Richard Rawe's Draft Case Papers, 1952–1960
Download: PDF — Richard Rawe's Draft Case Papers, 1952–1960
Box 1576 Grand Coulee, Washington December 7,1952
Watchtower Bible and Tract Society 117 Adams Street Brooklyn 1, N. Y.
Dear Brothers,
I have just recently filled out my Quetioneer and Conscientious Objector form and sent them in. Now I am preparing affidavits in support of my claims of being a Minister and Conscientious Objector. If you are still issuing Letters of Ordination to Bioneers I would like to make request for one of these to file with my other Selective Service papers.
Yours in Jehovah's Service,
Richard M Rawe Selective Service No.
45-22-34-183
Box 1576
Grand Coulee, Washington
Dec. 17 1952
Selective Service System Local Board No. 22 Chelan Co. Court House Wenatchee, Washington
Notice Of Appeal
I wish to make this written notice of appeal of my classification. The reason I feel my classification should be IV-D instead of I-0 is because I am primarily an ordained minister of religion, (measuring up fully to the requirements of the law in order to receive such a classification) and secondly a conscientious objector. The reason I made the claim of conscientious objector is because I have conscientious objections to training and service in both combatant and non-combatant service because of my status and duties as a full-time ordained minister.
If the Board does not wish to change my classification to IV-D after considerning this statement them I wish to make this request:
Request For Personal Appearance
I wish to make request for a personal appearance Before the Board to review my case.
If the personal appearance is necessary, then when you send me the date when this meeting is to take place I would also like a brief statement as to why the Board feels it can not give me a IV-D.
Sincerely yours,
Richard M. Rawe
Richard M Rawe Selective Service No.
45-22-34-183
Box 1576
Grand Coulee, Washington
DEC 17, 196 I MIGRATION JAN 19
Selective Service System Local Board No. 22 Chelan Co. Court House Wenatchee, Washington
Notice Of Appeal
I wish to make this written notice of appeal of my classification. The reason I feel my classification should be IV-D instead of I-0 is because I am primarily a ordained minister of religion, (measuring up fully to the requirements of the law in order to receive such a classification) and secondly a conscientious objector. The reason I made the claim of conscientious objector is because I have conscientious training and service in both combatant and non-combatant service because of my status and duties as a full-time ordained minister.
If the Board does not wish to change my classification to IV-D after considering this statement then I wish to make this request:
Request For Personal Appearance
I wish to make request for a personal appearance before the Board to review my case.
If the personal appearance is necessary, then when you send me the date when this meeting is to take place I would also like a brief statement as to why the Board feels it can not give me a IV-D.
Sincerely yours,
Richard M Rawe Box 1576
Grand Coulee, Wash.
June 9, 1953
Selective Service Local Board No.22 Wenatchee, Wash.
Dear Sirt:
Enclosed please find a copy of a letter to the State and National Directors requesting them to take an appeal to the President in my behalf. Please include these 2 letters in my file.
I also want to ask the local board to delay any futher action in my case untill the Director's have acted on my request.
There are inclosed also in this letter 5 other letters from different persons stating how they view me in relation to my ministry. Please include these 5 other letters in my file also.
Sincerely yours,
Enclosures: 7
Richard M Rawe Box 1576
Grand Coulee, Wash.
June, 10, 1953
General Lewis B. Hershey Director Of Selective Service Washington 25, D. C.
Dear Sir:
I would like to request you to request my local draft board to reconsider the classification of I-O they gave me and determine whether a classification of IV-D should be given.
Their adress is: Selective Service, Local Board No. 22, Chelan Co. Court House, Wenatchee, Washington.
I believe that in view of the facts that I gave you in my previous letter this request will be substantiated.
Thank you for your kind consideration.
Sincerely yours, (Copy of) Local Board Meeting Jan.
5, 1954
Rawe, Richard, M. 45-22-34-183
After postponing decision of above registrant's case, the local board at the direction of the State Director, reopened and considered anew the classification, and because there was no substantial change in the registrant's status since consideration of case by the Presidential Appeal Board, the decision of that board was affirmed and registrant continued in I-A classification.
Florance W. Allen Asst. Clerk Amended Minutes Local Board Meeting
ded Minutes Local Board Meeting January 26,1954 January 5, 1954 - Prepared AFTER Jan. 20
nuary 5, 1954 . Look over for 90 .
Rawe, Richard Martin-45-22-34-183
Complying with the request of State Director dated January 20,1954 Local Board makes these amended and expanded minutes of the January 5,1954 meeting for the purpose of informing those who maybe concerned with the reasons for action taken at said meeting.
In compliance with the State Director's request of December 1, 1958 the local board reopened the classification of the above registrant and considered it anew, using as a guide the Supreme Court decision in the case of Dickinson vs United States.
The registrant's principal claim is for classification as a minister of religion. Information submitted by the registrant in support of this claim was carefully studied to determine whether he is the leader of his particular religious organization, as referred to in the Dickinson case. He is a member of the Ephrata congregation or company of Jehovah's Witnesses. In his seven-page summary of information, sworn to by him on November 30,1953, he states he has been assigned the duties of "Territory Servant and Theocratic Ministry School instructor in Ephrata, Wash. Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses". In a letter dated June 7, 1953, Clifton Webb, who identifies himself as "Congregation Servant" states "the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society recognizes him As Assistant Congregation Servant and Theocratic Ministry School Servant to the Ephrata Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses". In an undated letter received by this local board on June 11, 1953, Laurence L. Woodall, who identifies himself as "Company Servant of Grand Coulee Company of Jehovah's Witnesses", states "At present he holds the servant's position of School servant with the Ephrata Washington company of Jehovah's Witnesses". In a letter dated June 7, 1953 Verne D. Woodall, who identifies himself as "Assis. Cong. Servant, Grand CouLee, Wash", states "He has been appointed by the Watchtower Bible and Tract Soc. as Assis. Congregation Servant and Theocratic Ministry School Servant in th Ephrata, Wash. Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses". The file contains seven other letters from persons not identified as having official positions in the organization, whose addresses are shown as follows: one from Ephrata, one from Spokane, one from Coulee Dam, one from Electric City, and three from Grand Coulee. The file does not contain a document or a copy thereof issued by the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society or any official of Jehovah's Witnesses identifying the registrant as having been appointed to the principal position in any congregation or company of Jehovah's Witnesses.
The local board's conclusion is that the registrant has submitted voluminous evidence that identifies him as having spent a large amount of time in the activities of the religious organization of which he is a member, but that his induction would not "leave a congregation without a cleric" in the words of the Dickinson decision.
The local board also noted that the registrant, in his own hand, in Item 25 of Report of Medical History (Standard Form 89) completed by him at the Armed Forces Examination Station, Seattle, Washington, on August 27,1953, showed "wood working" as his usual occupation.
The local board has not sought information from other sources to contradict or controvert the registrant's claims. He has had ample opportunity to submit evidence which would fully establish his eligibility for classification in Class IV-D. The information he has submitted falls short of convincing the local board that in the light of the definitions in Section 16 of the Act the registrant is other than an active lay person who has given evidence of considerable devotion to the tenets of his religious belief.
Consideration was also given to the registrant's claim of being conscientiously opposed to participation in war in any form. In attachments made a part of his Special Form for Conscientious Objector (SSS Form No. 150) The registrant subscribes to the belief that Jehovah's Witnesses will fight under certain circumstances and that they will fight in defence of their ministry and their brothers. The local board does not believe that when the registrant classified this registrant in Class I-O he appealed to the appeal board from that determination, and that when the appeal board classified the registrant in class I-O he requested the Director of Selective Service and the State Director of Selective Service to appeal to the President in his behalf from that classification. The local board fails to see how it could classify the registrant in Class I-O when he has indicated his dissatisfaction with that classification on two separate occasions and exercised a statutory right in appealing to the appeal board against that classification when it was made by the local board.
The local board therefore voted, in view of the above, that the registrant be classified in Class I-A.
(signed) James A. O'Connor Chairman Box 1576
Grand Coulee, Wash.
Jan. 12, 1954
Selective Service System Local Board No. 22 Wenatchee, Washington
Dear Sirs:
Please put in my file the enclosed NOTICE OF APPEAL TO APPEAL BOARD and the notes I took on the "Proceedings of Personal Appearance Before Local Board No. 22, Dec. 1, 1953"
Sincerely yours.
Richard M. Rawe
Savannah Bay
Daring Devilson ' s claw to minister revision of this be on short a short of an hour or four minutes implying an undeleaveable position Box 1576
Grand Coulee, Washington
Jan. 12, 1954
Hayden C. Covington 124 Columbia Heights Brooklyn 1, N. Y.
Dear Brother Covington,
On Jan. 7, 1954 the Local Board sent me annotice of classification card that informed me that the board has decided to continue me in class I-A.
Enclosed please find a copy of the NOTICE OF APPEAL TO APPEAL BOARD and copies of the notes of the two board meetings for your file.
As soon as I receive the classification from the Appeal Board I will send this information to you.
Your brother,
Richard M. Rawe Form 8811
Rev.1-4-40
GOAL TO OPEN BOOK RETURN RECEIPT
Received from the Postmaster the Registered or Insured Article, the original number of which appears on the face of this Card.
1 (Signature or name of addresses)
2 Mrs Edgaw A Allen= (Houss M.
(Signature of address agent—Agent should enter address name on line ONE above)
JAN 15 1954
Date of delivery , 19
U. 3. CONCENTRATE PRINTING OFFICE 16—12421
--PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE TO AVOID PAYMENT OR POSTAGE $$
POSTMARK OF DELIVERING
Street and Number,
or Post Office Box.
REGISTERED ARTICLE
INSURED PARGEL
NO
State ORIZA
16=1241 Box 1576
Grand Coulee, Wash.
Jan. 12, 1954
Selective Service System Local Board No.22 Wenatohee, Washington
NOTICE OF APPEAL TO APPEAL BOARD
I wish to have my I-A classification charged to IV-D. I believe that recent court decisions and the evidence in my file will support my claim to a IV-D classification. I believe the reason why the local board did not classify me IV-D is because of the age at which I was ordained and because of the March 9,1953 decision in the Dickinson case, which is now reversed. These points were raised in a letter to me from Charles M. Toynbee, Deputy State Director, on June 11, 1955, he said, "Your letter states that a document you have submitted to the local board shows that you were" ordained in a public ceremony on September 20, 1952". At that time you were approximately 8 years of age. In a recent case before the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth District, (Dickinson vs U.S.) a decision was handed down on March 9, 1953. It it the Court pointed out the position of the draft board when confronted with a situation which required that it give the appellant's claim rather careful scrutiny. The entire language of that certain portion of the Court's decision and the result of the consideration given to your case by your local board and by the Appeal Board appear to be consonant."
I would like to point out that the Selective Service Regulations provide that it is the persons status at the time of his classification that determines what his classification shall be. Regardless of the age at which I began my ministry there is nothing to show not that I am not a minister and entitled to such a classification. (For more information on this see pages 3,4 of the seven page report I left with the board on Dec.1, 1953) I believe the Supreme Court backs me up in this regard when it said in its majority opinion on the Dickinson case: "That the ordination, doctrines, or manner of preaching that his sect employs diverge from the orthodox and traditional is no concern of ours; of course the statute does not purport to impose a test of orthodoxy." (Emphasis added).
Mr. Toynbee applied the results of the March 9, 1953 decision of the Dickinson case to my case. On November 30, 1953 the Supreme Court of The United States reversed this decision. The important points in the Dickinson case are consonant with my case. Dickinson is a full time "pioneer minister", I am too. Said the Court: "The principal and decisive issue before us is whether there was a basis in fact for denying Dickinson's claim to a ministerial exemption under Sec. 6(g) of the Universal Military Training and Service Act." The Court found that there was no basis for denying Dickinson's claim to ministerial exemption.
If there be any doubts as to whether I am now a pioneer minister inquiry can be made to the Watchtower Society.
Sincerely yours,
Richard H. Eawe LAW OFFICES HAYDEN C.
COVINGTON 124 COLUMBIA HEIGHTS BROOKLYN I. N. Y.
January 15, 1954
MAIN 5-1240
Richard M. Rawe
Box 1576
Grand Coulee,
Washington
Dear Brother Rawe:
Thank you very much for your letter of January 12, 1954, informing me as to your present draft status.
Since the local board reopened and reconsidered your classification you should have requested a personal appearance in the usual way. In your letter you say that the classification card was mailed January 7,1954. Therefore the request should have been filed within ten days. However, since you have filed the notice of appeal your file will be sent to the appeal board and in turn reviewed and referred to the Department of Justice for an appropriate investigation and hearing and recommendation as to your conscientious objections to participation in war.
Did you prepare a written summary of the personal appearance? This suggestion is found on page 17 of the Booklet "Procedure for Jehovah's Witnesses under Selective Service." Since December 18, 1952, it has been the responsibility of the registrant to prepare the written summary of the oral evidence presented at the personal appearance. I make mention of this because of the summary prepared by the clerk of the oral information presented to the local board on December 1, 1953. Actually, according to the law, you were not afforded a personal appearance at that time, since such appearance must follow a reopening of a classification, not just preceding the reopening.
However, if the information in the summary by the clerk is correct then and it was a personal appearance, you should have prepared a written summary of the oral evidence and outlined all the information that you presented which would support the ministerial position that you are claiming and which has not been stated elsewhere in your file.
Such information is always prepared for the benefit of the appeal board when considering the registrant's classification. Otherwise he is denied the benefits of a full and fair hearing.
In the event that the classification by the appeal board is unfavorable you should follow the suggestions on pages 24 through 27 of the Procedure booklet.
Please keep me informed of the developments in your case.
Your brother,
HCC:fb
Hayden Berington
to an prying reason only then they should offload the The president for one hour and introduction to the keiren and on swell on duty with the work of New Chance progress of such latency on the Reason .
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
REC'D.
MAR 2.6 1954.
SPOKANE, WASH.
Resume of the Investigative Report
Re: Richard Martin Rawe
Registrant's father was interviewed and he advised that his son had been employed on a part-time basis for the past three years in the informant's lumber mill at Grand Coulee, Washington. The informant continued that registrant had been working in this capacity three days a week and it was noted that he devoted the remainder of the week to the performance of his ministerial duties in the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society.
Conscientious Objector
One interviewee in Miles City, Montana, who is an ordained minister in the Jehovah's Witnesses organization, stated that he had known the registrant since 1948. According to this interviewee registrant had received instruction in the teachings of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society since early childhood and there was no reason to question the registrant's bona fide affiliation with this religious sect,
Registrant and other members of his family have resided for many years in Grand Coulee, Washington. Persons who were interviewed stated that registrant was a hard worker and they described him as a conscientious student. He and his family are well regarded in the Grand Coulee, Washington area. Former instructors advised that registrant would not salute the flag or enter into social or athletic events while a high school student. His refusal to do so was based upon his religious training and convictions. Associates of the registrant in the Jehovah's Witnesses organization and references said that he was an active and devout member of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society and they had no reason to question the sincerity of his professed religious convictions. One church official said that registrant was presently serving as the Theocratic Ministry School conductor and it was further noted that registrant was holding the office of Bible Study Servant. Several interviewees explained that registrant was also classified as a "pioneer" minister and in this capacity he was required to devote at least one hundred hours a month to the performance of public church duties.
Credit and criminal records are negative.
Prepared: March 22,1954 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE WASHINGTON, D.
C.
NOTICE OF HEARING
909 Paulsen Building
Spokane 1
(City)
Washington
(State)
April 20, 1954
(Date)
TO: Richard Martin Rawe (Name of Registrant)
Box 1576 Grand Coulee Washington (Street Address) (City) (State)
You are hereby notified that before the undersigned Hearing Officer at
Room 334 (Room) Federal Building (Building) Riverside Ave. & Lincoln Street (Street Address)
Spokane Washington at 10:00 A.M. (City) (State) (Hour)
o'clock on \frac{May} {(Month)},4⁄(Day),19\underline{54} , a hearing, at which you are
requested to be present, will be held by the Department of Justice to consider your claim to exemption from training and service under the Universal Military Training and Service Act by reason of your alleged conscientious objection to participation in war in any form.
Harry T. O'Connor , Hearing Officer Special Assistant to the Attorney General Box 1576 Grand Coulee, Wash.
April 23,1954
Havdan C. Covington 124 Columbia Heights Brooklyn l, N. Y.
Dear Brother Covington,
In your last letter to me of Jan. 15,1954 you asked the question: "Did you prepare a written summary of the personal appearance?" I would like to inform you that I dad and also that: I sent a copy of it to the local board (registered letter, return receipt requested) and this copy is now in my file.
My case has been referred to the Department of Justice and from Feb. 20 to March 22,1954 an agent of the F.B.I. was making an investigation of me talking to every one. On April 20,1954 I received a notice from the hearing officer that the hearing would be held on May 4,1954 at Spokane Wash.
I will continue to follow the suggestidns on pages 19-23 of the Procedure booklet and keep you informed on developments.
Yours in Praising Jah,
Richard Mr. Grave
Richard M. Raws Box 1576
Grand Coulee, Wash.
April 23,1954
Harry T. Davenport,
Special Assistant to the Attorney General
Dear Sir:
Received your notice of Hearing and Instructions, also Resume of the Investigative Report.
I note the date of the Hearing has been set for 10:00 A.M. May4,1954. Johovah's Witnesses are holding their assembly in Spokane May 7-9,1954. I would like to make the request that, if possiable, the hearing date be set at May 6 or 7, preferable/Friday, May 7, 1954. This would save an extra trip and expenses not only for me but also for any witnesses I may have to testify in support of my claim. If the hearing date can not be changed I will be glad to come on May 4,1954. Please notify me as soon as possiable when and if the hearing can be changed.
In reading over the Resume of the Investigative Report I noted that there was no unfavorable evidence. I would like to make the request that if there is any unfavorable evidence in the entire Investigative Report that you would please inform me of this.
Sincerely yours,
Richard M. Gawe
Richard M. Rawe 909 Paulsen Building Spokane 1, Washington April 26, 1954
Mr. Richard M. Rawe Box 1576 Grand Coulee, Wash.
Dear Mr. Rawe:
Pursuant to your letter of April 23,1954,the hearing upon your claim to exemption from training and service under the Universal Military Training and Service Act by reason of your alleged conscientious objection to war in any form, is continued from May 4,1954,to May 7,1954,at Room 334 Federal Building, Spokane, Wash.
Yours truly,
Harry T. Vannmark
Hearing Officer Eastern District of Washington
HTD:am Substance of Hearing Before Hearing Officer Eastern District of Washington (Harry T.
Davenport) May 7,1954
May 7,1954
Hearing was started by hearing officer making reference to letter of appeal that I had written and which was contained in my file which he had before him. Statements were made by registrant as to present clasification,l-A, classification appealed for, 1V-D, date of birth, May 10,1934, the neutral stand taken by Jehovah's witnesses, Missionary assignment I hold in Ephrata, Washington, and my position non-combantant service, all "pioneers" of Jehovah's witnesses being Dull-time ministers and seeking 2V-D. All of this was in response to questions asked by hearing officer.
Questions were next asked as to how many of Jehovah's witnesses there were at Grand Coulee, (24) and I was asked to name the different servant positions in the congregation and what each of their duties were, which was done. Questions were asked and answered as to Congregation Committee.
In response to questions the difference between a Pioneer and a Congregation Publisher was explained. Also number of Witnesses at Ephrata(16), and servant positions I am holding which are, Bible Study Servant, Theocratic Ministry School Servant, Territory Servant, and Area Study Conductor. More statements were made as to time spent and activities of the pioneer work I am doing.
Discussions on where I live, what work I do, compensation derived, and other questions as to standard of living were asked and answered.
Questions next were asked as to what occasioned my missionary work in Ephrata. It was my assignment there by the Watchtower Society upon the acceptance of my application to be a pioneer. At the time I started there there was no active group which there is now. Application for a Congregation were made to the Society in October, 1952, I started to pioneer there May 1, 1952. The Society has assigned the Ephrata Congregation surrounding towns and rurals which I am also working.
After a discussion of the "Certificate For Pioneer" a discussion followed on the acceptability of a 1-O classification in which it was pointed out that I was a conscientious objector as well as a minister and that sedition 1623.2 of the Selective Service Regulations states that a registrant shall be placed in one or more of the classes listed and that he shall be placed in the lowest class for which he is determined to be eligible. The Dickinson case was also pointed to as substantial backing for a IV-D.
Mrs. H. C. Green of Electric City, Wash. was presented as a witnesses and testified that all that I had said was true and that she knew of no reason to doubt my sincerity and convictions.,She stated she had known me from childhood. Mrs. Green also took notes on the hearing for me. With this the hearing ended.
With this the hearing ended.
Dox 1576
Grand Coulee, Washington
May 10,1954.
Attorney General United States Department of Justice Washington 25, D. C.
51r:
I have just had a hearing before Mr. Harry T. Davenport, Hearing Officer, Eastern District of Washington.
It is my understanding that Mr. Davenport will make a recommendation to you which will be based on this hearing and the secret investigative report of the P. B. I.
Eay I make the request that along with your recommendation to the board of appeal that you include a copy of the hearing officer's report and, if there is any, a copy of all of the adverse evidence appearing in the F.B.I. secret investigative report.
Thank you for this service.
Very truly youre.
Richard M. Rae Hayden C.
Covington 124 Columbia Heights Brooklyn 1, N. Y.
Dear Brother Covington,
Please find enclosed a copy of "Substance of Hearing" the letter to the Attorney General, and a letter to the local board requesting these to be put in my file.
The date of my hearing was changed from May 4,1954, at my request, to May 7,1954 because we had our circuit assembly at that date in Spokane and would save on expenses.
There was no adverse or unfavorable evidence and the hearing officer seemed to be very nice.
In the event that the appeal board dose not give me a IV-D, and is unanimous, I will again write letters to the State and National Directors of the Selective Service, as mentioned on pages 24-25 of the Procedure blt., unless you advise otherwise.
In writing to the Directors, would you suggest that, in giving reasons why they should appeal to the president for me, I should mention the Dickinson case as well giving the reason of doing it in the national interest or necessary to avoid an injustice"? Would you suggest I put strong emphasis on the Dickinson case?
I will continue to keep you informed on developments.
Your brother Richard M. Rawe Richard M. Rawe Box 1576
Grand Coulee, Washington
May 10,1954
Selective Service System Local Board No. 22 Wenatchee, Washington
Dear Sir:
Please put in my file when it is returned to you the enclosed copies of the "Substance of Hearing" and the letter to the Attorney General. Thank you.
Sincerely yours.
9 : 00 . Bristol
Richard M. Rawe LAW OFFICES HAYDEN C.
COVINGTON 124 COLUMBIA HEIGHTS BROOKLYN 1, N. Y.
MAIN 5-1240
June 13, 1956
Mr. Richard Rawe
Box 1576
Grand Coulee, Washington
Dear Brother Rawe:
The hearing officer is correct--he is not permitted to give out the FBI report.
However, the request should be made for it anyway, even though you will not get it. That way, the request is in your file and it may be useful at a later date.
Your brother,
HCC:gh
Hayden Co. Lovington Hayden C.
Covington 124 Columbia Heights Brooklyn 1, New York
Dear brother,
Recently my brother (William Dale Rawe) had a hearing before the Department of Justice. In following the 'new procedure' he ask for the entire FB I report even though the was no actual adverse evidence in the summary. Instead of receiving it they sent the enclosed letter.
I have not yet received notice of my hearing but it may be held soon so would like to know the following information in order to be prepared for it.
I feel it is necessary to have both complete FBI reports (I have been investigated twice) contained in my draft file because of the large amount of favorable evidence. Especially the second report because it gives a 'favorable testimony' from those not witnesses such as back-calls and Bible studies I have been conducting. Would it be proper to insist on both reports?
Is it true he is 'not permitted to' give this complete FB I report or have it put in the file? If not, how should I attack this problem in writing to him for the reports?
Thank you for your consideration of these questions on proper procedure.
Your brother,
Richard Pauve
Richard Rawe
Enclosures Mr. William Dale Rawe Box 1576 Grand Coulee, Washington
Dear Sir:
I have received your letter of April 20,1956, requesting that I supply you with the Fedoral Bureau of Investigation report. I have to/advise that I am not permitted to do so.
Receipt of your other letter of the same date, requesting that the Department of Justice send to the Appeal Board a copy of the Resume' and the Hearing Officer's report, is also acknowledged.
Yours truly,
(signed)
Harry T. Davenport Special Hearing Officer Eastern District of Washington
HTD:AM Summary of hearing before hearing officer, April 30, 1956
Do you have a brother who was here for a hearing about a year ago?
Yes, I believe it was about a year ago.
How many are there in your family besides yourself?
My brother, mother, and father.
Is your brother still doing ministerial work in Ephrata?
Yes.
You received your first classification while you were still in school, which was I-S until your graduation?
Yeah Yes.
Then you were classified I-A? Yes. Have you ever has any other classification? No.
What is the basis of your conscientious objections?
The basis of my conscientious objections is my conscience trained by the Bible.
Yes, but what are the reasons for your conscientious objections?
One reason why I have conscientious objections to participation in war in any form is because sharing in war means taking human life without authorization from Jehovah; that means it is murder, which, of course, is condemned by the Bible.
Another reason Why I have conscientious objections to participation in war in any form is because if involves the use of cannal weapons, which also is condemned by the Scriptures. The says that a Christians are not carnal.
By carnal weapons you meant fleshly weapons?
Yes, weapons such as knives, guns, bombs, planes, etc.
Another reason why I conscientiously object to participation in war in any form either as a combatant or noncombatant is because to do so would mean that I would be a part of this world, and the Bible says that a Christian should be no part of this world.
Another reason is that I would be giving to Caesar, of a worldly government what belong only to God, and the Bible says that a Christian should give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar, but to give to God what belongs to God. Eaesar can't give me life; that comes only from Jehovah, so I must not give my life to any earthly government, but only to God. The same is true of worship, fear, and allegiance: they belong only to Jehovah.
Another reason is that if I would participate in war in any way, thereby killing some of my brothers in the organization, I would be causing a division in the organization, and the Scriptures say that one of the things that God hates, the thing that is any abomination to him, is he who causes a division among brothers.
Another reason is that participating in war in any form, either as a com- batant or a noncombatant, would constitute an act of treason against God's kingdom. The Bible speaks of Christians as ambassadors, for the kingdom; if a worldly ambassador were to forsake the cause of the country he was represent- ing and join that forty country of to which he was sent, it would be treason. The same is my position as an ambassador for God's kingdom: if I would take up the cause of any tenth country on earth, it would be an act of treason against the kingdom of God. This is true because all nations are opposed to the kingdom. The Bible says that the whole world is lying in the power of the evil one, Satan, who is opposed to Jehovah. And Jesus said that his kingdom is no part of this world.
Is this country opposed to God's kingdom?
Yes, this country along with all others are opposed to God's kingdom. They show this by refusing to recognize the kingdom and Jehovah's witnesses as its ambassadors. They show this by their treatment of Jehovah's witnesses.
But hasn't the government recognized Jehovah's witnesses as ministers and given them the same rights as ambassadors?
No, it hasn't recognized all of Jehovah's witnesses as ministers, only some of them.
But haven't you people been given the same rights as other religious groups?
We haven't bean given those rights with as little trouble as others; it's been only after long and costly court battles. No other organization has had to go through as much as we have.
Where are you employed at the present?
I have a business of my own in Moses Lake, a tree service business.
Are you married? No.
Is there a congregation of Jehovah's witnesses in Moses Lakb? Yes. Do you hold any position in that congregation? No. Do you engage in the work there? Yes. Do you conduct any of the congregation meetings or home Bible studies? No. You mentioned that you engage in the work, selling magazines, books-----
Our work is not selling. You take money for it don't you? Not necessarily; sometimes we give our literature away free when a person cannot afford to pay for it. Well, but when you stand on street with your magazines, you expect people to pay for them don't you? Not necessarily.
Did your mother train you as one of Jehovah's witnesses? She tried to.
Has your father even opposed you in this regard? No.
What are your plans for the future?
I plan to enter the pioneer, or full time, service some time this year. It will probably be about the same time as does Mr. Butler, who is my partner in the tree service business.
Is Mr. Butler one of Jehovah's witnesses? Yes. How old is he? I don't know exactly, but I guess about in his thirties.
Are your conscientious objections based primarily on the matter of how you spend your time?
They are not based on that primarily, but that is one of the reasons; if I would devote my time to anything else, I would be breaking a vow to Jehovah, in which I have vowed to give him everything I have, money, time, energy, etc.
Then you have no intention of going back to work in your father's sawmill? No.
Does this change in your career and moving to Moses Lake indicate any difficulty between you and your parents? None whatsoever.
What is your belief about the use of force? Under what circumstance would you use force?
My belief in the use of force is determined by the Scriptures. I would use it only when God permits it to be used., such as to defend my brothers, meetings, preaching, myself, and my property.
What about to defend your country?
No, I wouldn't use force to defend any country. Why wouldn't you? Because it's forbidden by the Bible, Where does the Bible forbid it? It forbids it when it says that a Christian is not to murder, not to be a part of this world, not to give to Caesar what is God's, and those other things that I've already mentioned.
When did you begin attending the meetings? About 1950. How old were you then? About 12 or 13. When were you baptized? On Oct. 28; 1951.
You have said that instead of combatant non-combatant service you would perform civilian work only if it is exactly the kind you want, work for the Watchtower Society. To do that wouldn't you have to go to Brooklyn? Not necessarily. What is I mean by work for the Watchtower Society is the pioneer service.
Isn't this being rather arbitrary? Since my eternal destiny is involved, I have to be arbitrary! You're not in the fulltime service now are you? No, but anytime I see that I can stay in it the longest, then I will; but if I agreed to any other work I would not be able to enter the fulltime service anytime I want to.
Hayden C. Covington 124 Columbia Heights Brooklyn 1, N. Y.
Dear Brother Covington,
In having my Income Tax prepared the question arose as to wheather my ministerial expenses could be deducted as a business expense or only as a contribution which would have a 20% limit.
We considered the letters as per December 11th Kingdom Ministry but to them it didn't seem clear enough especially as to the conclusion drawn from the ruling by the federal government as to the depreciation on the automobile.
Enclosed please find a copy of income tax return which may be of help in considering this matter. Please return. Any help on the above would appreciated.
As to my draft case, nothing has been done since the F. B. I. investigated me the second time in Nov. of 1955. I am still awaiting a hearing before the hearing officer which it looks like would be the next logical step.
With you in telling the good news from day to day.
Your brother,
Richard Rawe LAW OFFICES HAYDEN C.
COVINGTON 124 COLUMBIA HEIGHTS BROOKLYN 1, N. Y.
MAIN 5-1240
April 4,1957
Mr. Richard Rawe
Box 1576
Grand Coulee, Washington
Dear Brother Rawe:
Returned to you herewith is the copy of your 1956 income tax return. Since you are a pioneer, the ministry is your vocation, and you can therefore count your ministerial expenses as expenses rather than contributions.
If you were a part time minister, a congregation publisher, then you would have to list them as contributions because the ministry would not be your vocation. But since the ministry is your vocation you can count your expenses and also the depreciation on the car as an expense from your business which is the ministry.
When something develops in your draft case, remember to keep me informed. Since you have been pioneering going on five years now it is ridiculous that your ministerial claims have not been recognized.
Your brother,
HCC:gh
Student at Lovington Hayden C.
Covington 124 Columbia Heights Brooklyn 1, N. Y.
Dear Brother Covington.
If it is possiable please send me two copies of the Pate opinion as I would like one for my personal file.
Since my file has been in the hands of the Appeal Board since August of 1955 and no action has been taken except that the F. B. I. invistagated again, would you suggest that I send a copy of the Pate opinion to the Local draft board and request them to send it on to the appeal board or should I waite untill the appeal board makes a desicion, when ever that will be, and then send it to the Local board?
Your brother, LAW OFFICES HAYDEN C.
COVINGTON 124 COLUMBIA HEIGHTS BROOKLYN 1, N. Y.
MAIN 5.1240
May 8, 1957
Mr. Richard Rawe
Box 1576
Grand Coulee, Washington
Dear Brother Rawe:
Enclosed are two Pathe opinions that you requested. There is no point in filing them now, because they will not be forwarded to the appeal board. Hold them until you receive the recommendation of the Department of Justice to the appeal board. Then when you answer the recommendation, you can use them.
The only thing that you can do is remain in the full time service enjoying the blessings of that activity, until the Department of Justice finally comes through with a recommendation. When you receive it you will have 30 days in which to answer it. Send it to me immediately upon receipt and I will give you some suggestions for replying to the appeal board concerning it.
Your brother,
HCC:gh Enclosures
Haydent Lockington September 9,1957
Local Board No. 22 Sept. 11, 1957 Chelan Co. Court House Wenatchee, Washington
Director of Selective Service State of Washington State Armory South Tenth & Yakima Streets Tacoma 5, Washington
Re: Richard Martin Rawe, SSN 45-22-34-183 Conscientious Objector
Dear Sir:
Pursuant to the request of our Department dated August 20,1957,the selective service file in the captioned case is returned for further processing/
Very truly yours,
WILLIAM B. BANTZ United States Attorney
GG Encls.
cc: Conscientious Objector Section Department of Justice Washington 25, D. C.
Washington State Headquarters SELECTIVE SERVICE SYSTEM Tacoma 5, Wash. September 10, 1957
In replay refer.
The Chairman Local Board No.22 Wenatchee, Washington
Re: RAWE, Richard Martin 45-22-34-183
Dear Sir:
The Cover Sheet (SSS Form No. 101) and contents pertaining to the subject-named registrant is returned.
The Director of Sleective Service has requested, in accordance with the provisions of section 1625.3, Selective Service Regulations, that your local board reopen and consider the subject-named registrant's classification anew. This action is considered desirable in view of the length of time that has elapsed since this case was referred to the United States Attorney.
Prior to reopening the registrant's classification please advise him that his case is being reopened, and furnished him a reasonable period of time to submit current information which might affect his classification.
For the State Director,
(signed)
DAVID J, MANSFIELD Major, AGC Chief, Manpower Division
Inclosure - 2 Cover sheet and contents 9/8/57 US Atty ltr to SD SELECTIVE SERVICE SYSTEM
Local Board No. 22 Chelan County Court House Wenatchee, Washington
(LOCAL BOARD STAMP)
September 11, 1957
IN REPLY, REFER TO.
Mr. Richard Martin Rawe Box 1576 Grand Coulee, Washington
Re: 45-22-34-183
Dear Sir:
Your case is being reopened at the request of the Director of Selective Service and will be considered at our November meeting. This meeting will probably take place during the first week in November.
If you have any new information to submit to us at this time you should do so before November 1st so that we may fully consider same.
For the Local Board
James A. O'Connor 7. w.
JAO/fa
James A. O'Connor
Chairman Hayden C.
Covington 124 Columbia Heights Brooklyn 1, N. Y.
Dear Brother Covington.
Enclosed please find copies of letters which I copied from my file at the draft board office when I was down there.
You will notice that "The Director of Selective Service has requested, in accordance with the provisions of section 1625.3 Selective Service Regulations, that your local board reppen and consider the subject-named registrant's classification anew."
In November of 1955 I was investigated for the second time by the F. B. I. My case went to the Appeal Board. However I have never had a second hearing before the hearing officer. Neither have I received the decision from the appeal board. Now they want the local board to reopen the case. My question is: Is this proper procedure? Should not the appeal board first act on the case? Should I proceed as they have instructed or should I insist that the appeal board render a decision first?
Your brother,
Richard Rawe LAW OFFICES HAYDEN C.
COVINGTON 124 COLUMBIA HEIGHTS BROOKLYN I, N.Y.
MAIN 5-1240
September 18, 1957
Richard Rawe
Box 1576
Grand Coulee, Wash.
Dear brother:
I have your letter of September 16, 1957. I do not know what classification the local board gave you in August 1955 after you had your personal appearance. I do know that you apparently appealed from such classification. If it was I-0, then, according to the amended regulations you would not have a hearing before a hearing officer if the appeal board determined to give you I-0.
The reason for the local board to reopen your classification is apparently that shown in the State Director's letter, namely, "in view of the length of time that has elapsed since this case was referred to the United States Attorney."
Concerning the determination of the local board at the hearing on August 8, 1955, that the "Congregational Servant and perhaps the Assistant Congregational Servant are the Ministers of that particular Jehovah Witness Congregation, and that the other officers of the congregation are not qualified for ministerial deferments" should be answered in writing when you appear, and you can also argue orally. It is an arbitrary and capricious and illegal denial of your rights under the law, because the board employed artificial standards in determining what constitutes a minister of religion within the meaning of the Act and the Regulations and they did not follow the definition of the term used in the Act and Regulations in determining your claim as a minister of religion. See the cases of Dickinson v.
United States, Hull v. Stalter, Niznik v. United States (both opinions), Arpaia v. Alexander, Flakowicz v. Alexander, United States v. Kose, United States v. Burnett and United States v. Brandt. I send a copy of each of these opinions by separate mail. Also I send to you a copy of the Ransom opinion, and Jewell.
There may be other information that you can glean from the Counsel memorandum to aid you in presenting your case to the local board. Anything you tell them orally you should also hand to them in writing to be placed in your file for their consideration in reaching your proper classification. The enclosed BUSH letter may also be of some aid to you in preparing the information you will file at the time of the personal appearance. Please return this letter to me as soon as you get your material ready, and you do not need to wait until the hearing in order to do so; do it right away and have it in readiness.
Your brother,
C-J
by Stephen C. Lovington
PS: When you prepare the material for filing, please make an extra copy (or two if possible) for me.
Dear brother,
Have at hand your letter of Sept. 18, 1957 which I thank you for. Some complications seem to have arisen in my case and to get to the bottom of them I would like to review my case for you:
On March 9, 1955 I received a I-A classification from the President. On March 16 and 20, 1955 I wrote letters to the Local Board to try to get a personal appearance before the board. I failed in this. That is to say I did not get a personal appearance before the board. Now comes July 14, 1955 on which date I received a Classification Card (SSS Form No. 110) Which informed me that the local board had classified me I-A. I wondered why they should do this since just prior to this they refused me a personal appearance to discuss my case with them. I requested a personal appearance which I received on Aug. 8, 1955. At this personal appearance I found out that they had reopened and considered anew my case on July 14, 1955 because of a 'procedural defect in the Department of Justice review of my case' and their Operations Bulletin No. 123 instructed them to reopen and consider anew my case. (See SUMMARY OF ORAL INFORMATION PRESENTED TO LOCAL BOARD Aug. 8, 1955) From this personal appearance I understood that the F.B.I2 would investigate again and that I would have another hearing before the hearing officer and then the Appeal board would act on my case. In a cover letter dated Aug. 11, 1955 it said: "We would appreciate your immediate attention to this so that your file may be forwarded on Appeal, as requested in your letter of July 20, 1955." However, following the Aug. 8, 1955 appearance I did not receive a Classification Card (SSS Form No. 110) telling me what the decision of the board was. The last classification card I have is dated July 14, 1955. (I am writing the Local Board to see if they were supposed to have sent me such a classification card as seems to be indicated in the letter dated Aug. 26, 1955)
But at any rate, my file was evidently sent to the Appeal Board which in turn gave it to The Justice Department so they could correct the 'procedural defect' (what ever that was?) as per Operations Bulletin No. 123 (whatever that said?) because during Nov. 1955 the F. B. I. investigated me for the second time. So up to Sept. 1957 I was waiting for a hearingBeforethehearing second hearing before the hearing officer as a result of the second investigation by the F. B. I. in Nov. of 1955. I was also waiting for the decision of the Appeal Board. But till now I have received neither the second hearing before the hearing officer or the decision of the Appeal Board. (I am also writing the Local Board to see if the Appeal Board had acted and if they were supposed to have sent me a Notice of Classification (SSS Form No.110) and to find out what their decision was if they made one) Then on Sept.
11, 1957 cpmes a letter from the Local Board telling me "Your case is being reopened at the request of the Director of Sleective Service and will be considered at our Nov. (1957) meeting."
Now because I have not received any word from the hearing officer or the appeal board this reopening of my case looks like improper procedure, dose it not? However if the Appeal board did act and give me a I-0 (which if they did I have no knowledge of) then of course like you mentioned in your letter of Sept. 18, 1957 I would have no hearing before the hearing officer.
When I receive an answer from the Local Board as to the Classification Cards mentioned above I will notify you at once. till then I will prepare for the personal appearance I am to have before the Board in Nov. as per your letter of Sept. 18,1957.
Enclosed please find the copy of the BUSH letter you sent to me.
Another matter. Is the Local Board required to keep all letter pertaining to my case in my file? I suspect that many letters between the State Selective Service Headquarters and the Local Board Chairman concerning my case are not kept in file which is rather a handicap to knowing exactly that which is going on concerning my case. For example some time ago I was in the local Board's office copying things out of my file so I would have a complete file at home and so you would have a complete file to which to refer to and there was a letter in my file which made reference to another letter pertaining to my case which was not my file at the boards office. I ask the clerk about this letter and where it was. She was rather nervous and said there was no such letter, but when I pressed the issue she called in the Board Chairman to talk with me about the matter (he was up stairs in his law office) as we were discussing the matter the Clerk was going through papers in another file in the cabinate and had her fingers on this letter in question. Just at the time the time I brought the matter to a head with him and ask him where the letter was she (the Clerk) pulled this letter out of this other file and handing it to him said: "Is this it"? (which also indicated to me there was others). The letter she took out of the other file was then put in my file, but there was still a question in my mind as to whether this was the only or all the letters in that other file. If they are holding something back that they shouldn't please tell me how I should go about getting them all in my file.
I will keep you informed on all developments.
Your Brother,
E V C H O S C W F S .
Richard Ravel
Richard Raws Selective Service System Local Board No.
22 Chelan Co. Court House Wenatchee, Washington
Dear Sirs:
In reviewing my draft board file several questions have come up which I would appreciate clarification on.
Following the August 8, 1955 personal appearance before the board was I sent a Classification Card (SSS Form No. 110)? According to a letter in my file dated August 26, 1955 I was apparently sent one, but if I was I did not receive it. The last Classification Card I received is dated July 14, 1955 (I-A).
I have been waiting for the decision of the Appeal Board and to date have received none. Has the Appeal Board acted on my case? If so would you kindly inform me of the results.
In your September 11, 1957 letter it was not clear as to whether or not I was to appear before the local board in the November meeting or if I was just to submit written information. If it is proper I would also like to appear before the board at that time. Please notify me as to the date of that meeting when you have decided on it.
Sincerely yours,
Richard Rawe
Box 1676 Grand Conlee, Wash. Sept. 27, 1957
Hayden C. Covington 124 Columns
The sketch here
in 1521
is the
United Cattle. Wash.
INTERDITIONS TO DENVERING EMPLOYEE
DELIVERY COORDINATION
INFORMATION
FOR EMPLOYEES
WHERE
THE COORDINATION IS NEEDED FOR EMPLOYEES
ATTN: EMPLOYEE
DATE: 1990-01-01
RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL----15.20
SENT TO Selecting Service System
STREET AND NO Local Board # 22
CITY AND STATE County Court
If you want a return receipt, check which it shows to whom and when delivered
31¢ shows to whom, when, and address where delivered
If you want restricted delivery, check here20¢ fee
POD Form 3800 Replaces previous editions of Mar.1956 this form which MAY be used.
Watchtower 117 Adams Street Brooklyn 1, New York
Dear brothers:
Thank you very much for the enclosed letter of September 20,1957. The reason I am returning it is because there seems to be an error in the first paragraph. Is says that I have been pioneering "since October 1,1952"
According to my records I was appointed Vacation pioneer May 1, 1952 with the Grand Coulee Congregation of Jehovah's witnesses. On June 30 I was appointed Vacation pioneer with the Moses Lake Congregation. September 1, 1952 I received a Regular pioneer assignment with the Moses Lake Congregation and on May 20, 1953 an assignment with the Ephrata Congregation, where I am working now.
My "CERTIFICATE FOR PIONEER" (issued Dec. 31, 1952) states I was appointed a pioneer on May 1, 1952. In order that this "TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN" may be in harmony with this and other draft board records I am returning it so that if there is an error it may be corrected.
Thank you very much for your attention on this matter.
Your brother,
Richard Rawe SELECTIVE SERVICE SYSTEM
]
Local Board No. 22 Chelan County Court House Wenatchee, Washington
(LOCAL BOARD STAMP)
September 27,1957
IN REPLY, REFER TO.
Mr. Richard Martin Rawe Box 1576 Grand Coulee, Washington
Re: 45-22-34-183
Dear Mr. Rawe:
In answer to your letter of September 26th we reply as follows.
Notices of Classification (SSS Form No. 110) mailed to registrants and not returned to us are deemed to have been received by the registrant. The fact that you say you did not receive the classification card sent you on August 11, 1955 does not alter your classification, as your classification of I-A was not changed. I believe the August 26, 1955 letter to which you refer is a letter to the board from State Headquarters and has no bearing on the matter.
Why the appeal board did not act upon your appeal, I do not know. Presumably that is why we are being requested to reopen classification at the present time.
If you desire to come before the board you may do so at our meeting, October 3rd. It will begin at 1:30 P.M.
For the Local Board
JAO/fa
James A. O'Connor 7 a.
James A. O'Connor
Chairman WATCHTOWER BIBLE AND TRACT SOCIETY OF NEW YORK, INC.
117 ADAMS STREET, BROOKLYN 1, NEW YORK, U.S.A. SCA:SSA September 30, 1957
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
THIS IS TO CERTIFY that RICHARD RAWE, who was duly ordained on September 20,1942,has continuously served as a full-time minister,Pioneer, of Jehovah's Witnesses since May 1,1952.
Mr. Rawe's missionary congregation is made up of many groups of listeners and interested people living within the area officially assigned by this Society to the Ephrata, Washington, Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses. He serves as spiritual advisor and religious leader for this group of interested people. They are his congregation. He regularly provides them with spiritual aid and guidance. He is fully authorized by this Society to perform such public worship and to do missionary work. His vocation is the Christian ministry. He regularly teaches and preaches to his congregation the principles prescribed by Jehovah God, outlined in his Word, the Bible, and practiced by Jehovah's Witnesses under the direction of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, Inc. He is fully authorized to represent this Society as a Pioneer minister preaching to such congregation full-time.
Sincerely,
WATCHTOWER BIBLE AND TRACT SOCIETY, INCORPORATED
Superintendent of Ministers and Evangelists
Subscribed and sworn to before me in Kings County, New York, on this 30th day of September, 1957:
Berg ; P . Geyer
BENI. P. GEYER
Notry Public State of New York No.24-6501750 Qualified in Kings County Commission Expire March 30, 1958 SELECTIVE SERVICE SYSTEM
Local Board No. 22 Chelan County Court House Wenatchee, Washington
（LOCAL BOARD STAMP）
October 1, 1957
IN REPLY, REFER TO.
Mr. Richard Martin Rawe Box 1576 Grand Coulee, Washington
Re: 45-22-34-183
Dear Sir:
It has been necessary to postpone the date of next meeting of local board which was scheduled for October 3,1957.
We shall advise you of the date of meeting in either October or November, when it has been determined.
By Direction of the Local Board
Flavene D. Allen
Florence W. Allen
Clerk Hayden C.
Covington
124 Columbia Heights
Brooklyn 1, New York
Dear brother,
Enclosed please find two copies of the material I plan to send to the Draft Board for their next meeting when they consider my case. I do not plan to be at this meeting but if the decision they make is not IV-D then I will request a personal appearance at which time I will argue orally before the board. As you will note from enclosed letters from the draft board on Sept. 27 and Oct. 1; they are willing to have me come to this first meeting but it seems better just to submit the written material and afterward if their decision is not IV*d to then have a regular personal appearance in accord with the Regulations. What do you think, would it be better to go to the first meeting or just submit the material and then, if the decision is not favorable, to request a personal appearance
I will not be able to submit all the written material for about ten days as I will not have a photographic copy of the "TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:" till then. In the mean time I will be waiting any instruction from you.
Your brother,
Richard Rawe LAW OFFICES HAYDEN C.
COVINGTON 124 COLUMBIA HEIGHTS BROOKLYN 1, N. Y.
MAIN 5-1240
October 10, 1957
Richard Rawe
Box 1576
Grand Coulee, Wash.
Dear brother:
I have your letter of October 8.
It seems all right for you to follow the procedure you have outlined. The local board will have certain information from you. If, based on it, they do not give you 4-D, then you will have some basis for argument, and then you can file such additional material as you then have when you appear for the personal appearance. I return one of the copies of your letter of October 17 that you sent to me. You might correct the mis-spelling in the first line of paragraph five on page 1 and last word in the first line of paragraph two on page 2.
Having in mind that Selective Service 'harps' on the administering of rites and ceremonies, you might be prepared with written and oral information on this subject as suggested in the Counsel memorandum, copy of which is enclosed.
Your brother,
Stuyden Ecovings Local Board No.
22 Chelan County Court House Wenatchee, Washington
Dear Sirs:
The following information is to be considered at the next meeting of the Local Board (in Oct. or Nov.) when it considers my case.
The Act and Regulations make the following test for a Minister: (1) He must be a 'duly ordained minister of religion' (Section 16 (g) 1). (2) He must be a 'regular minister of religion' (Section 16 (g) 2,3). No other requirements are made either by the Act, Regulations or Courts.
Now comes the question, do I meet these requirements? The facts as presented show I do. There is included in my file a "CERTIFICATE FOR PIONEER" which testifies that I am "a duly ordained minister of Jehovah's witnesses". Other documents in my file show I have other appointments from the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society also. To futher show that I "administer the rites and ceremonies thereof in public worship", I enclose a copy of a "CLERGYMAN'S RECORD" that testifies to a funeral that I presided over.
Now, as to Section 16 (g) 2,3 do I meet these requirements? Again the record answers yes. I am still devoting up to 300 hours a month to ministerial activity as stated in "SUMMARY OF ORAL INFORMATION PRESENTED TO LOCAL BOARD" (Aug. 8, 1955). Please read now the enclosed "TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:" issued from the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, Incorporated, by T. J. Sullivan, Superintendent of Ministers and Evangelists. This shows that I have been a "full-time minister, Pioneer, of Jehovah's Witnesses since May 1, 1952", which is for more than 5 years. Note also that it testifies to the fact that I have a congregation of which I am the Minister.
…