disentitle her to a conspicuous recognition in the Red Cross Building.
EX-SECRETARY OF STATE RICHARD OLNEY (in 1917). (The eminent American
selected by the “Remonstrants” in 1903, and unanimously approved by
the Red Cross, to name the members of the Red Cross Proctor
Committee—to investigate the “charges.”)
[Illustration:
GROVER CLEVELAND
The President, March 4, 1885–March 4, 1889; March 4, 1893–March 4,
1897
Miss Barton, I want you to represent the United States at the
International Red Cross Conference at Carlsruhe, Germany.
FREDERICK T. FRELINGHUYSEN (in 1887),
Secretary of State, under Grover Cleveland.
I thank you, Mr. Secretary, but I cannot do so; I am ill.—CLARA
BARTON.
Miss Barton, all the country knows what you have done, and are more
than satisfied. Regarding your illness, you have had too much fresh
water, Miss Barton, I recommend salt.—FREDERICK T. FRELINGHUYSEN.
]
There is, and can be, no foundation for such a charge.... During all
the twenty-five years that Miss Barton has devoted herself to the Red
Cross work she has been in receipt of an individual income which it
has been her pleasure to use in defraying her own expenses and for
such helpers as the extensive correspondence compelled.
(Signed Red Cross Committee
By WALTER P. PHILLIPS Chairman,
SAMUEL M. JARVIS,
J. B. HUBBELL.)
(In a Memorial to Congress, March 3, 1903—from House Document No. 552,
Vol. 49, 58th Cong.)
Wherein ... was removed from his position, under Miss Barton, he said:
“I can stand a great deal of cuffing, but then my time will come, so
help me God I will not humbly submit to all I am having to bear.” ...
was brought to Washington from a distant State ... principal witness
for the “Remonstrants.” Mr. Stebbins and I were convinced that ...’s
object was blackmail.
W. H. SEARS, Attorney for Red Cross.
... conspired to supplant Miss Barton by destroying her name and fame.
Miss Barton resigned in my favor. Hoping to secure justice for Miss
Barton I accepted the Presidency, but finding that I would be unable
to assume the onerous duties as her successor, with Miss ...’s
insatiable desire to be at the head of the Red Cross, I resigned in
favor of a party Miss ... dared not oppose. Affidavit by MRS. JOHN A.
LOGAN. (From a book of 177 pages by General W. H. Sears, in a report
to the Library Committee of Congress, in 1916.)
... not one of whom (“remonstrants”) ever went to a field nor gave a
dollar, above fees; and half of whom were never known as members until
now they appear in protest against the management. CLARA BARTON
(1903).
As to the threat of an investigation, if there be any, Miss Barton
cannot assent that it be suppressed by any act of hers. Red Cross
Committee, 1903. From House Document No. 552, Vol. 49th, 58th
Congress.
The Red Cross up to this time, 1898, had kept clear of political
rings, and uncontaminated. Miss Barton was the acknowledged chief in
authority. The Society had begun to win the most enviable reputation;
it was growing to be a power; and politicians who had hogged
everything else, from a cross-roads postoffice to a foreign minister,
had begun to lay plans for displacing Miss Barton with a wife, niece,
or daughter of a Washington politician. Miss Barton was probably not
aware of this unholy scheme at this time. Perhaps, even if she had
been, it would not have disturbed the serenity of her countenance for
she was working for God and humanity. _Under the Red Cross; or the
Spanish-American War_ (Page No. 154, book published 1898; Author,
Doctor Henry M. Lathrop; Editor, John R. Musick.)
BLACKMAIL ALLEGED—“CONGRESSIONAL INVESTIGATION”—TRUTH OF HISTORY
Joan of Arc was born in 1410; Clara Barton in 1821—411 years
later. The former became the leader of the armies of France; the
latter, the leader of humanitarianism in America. Each was a
patriot—self-sacrificing—serving not for self-glory, but for a
great cause. The little clique of politicians and military
aristocracy plied Joan of Arc for five months with “catch
questions” on “trumped-up” charges, then condemned her to be
burned at the stake. The little clique of politicians and social
aristocracy plied Clara Barton with “catch questions” on
“trumped-up” charges, then tried to condemn her to eternal
ignominy. General Leonard Wood, humanity’s friend and chivalric,
with whom Clara Barton served in the camp, the hospital, and on
the battlefield, says: “There is a call for women actuated by the
same spirit of service as a Deborah, a Joan of Arc, a Molly
Pitcher—women who will carry forward the work begun by Clara
Barton and Florence Nightingale.”
Let the ends thou aimest at be thy country’s
Thy God’s and Truth.
Clara Barton met her fate in the Nation’s Capital. Says _The Fra_: “The
clique went before Congress and secured an amended charter to the Red
Cross, which included none of Miss Barton’s friends. Because the name of
Clara Barton headed the list, the bill was passed; the members of
Congress supposed it was a bill that Miss Barton wanted. This was done
without Miss Barton’s knowledge or consent. However, Miss Barton was
ignored by the new organization. Her name has never been mentioned in
their reports or publications; she has never been invited to attend any
meeting of the Society which she had created, and established in this
country.”
The Red Cross then was non politics, non society, non salary, non graft.
President Clara Barton was obdurate, non pliable. She could not _be
used_. Her virtues became her undoing. She was retired. From Europe, for
inspiration in America, was brought the English heroine;—suppressed or
belittled, the American Red Cross Mother in semi-official literature,
“At Home and Abroad.” The _coup_ won—the conspiracy completely
triumphed. And how the official records disclose.
Washington is the rendezvous of “in full dress”
criminals—character-assassins,—“that strange bedlam composed largely of
social climbers and official poseurs.” They carry a stiletto, half
truth, but in desperate cases make use of slander, of forty-five
calibre. Their prospective victims range from rich Uncle Sam down to a
poor lone woman, of charity. They ply their vocations sometimes, through
envy, for self-glorification; sometimes, through ambition, for
self-exaltation. While Washington was having the _honor_ of dishonoring
the great American philanthropist, a western town was offering as a
present to her a fifty thousand dollar home, just to have the honor of
her presence there. Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley, Miss Barton’s three
cospirits and co-workers for humanity, met their fate while guarded by
detectives; under certain customs prevailing in the West and South, as
there is no protection from slander against a woman, “Chivalry” would
have come to the rescue of defenseless Clara Barton.
There is an official Red Cross report to Congress, made in 1903, said
report on file in House Document No. 552, Vol. 49, 58th Congress,
statements of historic interest relating to the status of Red Cross
affairs about that time. _In re_ the proposed annuity of $2,500 and the
Honorary Presidency for Life, should Clara Barton consent to permit the
minority membership _thereafter to control the Red Cross_, and other
matters relating thereto, appear the following in that report:
Since the filing of their (the remonstrants) Memorial in Congress, at
least two thousand newspapers, in the country and out of it, have
openly published these damaging statements, without the slightest
knowledge of the facts.
The memorial includes an ex parte statement.—It is greatly to be
regretted that such action should have been taken—without giving a
hearing to the majority of the organization, or to Miss Barton
herself.
[Illustration:
From a photograph taken at St. Petersburg, Russia, July, 1902, at the
time the Decoration of the Red Cross was conferred on Clara Barton
by the Czar and Empress Dowager.
]
[Illustration:
From a photograph taken in 1904, at the time when occurred the
so-called “investigation” of Clara Barton, at Washington, D. C.
]
[Illustration:
From a photograph taken in Washington, D. C., in 1878.
]
[Illustration:
From a photograph taken in 1897, just before leaving the United States
for her work among the Reconcentrados in Cuba.
]
[Illustration:
From a photograph taken in 1882, just after Clara Barton had completed
the organization of the American Red Cross.
]
While there were seven States represented by members actually present
(at the meeting), the entire list of signers to the Memorial (by the
remonstrants), with one exception, were residents of Washington, D. C.
With one exception, not one of the twenty-five members has ever taken
part in Red Cross Field work for a single day;—and she valuing her
services, however, at $50.00 per week for two weeks, making a sum of
$100, which was allowed and paid by the board; nor were there any
records to show that, aside from their membership fees aggregating
about $160, they have ever contributed to the funds of the Red Cross,
while individual signers of this Memorial have drawn from it more than
500, in aggregate amount.
Clara Barton has never been a pensioner on the Red Cross Society, and
certainly could not assent to be placed in that relation. We may, too,
reasonably ask how these sticklers for correct form in all proceedings
can find authority, being only a small minority of the membership, to
offer such terms; and how can they undertake to barter its offices,
privileges, and funds for a compliance with their demands? They admit
they can stop the proceedings in Congress—for a consideration—thereby
indirectly admitting the purpose of their movement from the beginning.
The mere statement of the situation will suggest its difficulties. The
majority in control of the body is at a loss to know where and how,
under the charter or any of its bylaws, past or present, there can be
authority for such proceedings.
“That it was physically withstood,” says Clara Barton after her
retirement, “was beyond either the expectation or the intention;” “still
stamping on me;” “so long as I am _personally_ unharmed I expect nothing
more.” Fortunately for her country her life was spared, by her
“enemies,” eight years more; for in that eight years she did a work many
times more difficult than to have kept running her perfected and
well-oiled Red Cross machinery. She brought into existence a new
organization, of possible greater benefit to the American people than
the Red Cross, an organization with headquarters in Boston and branch
societies everywhere from Maine to California.
And why should she not have done so? About the time of her retirement
(in 1903) there was filed with Congress by a committee of the Red Cross
an official report, unanimously concurred in by the committee, in which
report appears the following: “At no time in her life has Miss Barton
been in sounder bodily or mental health, or better able to continue the
work to which her years of experience and natural endowments have
preeminently fitted her. Moreover, the nation’s confidence is Miss
Barton’s, and no hand can better guide its Red Cross work than hers.
While every right minded person will deplore the mental suffering,
anxiety, and personal humiliation inflicted upon one of the noblest
women that ever lived, it cannot be supposed that she will abandon her
life work on such a demand as this, or that she will retire from the
office to which she has been almost unanimously elected, while under
fire; nor would her friends permit it if she were so disposed.—We find
nothing in the opposition except malice, resentment, and the jealousy of
a few people whose ambition has been thwarted.”
Tis eminence that makes envy rise;
As fairest fruit attract the flies.
Successful with her new organization, the Red Cross a few years later
(in 1910) formed in its society a department to carry on relief as then
carried on in Miss Barton’s new organization, the department being of
like name—The First Aid Division. In her new field of humane service,
Clara Barton expended from her personal funds about $5,000, besides five
years of hard work, before she achieved success.
She was herself again; she was on the “firing line”; she had the support
of her former Red Cross field forces,—not one had deserted her. She
didn’t flee her “enemies” to Mexico, but to the “Hub”;—where, and in
which vicinity, she had enjoyed social amenities with the Julia Ward
Howes, the Wendell Phillips’, the George Bancrofts, the John B. Goughs,
the Louisa M. Alcotts, the Lucy Larcoms, the Mary Baker Eddys, the Henry
Wilsons, the Charles Sumners, the George F. Hoars. Either among such
then living or their friends, she had lost none of her prestige because
she had been attacked in the “Den of Character-Assassins.”
Be thou chaste as ice, as pure as snow,
Thou shalt not escape calumny.
On her “First Aid” Advisory Board were Lieutenant-General Nelson A.
Miles and ex-Governor John L. Bates, of Massachusetts; Dr. Eugene
Underhill, of Pennsylvania; Dr. Charles R. Dickson, of Canada; Dr.
Joseph Gardner, of Indiana. Associated with her in various other
capacities, also, were persons of national fame and widely-known
humanitarianism. She was unanimously elected and re-elected, while she
lived, the Active President of the organization—the organization known
as the National First Aid Association of America: now she is the
President _In Memoriam_.
In the House Records of 1903 and 1904 there is found the following:
“They (Remonstrants) suggest that Miss Barton is a party to loose and
improper arrangements for securing the needed accountability for
supervision of disbursements for money furnished in demand of exigency
of the Red Cross by the charitable public.” In 1916, a letter signed by
a leading Red Cross official was mailed to the members of the United
States Senate and the House of Representatives. In that letter, among
many other “charges,” was the following: “I think I have given
sufficient evidence to show why the dishonest appropriation of relief
funds for the personal use of Miss Barton makes the officials of the Red
Cross strongly opposed to having the memorial of such a woman placed in
a building that stands in remembrance of the noblest, finest, and most
self-sacrificing womanhood of America.”
It is inexcusable, on the part of a member of the present management of
the Red Cross, to make public “accusation” of Clara Barton’s
book-records without certification to that effect by an expert
accountant, in an official capacity, and then only confidentially to the
organization itself for some good purpose; and in no case to the public
in defamation, to support the position taken by an “enemy.” Similar
conduct, on the part of an employé in a well-ordered private corporation
would subject the guilty, probably, to dismissal in disgrace from the
service. If in the interest of public policy such information should be
made public, and become of record, it should be made officially public,
and through the President of the society.
In what has been done, _pro bono publico_ has had no
consideration. In publicly attacking the Red Cross Founder’s
book-records before the members of the National Legislature,
there should also have been considered that conditions now
are not as were the conditions a score of years ago. Then the
President-Vice-President-Chairman-Vice-Chairman-Comptroller-General
Manager received no salary; _now_ (in 1919) the annual salary of
four Red Cross officers is $41,400; $15,000 and $10,000
respectively, for Chairman and Vice-Chairman; $8,000 and $8,400
respectively, for Comptroller and General Manager. _In re_ the
attitude of the “Remonstrants” towards her, Clara Barton said: “I
am still unanimously bidden to work on for life; bear the burden
of an organization; meet its cost myself—and now threatened with
the expenses of the ‘investigation.’”
In consonance with her sentiment, and statement, “The foundation on
which all good government rests is conformity to its laws,” Clara Barton
in 1904 turned over to the new management all Red Cross books, official
papers, official records, public funds—all Red Cross matters of
whatsoever kind or nature. If there were evidence of defalcation, or
“dishonest appropriation of relief funds for the personal use of Miss
Barton,” then was the time to have made the charges, and in the criminal
court. “Instead, the _post mortem_ charges were made twelve years after
Clara Barton’s resignation of the Red Cross Presidency, and four years
after her death.”
Kings, queens and states,
Maids, matrons, nay, the secrets of the grave
This vituperous slander enters.
Under the laws of this country the accuser was estopped from making
“charges” in 1916; or at any other time, except in a court of competent
jurisdiction. Were it not for this wise provision the reputation of no
man nor woman, alive or dead, could have adequate protection from
“enemies,” in ambush. By what code of ethics, legal or moral, is such
_personal_ judgment against the dead rendered? And where is the
record-verdict of the “crime”? In five or six years of the
investigation, I have been unable to find any record that such “crime,”
as is alleged against Miss Barton, was committed. Nor do I find that a
criminal charge of any kind against her is of record in the criminal
court, the only institution under the laws of this country where a
person should be adjudged guilty of crime. I do find from the records,
however, that the Red Cross official making these charges was one of the
“Remonstrants” of 1903–4, and who then certified to Miss Barton’s
“_integrity_”; and also over her own signature proposed that Miss Barton
accept the Honorary Presidency of the Red Cross as a tribute to her
“_integrity_.”
“Loose and improper arrangements for securing the needed
accountability”; “such a woman”; “dishonest appropriation of relief
funds for the personal use of Clara Barton!” Says _The Fra_, then under
the management of Mr. and Mrs. Elbert Hubbard, “Such accusation is not
only the blunder of boors but it is crime and sacrilege.” If such
unproved, unfounded charges against a woman, with immunity to their
author, can get into the government record, into the hands of the
people’s representatives at Washington, passing without governmental
protest through the mails, perilous the adventure of the women of
America to enter upon a career of public service.
And has the cause of Clara Barton grown? Yes, gloriously, to the
infinite credit of Clara Barton in laying the foundation in conformity
to her statement, “To be efficient, the Red Cross must have government
recognition, must bear the stamp of national individuality, and be
constructed according to the spirit, habits, and needs of the country it
represents;—in contemplating the possible realization of my hope and all
it would entail and involve, I have been looking carefully and anxiously
to the plans of the foundations of the structure we are hoping to build;
and I perceive in creating an Institution that shall be National and of
the people, the foundations must be as broad and as solid as the whole
nation.”
To the credit of the Clara Barton management, and of the succeeding
management, of the Red Cross; to the credit of the American people that
for twenty-three years previous to the “accusation,” and thereafter
notwithstanding, the world has held in highest regard the Red Cross
Founder and Red Cross integrity. What of financial support, _for
reasons_ that have been withheld, (probably millions) has not been
reported. What of financial and moral support accorded to the Red Cross
brings a flush of pride to the face of every true American; what of
seeming policy toward the Founder also brings a flush,—but not of pride.
A public policy, not in harmony with public sentiment, has brought on
national disasters—a world disaster.
Mere growth, of itself, is not a virtue; for the upas tree grows, with
spreading branches. The best prosperity is that prosperity whose
foundation is secure, whose record-history is untarnished. The best
philanthropy is that philanthropy which lives in the best atmosphere,
breathes of the purest, gives of the soul’s best. To her latest breath
Clara Barton breathed love, breathed purest Red Cross philanthropy,—but
prayed justice for herself. She had never spoken a discordant word in
her life, meaningly; her “enemies” monopolized the discordant words. So
far as known, she never made an enemy; her “enemies” were
self-made—their self-made record, on the books, reported “in the red.”
Wearing a “political helmet,” those who attacked a helpless woman took
possession of her reputation and prospered. At no time in her life has
it been shown that in her chosen field, with years of successful
experience, Clara Barton was not a good business manager; her “enemies”
assumed themselves, _without experience_, to be good in business and
took charge of her affairs:—but under _proper_ political protection.
Slander—it is a coward in a coat of mail
That wages war against the brave and wise.
Her “enemies,” shielded behind “charges,” made accusation against
her,—_without self-sacrifice_; she exposed herself to attacks of every
character known to womankind, and made self-sacrifices for the Red Cross
and for country. What is inscribed over the portals of the cell, near
Brussels, of Edith Cavell, must be inscribed on history’s tablets, of
Clara Barton: “She sacrificed herself for the Red Cross; she sacrificed
herself for the country.”
Slander
I saw it tread upon a lily fair—
A maid of whom the world could say no harm;
And when sunk beneath the mortal wound,
It broke into the sacred sepulchre
And dragged its victim from the hallowed grave
For public eyes to gaze upon.
Yea, I have seen this accursed child of envy
Breathe mildew on the sacred fame of her
Who once had been her country’s benefactor.
Human nature hasn’t changed since he, who became the first American
President, suffered through the “Conway Cabal,” a cabal not dissimilar
in the motives, the charges and the execution, to that through which
suffered the first Red Cross President. But George Washington was a
fighter; Clara Barton, a woman of peace. The Red Cross President was as
patient as was the first martyred American President, under persecution,
and who then said “I am nothing, but truth is everything.” She was as
innocent and unsuspecting as was our last martyred American President,
who said “I have never done any man wrong, and I believe no man will do
me one.”
Man, political, cowardly-man constructed the apparatus;—the tongue of
woman, the sender; the ear of woman, the receiver. Of all the God-given
good of earth, one woman is the best; TWO WOMEN, the worst. The only
serious charge in history that will stand against Clara Barton is that
she WAS A WOMAN; her most serious “misappropriation,” that of her
confidence in _another woman_.
Away the fair detractors went
And gave by turns their censures vent.
Elected for life? Yes. Then resigned? She was not a “war-woman,”—she had
never filled a swiveled-chair;—yes, she resigned in the interest of
peace and _harmony_. And from the facts, distorted, and the motives,
impugned, as to why she resigned were taken the bundle of faggots to add
fuel to the flames of her torture.
Slander never wants for material;
Virtue itself provides it with weapons.
As for safety, the ancient criminal fled to the Temple of the Gods, so
America’s modern character-assassin fled to the Temple of the Red Cross,
and implored silence; for then to recite the historic facts of the
martyrdom might cause vibrations that would have shaken to earth the
pillars of that sacred temple. President Clara Barton of the Red Cross
said: “Its President has spoken not at all, and never will.” Silence
reigned. The truth was withheld at the Red Cross receiving station,
while untruth sped wireless—and all the world wondered.