European Canvassing Work by L. R. Conradi

Review and Herald Publishing Association · Takoma Park Station, Washington, D. C. · Jul 12, 1906

European Canvassing Work

By L. R. Conradi

L. R. CONRADI

It is now nineteen years since the canvassing work began in Europe. Prior to that time, our laborers were glad if they could even be successful in giving away our journals and pamphlets. But as books were provided, and the proper instruction given our brethren, the work gradually developed. In some countries we have had difficulties to contend with that are unknown in the States.

To give one or two examples: In Switzerland there is, even until to-day, a high license for canvassers, amounting to twenty or thirty dollars per annum, for the individual permission to sell books. In Germany, the license costs from four to fifteen dollars a person, yearly.

Aside from the item of expense, there are a great many other restrictions. The German canvasser must be twenty-five years old, and he must have a recommendation from the police as to his moral character for the last three to five years. Then there is the district committee, whose duty it is to look after the books that are circulated, and to issue the permission for their circulation, so that there may be nothing in them that could give moral or religious offense to the people.

Now, while all these laws were made with good intentions, their authors having in mind only the protection of the public against immoral literature, or anything that would denounce religion, yet this latter provision can easily be misapplied.

In spite of all these things, our canvassing work has grown until there are now in the German Union 189 canvassers, whose sales last year, together with the sales of the tract society, amounted to about $65,000; Great Britain reports 122 canvassers, and sales for $67,000, about half of which the regular canvassers are responsible for; Scandinavia had 83 canvassers, with sales amounting to $39,000; and the Latin Union, eight canvassers, and sales for $3,700, making a total for 1905 of $174,700 for this field. Eternity alone will reveal what is being accomplished by the 400 faithful canvassers of Europe.

Not only do we have a good stock of books in the English, German, Danish-Norwegian, Swedish, French, and Dutch, but we are getting out books in the Spanish, Portuguese, Icelandic, Finnish, Welsh, Russian, Polish, Bohemian, Lettish, Livonian, Esthonian, Hungarian, Arabic, and Italian, and small publications in a number of other languages.

While the Lord has given us such efficient means for the circulation of present truth, the enemy is not at all asleep. He tries in every way possible to hinder this work. One of the greatest difficulties we have seems to be in the very country of the Reformation itself—in the German empire. Here dwell about sixty millions of people, one third of whom are Catholics, while the other two thirds profess Protestantism, although there are millions who really do not believe in any religion at all.

For some years our canvassers, when handing in their list of books to the district authorities, would find certain of the publications stricken from the list; and two years ago we found that twenty had thus been forbidden. Upon inquiring, we discovered that the opposition came from a pastor in the kingdom of Saxony. We visited the pastor, and called upon the chairman of the district committee, and finally secured an interview with the minister of morals and religion, to whom we submitted the doubtful books for examination. We were able to have this decision revoked. The great trouble is, if an adverse decision of this sort is rendered in one part of the empire, it is published in the government organ, and circulated throughout the country, so that a decision against us in one kingdom or principality is very apt to affect our securing permission for the circulation of the literature in other parts of the empire.

Since our canvassers have been pushing out more and more into Catholic neighborhoods the last few years, we have found still greater opposition to meet, and lately, in the city of Dusseldorf, not less than twenty of our publications had been stricken out. This was reduced upon our strong protest until finally only two books remained—“Great Controversy,” and the book “Revelation,” by the writer.

After this decision, there was only one way open, and that was to appeal to the highest administrative court in Berlin. We appealed to this court in writing, and Sept. 21, 1905, they confirmed the decision taken by the lower court regarding the two books. There was one way still left,—that some one appear personally before that court.

Jan. 25, 1906, the writer himself took up the matter in the name of the canvasser who had been refused the permission to sell these two books. Besides the president of the court, there were present six of the higher judges, the court secretary, a reporter of a leading Berlin paper, and two of our people. The decision of this court had been rendered in writing substantially as follows:—

“In the Name of the King:

“On the appeal of the plaintiff, is the decision of Dusseldorf, June 20, 1905, confirmed. The costs of the appeal must

be borne by the plaintiff. In setting the cost, the object of contention is valued at one hundred marks.

“The District Committee of Dusseldorf has by its decision of June 20, 1905, denied to the plaintiff a license to circulate the two books published by the International Tract Society in Hamburg—‘Great Controversy,’ by E. G. White, and the ‘Revelation of Jesus Christ,’ by L. R. Conradi, basing their decision on Sec. 56, par. 12, of the Statutory Laws for the Trades, because these books are apt to give religious offense to the Catholic population in matters of religion. Sec. 56, par. 12, states that in house-to-house canvassing there shall be excluded literature which is apt to give offense in matters of morals or religion. This ruling can not be understood as the plaintiff interprets it—that only those publications which would offend all religious persons, are to be excluded; but it is also to be understood as meaning that offense which might be caused to any part of the population on account of their belonging to any particular creed. This interpretation of the legislation is sustained by par. 166, of the Imperial Code of Laws, in which there is granted special protection to all Christian churches, and to all religious societies and other institutions that have the right of incorporation in the empire. In accordance to this, there is to be in the sense of Sec. 56, par. 12, of the statute, the prevention of any offense which might be caused through the circulation of printed matter to the members of the different Christian confessions. The interpretation of the lower court, that Sec. 56 is also to be applied if there is the question of offense only to the Catholic portion of the community, is therefore free from legal error.

“The result is attained by an investigation of the two books in question, as to whether they give any offense in this legal sense. It does not matter whether the passages in these books which are said to give offense are only extracts from other works, or are the words of the author himself; nor does it matter what the object of the books is, or whether the controversy conducted in them be just; nor does it matter whether these publications would be tolerated according to the criminal laws, or the laws of the press. The sense and purpose of the statute in Sec. 56 go farther than this: in principle, there is to be excluded from house-to-house canvassing any literature apt to give cause for any well-grounded offense in religious matters, because this manner of circulating printing matter in which the agent approaches unsolicited any person and offers his merchandise carries with it the danger of giving offense in a special way. The only question is, whether the real contents of the two controverted books, if circulated by the canvasser, would give offense to the people. This is to be affirmed with regard to the Catholic portion of the community, in harmony with the decision rendered by the lower court, based on the following passages from the two works, directed with great severity against the institution of the Catholic Church.”

Then the document quotes from “Great Controversy,” chapter 3, on “The Apostasy,” where the papacy is said to be the “man of sin” referred to in 2 Thessalonians 2; chapter 35, “Character and Aims of the Papacy,” where the confession is mentioned. In the book on “Revelation,” pages 56, 57, 65, 66, are referred to, where Pergamos and Isabel are spoken of. Then the decision continues:—

“There can be no doubt that books having such contents are apt to give offense to the Catholic portion of the community in the sense of Sec. 56, par. 12, in matters of religion. In view of this, the decision of the lower court is to be confirmed.”

Naturally, this decision thus rendered will be used as a precedent in all future decisions, in dealing with any books that in any way show up the true character of Romanism.

As remarked before, the writer had the privilege of appearing and speaking before these judges, and stating to them the real purpose of the books—that they are not directed against any person, but against a system of religion; and that if the law be interpreted in this manner, it will be but a short time until no religious literature can be circulated through the canvasser, for naturally enough the Romanists would be offended at any Protestant publications, and the Protestants would be offended by Catholic literature. That this is a danger, I produced as proof a leading Lutheran paper, in which an account is given of the bitter complaint of the Lutheran pastors at their last synod, because in some Catholic districts all Lutheran literature is excluded.

I was then requested to read all the passages in question. I did this, taking about an hour, during which the best of attention was given to what I said. When the judges retired, the reporter of one of the leading Berlin papers said that as long as we could not show that there was a legal error, the judges would quickly return, simply upholding their previously rendered decision, without taking time to go into the details of the arguments I had presented. However, to the reporter’s surprise, the judges were out nearly an hour, and instead of making a simple statement, they went again into all the details in reply to my argument, showing that it would not matter whether the author’s words were offensive, or whether it were the words he had quoted from some one else—even from a generally recognized authority, such as Wylie’s work on the papacy, that had received the prize of the Evangelical Alliance. It was stated that nothing whatever would hinder our circulating these works through the book trade as long as they could not be shown to contain anything criminally wrong.

The Berliner Tageblatt of Jan. 29, 1906, which is a leading Berlin daily, gave this comment on the decision:— “It will soon be four hundred years since Luther published his attacks on the pope, which were circulated in all corners of the German empire, through the canvasser. But we have happily reached a point where publications which contain an attack on the pope can be no longer offered for sale by house-to-house canvassing in the German empire. The decision is based on an ordinance of the Statutory Laws of the Trades, whereby house-to-house canvassing for literature can be forbidden if the printed matter is apt to give offense in morals or religion.”

Here it gives the decision of the highest administrative court, and then closes with these remarks:—

“Legislatures can see from this decision, how carefully they must formulate their laws in order not to give the courts any chance to put another sense into them. Evidently the legislature understood under ‘religious offense,’ only insulting attacks upon religion, but did not refer to an attack against the pope; but courts only too often act in harmony with the principle, ‘Legt ihr’s nicht aus, so legt ihr’s unter.’ (This is a German play on words, to indicate that either you explain the meaning, or else you substitute it.) Thus we have reached that condition of things where most of Luther’s writings, for example, would be excluded from house-to-house canvassing.”

I think these words and sentiments speak for themselves. But we should not be in the least discouraged by them. The Lord, who has helped thus far, has promised to be our wisdom and strength, and he will continue with his humble children in the future. However, we see that by appealing the case, we are able to reach a class of men who would probably never attend our public lectures. As they have to render decisions, they naturally have to read all these different books, and so become fully conversant with the truth. Thus the Lord is providing a means whereby the message shall be known even in the courts of justice in the land.