p. 229 | Withdrawing Support by John Norton Loughborough

Pacific Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Oakland, Cal. · May 27, 1875

Withdrawing Support.

By John Norton Loughborough

THE real supporters of good reliable journals, and those who contribute of their energies and means to make them a success, are generally the last ones to talk of "withdrawing support." It is amusing to look the case over and see who such talk, as a general rule, emanates from.

I call to mind a circumstance in the past history of the Advent Review, which will serve as an illustration. Some twenty years ago, a small faction, in one of the Western States, took a notion that they did not like the Review, because it did not favor their peculiar ideas of the age to come, but followed the even tenor of its way, publishing the great truths of the third angel's message as the distinct and specific truth for the times.

The opposition with this faction went so far that they thought they must do all in their power against the Review. As they could neither get it into a quarrel with them, nor make it teach their jargon, they concluded it must have its voice silenced. Knowing that a paper could not be published without means, they assembled in conference and gravely "voted to withdraw their support from the Review." When the publishers of the Review read the record of this vote in a letter which had been hastened to their office from the meeting, it occurred to them that they would look over their lists to see how much their finances were to be affected by the loss of this score or so of names.

The list, with account of each was produced, when, lo! it was discovered that with hardly an exception they were all behind on their papers, and some had paid nothing for over two years. The withdrawal of such "support" of course was a relief to the Review instead of any embarrassment. The loss of such confusing elements was speedily made up by many scores of consistent, substantial souls embracing the truth, who became permanent friends of the cause and real supporters of the Review.

In conducting the Signs we meet with some who, after all the explanations, don't exactly see how it is done, and are hastily showing their spite by ordering their paper stopped, for which they have paid nothing for over a year. One such case I was about to refer to, but before quoting the letter, I wish to state the facts. When the Signs was started, it was plainly stated in its terms: "$2.00 a year to those wishing to pay a subscription price, and free to others so far as sustained by the donations of the liberal." Some lists of subscribers came in, as high as forty, fifty, and in one case over a hundred to one post office, with no donation of the liberal to pay for them.

After a time a statement was made that the actual cost of publishing 4000 copies of the Signs was $2.00 each paper for one year. Those who had sent these free lists were requested to see if the papers were read with profit, and if those who were reading were so disposed, give them an opportunity to contribute for the support of the paper.

After some have had the paper free for nearly a year, a final effort is to be made to learn the standing of the lists, and Bro. White wrote an article showing that an actual expense of several hundred dollars over receipts had been incurred in publishing the Signs to that date. He requested those who did not want the Signs longer to stop it, and those who wished to contribute for its indebtedness and support to send in their donations for that purpose from $2.00 to $25.00 as they felt disposed.

Now somebody "got hit." Who was it? Some brother who had donated $30.00 and sent the paper to several of his friends free? No. It comes from one who has been reading the paper free for over a year. He says:

"GENTLEMEN SIRS: I write to ask you to DISCONTINUE MY PAPER. In the last paper, No. 26, is an article written by James White, (page 208, first column), which interests me, and I should think it would every other non-paying subscriber. I do not wish to be longer considered a BURDEN and consequently UNWORTHY. Please stop my paper and send it to somebody that will pay all the way from $2.00 to $25.00 a year for it, and I think it will be quite a profitable business."

The subscriber does not seem to see the point yet, only so far as to get a little vexed because his paper and several hundred more like it, should cost somebody money to print them. No one has been asked to pay $25.00 for the Signs. These donations are for printing the papers of those who have been reading the Signs (we trust many of them with profit) without money and without price. As our friend requests it, we will close his subscription with this number, merely suggesting that he tell us where the profit comes in, on those papers that we furnished to subscribers one year for which nothing is paid by them. J. N. L.