinnati with Dr. J. D. Buck and other theosophists. He reached New York in February and from then on rapidly declined. Mr. Judge died on Saturday, March 21,1896. His last words, according to F. T. Hargrove, who was present, were: “There should be calmness. Hold 1 fast. Go slow.”

We come now to an interlude of extreme confusion in the history of the Theosophical Movement. As in previous crises in the life of the Society, the external events following upon the death of Mr. Judge but reflected perturbations which had their origin in secret vacillations and even betrayals. All this was bound to dissipate the high achievements of the Movement in the United States. First evidence of what was to occur came in the form of an E.S. notice, issued Friday, March 27, announcing a “General Meeting of the E.S.T.” at the Headquarters, 144 Madison Avenue, New York, to be held on Sunday, March 29. All near-by members who could, attended this meeting and were passive participants in what took place. The principal event of the meeting was the reading, by E. T. Hargrove, of a prepared one-page announcement signed by eight of Mr. Judge’s closest associates—individuals who were active in the work of the Aryan Lodge in New York, in the American Society as a whole, in the conduct of Path Magazine, and in the crucially important work of the E.S. The announcement told of the concern of the signers for the future of the E.S. and reported that an examination of Mr. Judge’s “private papers” showed—
that the future of the School was not left to chance, nor to our mere judgment. They [the papers] contain astonishing revelations concerning our late Outer Head and definitely prove that he was far greater than superficially appeared. We think it right to inform you at once of this fact, and that his position in the Lodge was higher a n d his connection with Masters far more intimate and constant than was generally supposed by most members of the School. His papers further show that he did not stand alone in the work, but that, unseen and unknown to all but the very few, he had assistance right at hand, and that he left this assistance behind him, not withdrawn by his death. In regard to this matter we must ask you for the present to remember that even as he trusted us, so you must trust us. But we shall issue a further communication as soon as possible, proving from his own papers the correctness of all that is written above. . . .

The signers were E. T. Hargrove, James M. Pryse, Joseph H. Fussell, H. T. Patterson, Claude Falls Wright, Genevieve Ludlow Griscom, C. A. Griscom, Jr., and E. August Neresheimer.

What “documents” could add to the stature of William Q. Judge is difficult to imagine, but the purpose of this announcement needs little interpretation: it was to establish the “authority” of those who signed it as competent to indicate Mr. Judge’s occult “successor.” The foregoing statement was mailed to all members of the E.S., in the United States and elsewhere. This was followed, within a week, by a nineteen-page pamphlet dated April 3, 1896, containing a communication signed by the same eight individuals and what is described as a “verbatim report” of the meeting on March 29. This pamphlet declared that Mr. Judge had left “directions” for the future management of the E.S., including the designation of a new “Outer Head.” However, the announcement says. “the name and identity of W. Q. Judge’s occult heir and successor is to remain unknown to the members for one year.” Other matters provided for in the alleged “directions” from Mr. Judge included the formation of a Council and an Advisory Council. It reiterated that the new “Outer Head” was “practically unknown in the Theosophical Society, having been confided by Mr. Judge to but very few chosen and trusted friends.”

With this development, the Theosophical Movement entered a phase which threatened to defeat the careful plans laid by H. P. Blavatsky and to obliterate the example set by William Q. Judge. “Let the Society,” one of the Theosophical Adepts had said, “flourish on its moral worth alone.” But this was precisely what those who were left after the passing of Mr. Judge feared to do. They did not hold fast. They did not go slow. Hardly a week had gone by, after his death, when his closest associates in the work combined to impose a “successor” upon the membership of the Theosophical Society.

The position occupied by Judge in the Movement had been due to what he was and what he did. If Judge enjoyed a special place in the minds of many students, it was not because of any assertions made about him, whether by himself or his supporters, but because of his immeasurable services to the Theosophic cause. What might be said about him, concerning possible occult relationships with H.P.B. and the Masters, was in explanation of his manifest greatness, and consistent with it, rather than the basis for acknowledging him as a “Theosophical Authority” or a “Spiritual Leader.”

These relationships were now reversed in the representations made in behalf of Mr. Judge’s supposed “successors.” Here was a person “practically unknown to the Theosophical Society” who was now to be accepted as having high occult “status” simply because a small group of theosophists said so. Not “moral worth,” but “claims,” were now to be recognized as settling all questions of Theosophical leadership. It was indeed an insult to the memory of Judge that, so soon after his death, a procedure of “successorship” was established which violated everything he had stood for in life. Inevitably, and in less than two years, the Society was thrown into confusion and another split occurred.

The E.S.T. meetingheld inNewYorkonMarch29waspresidedover by E. T. Hargrove. Mr. Hargrove read to those present some extracts which he declared to be from Mr. Judge’s diary, offering “proof ” of the latter's “constant intercourse with Masters.” He read further from a “message” alleged to be from H.P.B. to Mr. Judge (dated January 3, 1895), in which “Promise,” the “chela” now offered as Mr. Judge's successor, was referred to. There are several such messages in the report of the March 29 meeting, none of them suggesting the strength and moral depth that is characteristic of H.P.B.’s writings. ''Whatever the origin of these messages, the use made of them by Mr. Hargrove and his associates can hardly he justified. After reading these “messages,” Hargrove concluded by saying:

Trust is our only salvation, but reason alone should show us that he [ Judge] could not have left that body if he had not had an occult heir and successor to take his place, for that is the law in the Lodge. This occult heir is the link between ourselves and him, and so on from the Rajah [an “occult” designation of Judge] to H.P.B., to Masters and to the great Lodge. There must be that link; his papers showed us where to find it; we have found it, have tested it and verified it beyond all question, individually and unitedly.

Other members of the Council, on the platform with Mr. Hargrove, now confirmed what he had said. James M. Pryse offered a written statement endorsing Hargrove’s revelations. J. H. Fussell said: “I know of my own knowledge that what our Brother Ernest T. Hargrove has stated is true; that our Chief. . . has not left us by the death of his worn-out body....... he is still working along the same lines that he has worked hitherto; and will continue to so work and to lead us.” H. T. Patterson gave similar testimony, and Claude Falls Wright declared that he had been sent by Judge to see “Promise,” and that “this chela went into a trance and told me much of the future.” Mr. Wright spoke of the continuing “direct protection of the Masters and the Lodge” and added: “We on this platform have in the last few days had marvelous proofs of this.” Mr. and Mrs. Griscom added their support to Hargrove’s assertions, and finally, Mr. F. A. Neresheimer read “a communication from the Masters” which he said he had received through “Promise” in March, 1895. The last sentence of this message, “Under no circumstances must Mr. Judge know of this,” does not speak very well for i t s authenticity. Mr. Neresheimer also informed the gathering that the Council would receive further instructions, “whatever there may be, from the Outer Head, with whom, as I previously stated, I am acquainted, and so are the others.

As the eight persons who joined in asserting that a “successor” had been made known to them, both by written instruction from Mr. Judge and through “occult” enlightenment and “messages,” were all well-known theosophists, it was natural that their word was accepted by nearly everyone in the Society. Actually, it was a matter of either wholly rejecting or wholly accepting what Mr. Hargrove and his supporters said; and to reject what they said would amount to declaring the entire movement in America a sham and a failure. Moreover, the death of Mr. Judge had doubtless stirred the feelings of members everywhere to particular anxiety and uncertain wonderings about the future, so that the declarations of the pamphlet of April 3 could easily be taken as representing a new security for the work.

The second annual Convention of the T. S. in A. was held at the end of April, 1896. By this time, although Mr. Judge’s “occult heir and successor” was to have remained unknown for the period of a year, it was an open secret that it was Mrs. Katherine Tingley, a person who, some two weeks later, Hargrove was to claim had undergone “a training and preparation even more rigid and comprehensive than that experienced by either H.P.B. or W.Q.J.” This latter statement appeared in a seven-page circular issued by Hargrove on May 17 to the E.S.T. membership, in which, under the title, “An Occultist’s Life,” he set forth what purported to be an account of significant events in the life of the new “Outer Head.” Mrs. Tingley, still called “Promise” in this circular, was described as under the direction of “the Master,” and Hargrove alleges that Mr. Judge had recognized her “true occult position” several years before his death and approved of her activities as a “psychometer. The day after the appearance of this circular, the New York Tribune printed an article of more than two full columns, disclosing Mrs. Tingley’s identity as the “Successor,” and containing a long 2 authorized “interview” with her. This public announcement was amplified to the E.S.T. membership by another confidential circular issued on May 21, in which “Promise” was identified as Mrs. Tingley Hargrove, whom the Convention had elected president of the T. S. in A., took charge of the editing of the Path, which was now called Theosophy, and appointed J. H. Fussell as his private secretary. Claude Falls Wright was “called to more important work” as the private secretary of Mr. Judge’s “successor.” During the Convention, Mr. Wright had addressed the members concerning the plan of “the Masters” to found “a School for the Lost Mysteries of Antiquity,” and Mrs. Tingley spoke glowingly on the same subject. The members responded with enthusiasm and a large sum of money was raised to support this project.

Shortly after the Convention, another appeal was made to the E.S.T. membership to obtain funds for a Theosophical “Crusade” around the world that “had been directed by the Masters.” Thousands of dollars were contributed, and after large meetings in New York and Boston, Mrs. Tingley set out for Europe with her entourage, which included Hargrove and Wright. Mrs. Alice L. Cleather joined the party in Europe. From the departure in June, 1896, until the return to San Francisco in February, 1897, Mr. Hargrove kept Theosophy supplied with ecstatic monthly reports of the progress of the “Crusade.” As these and other accounts make clear, the “Crusade” was marked by numerous signs and wonders. On June 15, in midocean, the Council revealed, the Crusaders were favored with a “message” from H.P.B. Another highlight of the trip was Mrs. Tingley’s claim of a meeting with “H. P. Blavatsky’s Teacher, on the mountainside near Darjiling.” This personage, Mrs. Tingley relates, when she met him, was whittling a plug of wood with which to improve the yoke of a brace of oxen that a chela was plowing with in a 3 field not far away On the return to America, the cornerstone of the “School for the Revival of the Lost Mysteries of Antiquity” was laid by Mrs. Tingley and her aides at Point Loma, near San Diego, California—which site had been disclosed to Mrs. Tingley while abroad, through a slightly “occult” coincidence. During the summer of 1897, the laudation of Mrs. Tingley as “successor” to Mr. Judge and as “Leader of the Theosophical Movement throughout the world” reached such a pitch of enthusiasm that all lesser lights were eclipsed or shone as mere satellites.

As the year wore on, however, signs of discontent began to manifest. F. T. Hargrove resigned from the Presidency and retired from his editorial duties on Theosophy. August Neresheimer and Mrs. Archibald Keightley (previously Mrs. Julia Campbell Ver Planck, who, as “Jasper Niemand,” had written for the Path during Judge’s lifetime), towhose joint careMr.Judge hadwilled thePath,fell out overmatters of editorial policy, Mrs. Keightley supporting Hargrove, and Mr. Neresheimer siding with Mrs. Tingley. In an E.S.T. circular dated September 3, 1897, Mrs. Tingley let it be known that she had “suggested” Mr.Hargrove forthe Presidency because, asshe explained, “I knew at that crisis he was the only available man to fill the place.” A few months later, Mr. Hargrove was to make a similar admission of a muchgravernature, atthe timeof the 1898Convention.

The atmosphere of rivalry between Mr. Hargrove and Mrs. Tingley was now so tense as to affect the entire E.S.T. and the membership of the T. S. in A. The date for the Convention was moved up to February, instead of April, its customary time in all previous years. A new organization, to be called the “Universal Brotherhood,” was planned outfor presentation attheConvention.TheT. S. inA.wasto bemerged with the “Universal Brotherhood.” Other plans were being laid by Mr. Hargrove and his followers. A circular sought signatures to support Hargrove as President of the Society, naming Mr. Neresheimer as Treasurer and reviving H.P.B.’s old office, that of Corresponding Secretary, for Mrs. Tingley. Neresheimer promptly repudiated this ticket. Hargrove countered with a circular declaring that “serious and obvious defects exist in the management of the society,” and, without naming Mrs. Tingley, argued against her overwhelming authority. Mrs. Tingley, in turn, issued an E.S.T. circular warning against “absolute disloyalty” and plans that would be “detrimental to the interests of the Theosophical Society.”

The 1898 Convention met in Chicago on February 18. The delegates were given printed copies of the program for creating the “Universal Brotherhood.” Almost unanimously, they adopted the plan for the new organization, under which the T. S. in A. became a department of the “Universal Brother4 Hood.” Mrs. Tingley became Leader and “Official Head” of both organizations with the right to veto even amendments to the constitution which provided her with every conceivable power. Under the new constitution she could appoint or remove any Officers of the “Universal Brotherhood” and enjoyed supreme control over all branches and lodges governed by the new organization.   

Hargrove and his followers now withdrew from the Convention and repaired to another hall to hold a convention of their own. They passed resolutions calling the Chicago Convention illegal, reaffirmed the 1895 Constitution of the T. S. in A., and elected A. H. 5 Spencer as Acting President. So far as numbers were concerned, Mr. Hargrove captained a forlorn hope. More than 95 per cent of the membership ratified the action of the Chicago Convention, only 200 out of a total of some 6,000 members joining with Hargrove and his associates. But Mr. Hargrove had not done with his protests against the course of events within the Society under the leadership of Mrs. Tingley. On March 1, 1898, he published a documentary record of a meeting he had called and presided over in Chicago on February 19, at which time he read copies of a series of letters addressed by him to Mrs. Tingley. The burden of this correspondence is to the effect that he, Hargrove, had made Mrs. Tingley the Outer Head, and that now he realized he had made a serious mistake. He thereupon removed her from that office, saying that he did so “by Master’s order.” He added that “The Outer Head to follow you has already been appointed by the Master.” Specifically, regarding Mrs. Tingley’s elevation to the status of Judge's “successor,” Hargrove wrote on January 30, 1898:
Now, my dear friend, you have made an awful mess of it—that is the simple truth. You were run in as O[uter] H[ead] as the only person in sight who was ready to hand at the time. We were all of us heartily glad to welcome you, for you solved the problem which confronted us—who was to be O.H.; you were a sort of neutral centre around which we could congregate. And most of us fairly yelled with delight, for you solved our difficulty and we had ample proofs that some members of the Lodge were working through you and that you had high and rare mediumistic and psychic gifts and that you were a disciple of the Lodge. So things went swimmingly for a time.
Our enthusiasm and anxiety to see all go well carried some of us too far—carried me too far to the extent of . . . Leading me to use my personal influence with people to get them to accept you as O. H. I thought it was for the good of the work, but since then I have learned better. [Italics added.]

The correspondence published by Mr. Hargrove and his comments about private meetings of the Council held after Mr. Judge's death make it reasonably apparent that Hargrove’s influence, rather than any written instructions from Mr. Judge, led the Council to declare that “Promise” or Mrs. Tingley was Judge’s “occult successor.” Further evidence of some sort of fantastic juggling of the facts, whether by psychic glamor or by deliberate, if pious, falsification—which, or how, will probably never be finally determined—lies in a letter of Joseph H. Fussell to a New Zealand 6 member, the Rev. S. J. Neill. This letter is in Mr. Fussell’s own handwriting and is dated March 28, 1896—the day before that on which Mr. Fussell, with six others, solemnly approved all that E. T. Hargrove asserted concerning the “instructions” from Mr. Judge. The letter is as follows:

March 28,’ 96 144 Madison Ave. New York
Rev. S. J. Neill, Auckland, N. Z. 
Dear Bro. Neill,
I know you will wish to hear concerning E.S.T. matters and the status of affairs since the passing away of the Outer Head of the E.S.T.
So far as is at present known W.Q.J. has left no directions in regard to carrying on the work of the School. Of course if he has done this, such directions will be followed.
An informal meetingwas held last Sunday afternoon (Mar. 22) atthe house of C. A. Griscom, Jr. to talk over matters relating to the work. There were presentC.A.Griscom,Jr.,E.A.Neresheimer, Jas.M.Pryse,E.T.Hargrove,C. F.'Wright,HT.Patterson,A.H.Spencer,E.B.PageandJ.H.Fussell.

In regard to the E.S.T. the following plan was proposed. That in the event of there being no directions left by Mr. Judge, a circular letter be sent out, signed by the above named and other New York members of the School to all E.S.T. members in America, suggesting that a Council be formed to carry on the routine work of the School, such Council to be concerned solely with this and having no authority as teachers or in strictly esoteric matters. Members will be asked to sign and return a printed slip to the effect that they approve of the plan for organization, etc.
The above is only a rough statement of the idea, but its purpose is to get the members to hold together and to coordinate the efforts of all so that we may be kept in touch with one another.
As soon as such Council is formed we will have a basis from which to work and be able to cooperate with the Council in the Eastern Division appointed by Mr. Judge.
Of course nothing will be done in this matter until we are assured that no directions have been found among the Chief ’s papers.
I will keep you informed of anything that may be done or that may turn up in regard to the work. 
With good wishes to you all,
Fraternally yours,
(Signed) Joseph H. Fussell

It was this same Fussell who, on March 29, 1896, solemnly assured the E.S.T. meeting in New York: “I wish to say first that I know of my own knowledge that what our Brother Ernest T. Hargrove has stated is true. . . .” Hargrove had unequivocally claimed the discovery of “papers” of Mr. Judge directing the formation of the Council and indicating the identity of the new “Outer Head.” But Mr. Fussell, on March 28, says that the Council was proposed as a “suggestion” to be submitted to members of the E.S.T. for their approval!

Who is telling the truth, and when is he telling the truth? Was Fussell telling the truth to Neill? Then why did he sign the pamphlet dated April 3, asserting that Mr. Judge had ordered the formation of the Council? If Hargrove is telling the truth in his letter of January 30, 1898, to Mrs. Tingley, then he, supported by seven other members of the Council, was merely using his “influence” to ensconce Mrs. Tingley as “occult” successor to Judge, although there were no clear directions from Mr. Judge at all.

As to Mr. Judge’s effects, this much is known: Almost at once after the funeral services, E. A. Neresheimer and C. A. Griscom went to Mrs. Judge and asked and obtained from her the keys to Mr. Judge’s desk and to the safe-deposit box in which Mr. Judge kept his personal papers. Later on, when Mrs. Judge visited the headquarters she found no private papers of Mr. Judge in his desk, and on going to the safe deposit box, found it empty. Whatever papers were taken from these places have never been produced or identified as such. In any event, Mr. Fussell knew nothing of any “directions” several days later, on March 28, when he wrote to the Rev. S. J. Neill.

The later history of the Universal Brotherhood and Theosophical Society founded by Mrs. Tingley* is marked by little except the similar claims of her “successor” to similar occult distinction. Mrs. Tingley died at Point Loma on July 11, 1929. In a printed letter, dated July 29, 1929, addressed to both the “exoteric” members of the Point Loma society and to the “members of its E.S.,” Dr. Gottfried de Purucker, who had long been associated with Mrs. Tingley, made claim to occult successorship on his own behalf. This letter said in part:
All the Comrades here feel a supreme confidence in the future, for they know that the Work is fully safeguarded, and thanks be to the immortal gods! they trust the one who now assumes the reins of government in the line of succession from H.P.B., W.Q.J., and K.T. . . .
In assuming the heavy burden of responsibility that has devolved upon me by K.T.’s appointment of me to succeed her. . . . I realize that, due to the work of our blessed K.T., more even than to the work of my two previous great Predecessors, our members have been trained, taught to reflect and to have an intuitive realization of what the Theosophical Movement means, not only to ourselves, but to Humanity.
Dr. de Purucker reaches an unprecedented climax for “successors” in informing the membership of his own occult status and relationships:
Thrice recently, before and since the passing of K.T., has one of the Great Teachers been with me here in Lomaland. I will open my heart to you and tell you something. The two Masters who originally founded the Theosophical Society, and who are the Chiefs of the E.S., are still working with the Society both inner and outer, and for it. . . . Each of these two has progressed far along the Path of Initiation since H.P.B.’s days, . . .
I have seen and conversed with Master M. within this last month, and twice has Master K.H. been in my office, once alone, and once with a chela, . . .

Later in the year, on September 1, Dr. de Purucker addressed another letter to the membership, asking for a new constitu- tion, to enable him, as he explained, to make better use of the “forces” now focussing upon his humble person. Describing them, he said: “The spiritual and intellectual forces pouring through me from the Great Lodge at times seem almost to tear into pieces the fabric of my being, so strong are they. . . .” The members responded by according the new “Leader” unqualified power to make the Society’s policy, “to take such steps or measures as in his judgment shall be necessary for the safeguarding of the best interests of the Theosophical Society,” and “to remove from office any officer of The Theosophical Society when the Leader shall deem such action to be for the best interests of the Society.

The second letter also contained the following assurances: . . . as I am the intermediary or mediator between the Great Lodge of the Masters of Compassion and Wisdom and the general membership of the T. S., and more particularly of the ES.: being the channel through which the Lodge-forces pour: so also am I therefore the Teacher, and will hand on what I may and can to those who prove themselves fit and ready to receive. Consequently, it will be my duty as soon as time and strength permit me to do so, to issue new E.S. teachings of a far deeper and more esoteric kind than those which were issued even by H.P.B. or by W.Q.J., or by our beloved, Katherine Tingley. This I can do for the simple reason that these, my three great Predecessors, never had the opportunity to do what Karman now impels and compels me to do: to besiege the Portals of Destiny and to open a way into the Mysteries, because the members through the life-work of our beloved K.T., are now ready to hear and therefore to receive what I can give them—an opportunity of incalculably splendid promise which neither H.P.B. nor W.Q.J. nor even K.T. had.

This claim of occult successorship was to be Dr. de Purucker’s theme throughout his tenure of office as “Leader” of the Point Loma Theosophical Society. Except for his effort, in 1931, on the anniversary of the birth of H. P. Blavatsky, to gather the members of the other Theosophical Societies into the “true” Society at Point Loma—a gesture of “fraternization” and “reunion” which could hardly succeed so long as Mrs. Besant at Adyar, and Dr. de Purucker at Point Loma, both claimed to represent the “true” Theosophical succession—the régime of Dr. de Purucker was uneventful. Lacking in Mrs. Tingley’s capacities for showmanship, the Point Loma Leader was driven to various methods of raising money to hold the organization together. In his third letter, the dues of the Society were announced as $12.00 annually, and later an attempt was made to float a loan of $400,000 through Trust Certificates sold to the devoted members. Finally, early in 1942, the Society sold its holdings of land on Point Loma and removed in June to Covina, California. The Point Loma property acquired in Mrs. Tingley’s time had originally amounted to 330 acres, on which a number of buildings had been erected to house the activities of the Society—which included a “Theosophical University”—and to provide living quarters for officials and resident members. At the time of the sale, these holdings had diminished to 78 acres. The next location was a 41-acre property near Covina, but the Society has recently announced the transfer of its headquarters to another location.

On September 27, 1942, shortly after the removal of the headquarters to Covina, Dr. de Purucker died of a heart attack at the age of 68 years. After a few days, it was announced that the affairs of the Society were being governed by a fivemember “cabinet,” and on October 8, Iverson L. Harris, chairman of the cabinet, issued the following statement:
The Theosophical Society, ever since its foundation, has been under direction of an uninterrupted succession of leaders and the present situation of its being in charge of members of the late leader’s cabinet is merely temporary, the normal procedure during the interval between the passing of one leader and the succession of the next.
Dr. de Purucker left full and detailed instructions to his cabinet as to the carrying out of his wishes in the event of his decease. These are being carried out with full approval and confidence of members 7 of the society here and elsewhere.

Three years later, The Theosophical Forum, the official organ of the Society, announced that Colonel Arthur L. Conger had been elected 8 to succeed Dr. de Purucker as Leader. The claims made for Col. Conger, while more subdued, perhaps, were in no significant way different from those made either by or for Mrs. Tingley and de Purucker. A sample of the sort of thing said about Col. Conger is provided by a review in the Theosophical Forum for February, 1948, in which the writer, G. F. Knoche, explains why neither Mrs. Tingley, nor G. de P. nor Col. Conger were either long or regular members of the Point Loma E.S. prior to their 9 “appointments” as “Outer Heads.” The explanation is this:
What does all this reveal? First, that close as is the hidden bond between a teacher and his successor, the teacher himself may or may not be fully aware who is to succeed him. Second, that significantly enough, no one of our teachers has ever formally appointed his successor. If we believe, as we verbally proclaim, that the T. S. is under the protective care of Masters, isn’t it obvious then that They alone exercise the right of appointment? Isn’t it equally plain that each one of the successors-to-be must de facto have been under the direct training of a Master?

A further point of interest in this article by Miss Knoche relates to the book under review, which has the title, The Dialogues of G. de Purucker, and for contents reproduces “the private record of the Katherine Tingley Memorial Group, an esoteric body formed by G. de Purucker shortly after he assumed the headship of the Theosophical Society in 1929.” According to the reviewer, Col. Conger, the succeeding leader, was “authorized to publish broadcast” this record of “esoteric teachings.” These revelations, the reviewer maintains, were made public in accordance with what is alleged to be the custom of the initiates of history. “The T.S.,” she declares, “has faithfully followed the archaic rule.” The review then quotes from E.S. papers of Mr. Judge as to what is to be held exoteric and what is not to be revealed and proceeds to recall that Dr. de Purucker taught “openly” what Judge had directed was to be kept secret. This is offered in evidence, one supposes, that Dr. de Purucker had the same authority or rather more authority than Judge in determining what might be made into “public” teachings. And Col. Conger, the next in line, was privileged to make still further disclosures in the publication of de Purucker’ssecret teachings.

There is a natural question that arises concerning all this, and Miss Knoche quite properly asks it:
. .if all that was esoteric is published, what then will the E.S. consist of? What is there left for those students whose hearts yearn for more than the exoteric works provide?

The answer given is that the “higher degrees” hold still greater secrets, and while the K. T. Memorial Group was de Purucker’s E.S., “there may have been a still more secret group of individuals offered an opportunity to strengthen and inspiritthe K.T.M.G.” But these groups “die,” it is argued, with the death of each “successor.” Thus the real teacher is a person, and not the “message” which thatteacherimparts.Afterthe death of a leader,studentsmay hope to be led by a “strong karmic guide into the new esoteric channel opened bythesucceedingTeacher.”

Even a mere “exoteric” student of H. P. Blavatsky and William Q. Judge will be able to recognize the wide abyss which separates these novel doctrines from the original teachings concerning occult discipleship and esoteric instructions.

There is little further to relate concerning the activities of the Covina society, except, perhaps, to say that they are much diminished since the flamboyant days of Mrs. Tingley’s rule, and that, a year or so after the war, some of the oldest and most faithful of the resident members were obliged to leave the Covina headquarters, apparently to give wider scope to the younger members. Among those leaving were Iverson L. Harris, quoted above as chairman of Dr. de Purucker’s Cabinet; Mr. W. Emmett Small, long connected with the work of issuing the Theosophical Forum; and several others.

Col. Arthur L. Conger, the third of the leaders in the Covina Society “succession,” died of a heart attack on February 22, 1951, in his seventy—ninth year. Seven days later, on March 1, it was announced that James A. Long, a former adviser and consultant of the United States Department of State, is the “new Head” of the Society, succeeding Col. Conger. Mr. Long told the press that the Society’s headquarters are being moved to Altadena, where 10 property is being acquired.