This is the sixth in a series of posts about war tax resistance as it was
reported in back issues of Gospel Herald, journal
of the (Old) Mennonite Church.
In this episode I’m going to try to cover the climactic years of of World War
Ⅱ. Most of what I found concerned the pressure Mennonites were under to buy
war bonds (as was the case in World War Ⅰ) and the attempt by Mennonite
institutions to develop some sort of “Civilian Bonds” that Mennonites could buy
instead with a clean conscience. I’ll save all that
for last. Here are some other bits that touched on war tax resistance:
Although it is difficult and perhaps impossible for the nonresistant Christian
to avoid making some indirect contribution to war and the use of force through
the paying of his taxes, still this does not excuse him from taking his stand
in testimony against war and for obedience to Christ in every way that is
within his power.
“Difficult” and “perhaps impossible” the reviewer says, but not, I
note, “unchristian” or “unscriptural” as tax resistance might have been quickly
dismissed in the past.
A “Christian Doctrine” supplement carried an unsigned article entitled
“Are We All in the War?”
The whole thing is about whether “indirect” support for the national war effort
implicates individuals in war. But the only part that touched on taxes directly
was this:
The work the Christian does — on the farm, in the office or factory, or in the
home — all contributes in the long run and in remote ways to the support of
the nation and its people. This is most clearly evident in the paying of
government taxes, direct or indirect.
There the subject was dropped.
In the “Christian Doctrine”
supplement, I found an interesting attempt by Edward Yoder to weaken the
interpretation of Romans 13
that says everybody always owes allegiance to their government because all
governments are ultimately divinely ordained. Instead, he claimed, the passage
should be interpreted as being advice specific to the Roman Empire at the time
Paul’s letter to the Romans was written, which, Yoder claims, was a relatively
tranquil and peaceful period of Nero’s rule. Here are the key excerpts from
“The Christian’s Duty to Government”:
Paul certainly was guided and inspired by the Holy Spirit to write what he did
on this subject. But it is a fact also that he wrote as he did and with the
precise emphasis he did because of certain conditions that existed at the time
he wrote. Though he lays down broad general principles, he was nevertheless
giving advice and instruction to people who lived under specific conditions
and amid particular surroundings.
[I]n order to grasp the apostle’s sense and meaning, we must try to understand
as fully as we can the circumstances under which he wrote these words. The
words taken by themselves and apart from any reference to conditions then
existing cannot convey to us the apostle’s mind nor the Holy Spirit’s
intention.
Paul wrote to the Roman Christians , at a time when he was spending several months at Corinth while on
his third missionary tour. The Roman emperor at the time was Nero. This
emperor ruled . He
died at the age of thirty-two years, after a reign of fourteen years,
according to which reckoning he came to the throne in
as a youth of eighteen years. It so happens
that Nero is known to posterity chiefly for his cruelly and his monstrous
vices. It is true that the major part of his reign, and particularly the last
part, was marked by some of the worst crimes of which a human being is
capable, as well as by an inhuman persecution directed against the Christians.
It is from these facts that Nero derives his deservedly evil reputation in
later history.
But not so often are we reminded of the fact that the early part of Nero’s
reign was eminently peaceful and orderly. The first five years that Nero ruled
were highly beneficent and prosperous for the empire. These were the years
when he was still a youth and was largely under the influence of his friend
and tutor, the Stoic philosopher Seneca. It was only after the first five
years of his reign that Nero cast off the influence of his teacher and began
to give free reign to the more base and vicious traits in his character. It
was, accordingly, in these early years of Nero’s reign that Paul wrote his
Epistle to the Romans. This fact should no doubt be kept in mind when we read
the apostle’s unqualified instruction to the Christians, that they must be
subject to the government over them and should regard it as ordained of God.
Whether Paul would have written in exactly the same vein and with the same
emphasis [illegible] years later, when the Roman government had begun to
martyr Christians, we cannot know.
Yoder goes on to “consider the nature of Paul’s contacts with officials of the
Roman government up to the time he wrote his Letter to the Romans” and notes
that in general, they were good: Roman officials tended to sympathize with
Christians and protect them from persecutors, and Paul’s Roman citizenship
helped him get around and stay out of too much trouble… for a while.
Implied also is that Paul, who would soon try to get legal recognition for
Christianity in Rome, was under pressure to distinguish Christians as
relatively law-abiding compared to the restive Jews of which they were at the
time considered a mere subsect.
Evidently he was not thinking of a government at war but only of the normal
police and judicial functions of its officials. To take his admonition to be
obedient to rulers in an absolute and unqualified sense is to mistake the
apostle’s meaning, we may be sure.
Though Paul did write in this connection of human government as established of
God, it is significant to note that in the Revelation of John, which was
written later, earthly governments, especially those that persecuted and
martyred Christians, are represented as ravenous beasts. Circumstances appear
to have determined to some extent how the Christians regarded rulers and
government.
These same considerations also may help to account for something that we feel
is lacking in Paul’s instruction at this point. Seemingly he left out of
account the possibility that the government, “the powers that be,” might
become anti-Christian or openly hostile to the Christian faith and its
propagation. He speaks of rulers as the rewarders of those who do what is
good. Nevertheless Paul himself lived to see the day when this same government
began to punish those who did right, to punish Christians for the faith they
held and propagated. He himself suffered martyrdom under the government which
he had described as “ordained of God.” The fact that he placed no
qualification on the duty of obedience to rulers in this passage did not mean
that he would not qualify it in actual practice. Evidently in practice Paul
agreed with Peter when he informed the rulers at Jerusalem, that it is
necessary always “to obey God rather than man,” whenever the demands of the
two conflict with each other (Acts 4:19; 5:29).
…May we as followers of Christ in these days of increasing governmental
demands upon the population search the Scriptures more carefully and
intelligently than ever to learn the will of God and our duty toward
government under the circumstances in which we live.
War tax resisters in the Mennonite Church would have to reform the traditional
understanding of verses like those in Romans 13 in order to make headway, and
this was one early attempt.
The traditionalists didn’t surrender without a fight. For instance,
“The
Christian’s Duty to the Government” by J.C. Kolb,
, reasserted the traditional
“two kingdoms” reading of Romans 13 and insisted that “If the property or money
[a Christian] has accumulated is demanded by the government, he gives it
without resistance.”
Kolb felt that those who enjoy the privilege of living under our government
“should be impressed that it is a solemn duty to report at full value all
taxable property, and should make no effort to evade payment of any tax or use
their influence to have what may seem burdensome taxes or laws repealed.” When
good Christians encounter the government, he believed, they should “willingly
render… all their dues, ‘tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom;
fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.’ ”
Harold S. Bender wrote about
the connection between money and war
in the issue, stressing
the bond issue but giving no credence to war tax resistance as an option:
Money is involved in war in three ways: (1) Money that goes into war; (2)
Money that war destroys; and (3) Money that comes out of war. In each of these
three phases the Christian conscience speaks to control action and attitude.
1. The Money That Goes into War. — In time of peace we were told that
war is so expensive that it is unthinkable that civilized nations would repeat
the folly of the first World War. Yet today countless billions (not mere
millions) are being spent to carry on the most destructive war in history.
Modern war is expensive because it is highly mechanized and motorized, and
only those nations can practice war which have command of great material
resources and have great industrial production. Before this war is over, it
may well cost the participants a total of a half trillion dollars. It will
cost the United States of America in the next fiscal year perhaps
$100,000,000,000. These figures do not include the cost of war’s destruction.
The money that goes into war must be paid by the people of the nations that
make war. Most of it is paid in cash derived from taxes and loans, largely
loans. Taxes are levies made by the power of the state upon its citizens. If
the levies are not paid they will be taken by force. Loans are voluntary
surrenders of cash in return for a promise to repay and on which interest is
earned. The Scripture teaches plainly that Christians should pay taxes, which
are forced collections, unreturnable non-interest bearing. It does not teach
that voluntary contributions should be made to support war. The Christian
conscience which cannot take direct part in war cannot willingly take indirect
part in war. The man who makes loans to the government for the prosecution of
war, pays others to do, and makes it possible for them to do, what he himself
cannot conscientiously do. In addition, he makes a profit (interest) from the
business of killing. On these grounds the Nonresistant Christian cannot aid in
financing war. He cannot consistently purchase war bonds. But to purchase
government bonds in peace-time, or the same type of bonds (civilian bonds) in
war time, is not only legitimate, but may be the Christian’s duty. The war
bond purchaser commits treason against his own nonresistant conscience and his
witness against war. By purchasing civilian bonds he keeps his witness clear.
What is the record of the Mennonite Church in the matter of war bond and
civilian bond purchases in the present war? No statistics are available as to
war bond purchases, but sufficient is known to warrant the statement that
there is as much or more weakness and betrayal of the nonresistant position on
this point than there is on the draft. A considerable number of members have
purchased and are purchasing war bonds. Some ministers have neither admonished
against such purchases, nor advised civilian bond purchases, and it is reputed
that some have purchased such bonds themselves. Some (very few, no doubt) have
served on bond campaign committees. Failure on the war bond question seems all
the more inexcusable in our rural communities where the pressure is not strong
and where no compulsion is used. The
U.S. Department of
the Treasury has instructed all war bond committees to give full recognition
to conscience in this matter by recognizing civilian bond purchases. No one
needs to purchase war bonds; if he does so, he does it because he prefers war
bonds to civilian bonds.
Our young men are “on the spot” in the matter of the draft. They cannot escape
public scrutiny; their position on military service inevitably becomes known.
What would be the result if our men who are still earning and are not drafted
were to be placed publicly “on the spot” in the matter of war bond purchases?
Perhaps it would be an aid in strengthening consciences. The same is true in
the matter of civilian bond purchases. There are at least 15,000 heads of
families in the Mennonite Church, but to date apparently less than one fourth
have subscribed to civilian bonds. Since money put into civilian bonds does
not go into war, and since it aids in carrying the national burden and in
preventing inflation, there is good reason for conscientious nonresistant
people to do their proper share by purchasing civilian bonds in proportion to
their income.
What then shall we as conscientious Christians do with our money in war time?
The simple answer is: keep it out of war, and keep it in the Lord’s work; but
in any case use it conscientiously and sacrificially, not as usurers but as
stewards.
During the
Alberta-Saskatchewan Conference
it was noted that some of the “boys” in the camps for
conscripted conscientious objectors were being asked to sign contracts in which
part of their wages were to be paid to the Red Cross. Because the Red Cross was
working closely with the military, Mennonites had been discouraged from making
voluntary donations to the Red Cross. However, because a contract like the ones
the conscientious objectors were being told to sign
“partakes of the nature of a tax” (as opposed to a
voluntary contribution) the conference advised the objectors to go ahead and
sign such contracts while they tried to work out an alternative.
The edition included an
interesting (but uncredited) letter
“From a C.O. to His Pastor”.
Part of this letter tried to reform the understanding of the Render Unto Caesar
riddle in a similar way to that in which Edward Yoder tried to loosen the
bonds of Romans 13:
When Jesus said, “Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s,
and unto God the things that are God’s,” He did not answer the Pharisees’
question. He merely gave them the principle for answering the question for
themselves. He did not say the tax money belonged to Caesar, nor did He say
that it belonged to God. He made no decision for them. I do not see how more
than just that can be made from this passage. It in no way defines what it is
that belongs to Caesar, neither does it say what belongs to God. We must of
course give to Caesar that which is Caesar’s, but we must also take care lest
we give to Caesar what alone belongs to God.
In fulfilling our new responsibility, we “Render to Caesar the things that are
Caesar’s.” When taxes are called for, we gladly, wholeheartedly, and honestly
render them to the authorities. Before salvation had wrought in us the change
which enables us to do this, we attempted whenever possible to render unto
ourselves the things that were Caesar’s. We were vain enough to endeavor to do
such things because at the same time we were trying to render unto ourselves
the things that belonged to God. It seems to me that when we truly learn to
“Render… to God the things that are God’s,” we will also faithfully “Render to
Caesar the things that are Caesar’s.”
And a “Sunday School
Lesson” on “The True Christian a Good Citizen”
(credited to “A.M.E.” — likely Alta May Erb) supplemented this with a
non-scriptural reason why Christians ought to pay all their taxes:
In return for what we receive we should be glad to pay our taxes. No true
Christian will grumble at or try to avoid them in any way. It costs money to
run the government. If the money we give is not all used wisely, we are not
responsible for that.
A couple of articles around this time tried to draw a distinction between the
Mennonite “nonresistance” doctrine, which included unwillingness to participate
in war but which was based on Jesus’s command to “resist not evil,”
with the superficially similar philosophy of pacifism, which was a
non-Biblically based position about the use of violence:
This suggests to me that Mennonites were beginning to feel some pressure from
the pacifist flank about the adequacy or sincerity of their nonresistant
position, or that some Mennonites were beginning to drift from traditional
nonresistance into a more radical pacifism and that the traditionalists felt
the need to bring them back in line.
The “Civilian Bonds” Scheme
Okay: This is going to be a bit lengthy, and some of it is going to be dull,
but it’s an important part of the story. Brace yourselves.
We’ll start with an editorial signed “H.” (John L. Horst, I think)
concerning “Defense Spending and Defense Bonds”
that appeared in the edition.
(The U.S. had begun
to offer “Defense Bonds” for sale on .) Excerpts:
Many of us recall the high-pressure drives to sell liberty bonds during the
World War some twenty years ago. It is worthy of note that the Secretary of
the Treasury, Henry Morgenthau, announces that “there is to be no ‘drive’,
there are to be no quotas, there is to be no hysteria, there is to be no
appeal to hate or fear.” This is a fine statement and we can only hope that it
will be carried out in good faith. At the same time it is well to notice that
already a “drive” is on over the radio and through the press and that a real
sales campaign is on.
The sale and purchase of war bonds has always been an issue of real concern to
all who are opposed to war on Christian principles. If it is wrong to take up
the sword or the rifle or other instruments of warfare, what about lending
money to help produce and buy war materials? Also what about working in a
factory which makes war materials? although that is not now our subject. On
both of these points our General Conference has spoken. The statement on
“Peace, War, and Military Service,” as adopted by the session of General
Conference, at Turner, Oregon, ,
says on the point of war or defense bonds:
We can have no part in the financing of war operations through the purchase
of war bonds in any form or through voluntary contributions to any of the
organizations or activities falling under the category described above [civil
organizations such as the Y.M.C.A.
and Red Cross, temporarily allied with the military in the prosecution of the
war] unless such contributions are used for civilian relief or similar
purposes.
It is well for us as nonresistant people to study the implications of the
present drive for money to be used for defense purposes. Even though the
government disavows all high-pressure methods for the sale of defense bonds
and stamps, one cannot tell what may happen in local communities. It is well
to be prepared so that we may give intelligent and Scriptural reasons for our
nonparticipation in this movement, either in buying or in selling. Let us aim
in all things to maintain a consistent and courageous attitude, yet with all
humility, so that we may not, on the spur of the moment or under strong
pressure, be drawn into doing that which we will later regret and which is
entirely incompatible with the profession of our faith.
A follow-up
concerned scrap metal drives and “our sincerity in refusing to participate in
the drive for defense aluminum and all similar defense efforts that solicit
voluntary contributions.”
O[rie].O. Miller reported on arrangements made by the
M.C.C.
to issue certificates of receipt for donations made to War Sufferers’ Relief
and Civilian Public Service, which certificates could be used by our people as
substitutes for giving to various defense and war drives such as
U.S.O.
He also reported on the possibility that a special agricultural bond issue
might be issued by the government which could be purchased by our people as
substitutes for defense or war bonds. The National Service Board is working on
this matter.
We are conscious of the fact that the human and material resources of the
nation are being marshalled by our government in a total war effort, and that
we shall be expected and asked, possibly in some matters commanded, to
participate in it. In the light of our historic nonresistant position, which
is well known to our government and our fellow citizens by repeated
testimonies in recent times, and has been maintained with devotion for over
four hundred years, and which we hold as a deep and sincere conviction of
conscience based upon our understanding of the Gospel of Christ and the Word
of God, we do not see how we can consistently participate in this national war
effort, much as we purpose in all other respects to be obedient, loyal, and
productive citizens.
We are deeply grateful for the continued recognition of our religious
conscience which is contained in the Selective Service and Training Act… If in
this supreme demand for participation in the national war effort our democracy
has honored the religious conscience to the extent of total exemption, we are
confident that in all lesser demands a similar freedom and protection of
conscience will be extended. This, we believe, will apply… to participation in
war financing through the purchase of war or defense bonds and savings stamps…
[W]e desire to appeal to our people on the following points:
That we do not purchase war and defense bonds and savings stamps, but rather
purchase civilian government bonds and savings stamps as they are provided.
Inasmuch as the question of the purchase of government bonds and savings
stamps is now before many of our people, we suggest the following to meet this
situation:
That M.C.C.
certificates of donation for relief and civilian public service, and M.C.C.
donation stamps, might serve as alternates to defense bond and savings
stamp purchases, particularly for those with limited means and for
children.
That those who are able to purchase government bonds of substantial size
might make use of a statement of readiness to purchase civilian bonds when
they become available. The following form might be useful for this
purpose:
Statement of Readiness to Purchase Civilian Government Bonds
In consistency with my religious belief and conscientious convictions, I
cannot aid or abet war or give voluntary support to the national war
effort, and for these reasons cannot purchase government obligations the
proceeds of which are used for war purposes. However, I do wish to
support my country with such means as are at my disposal, for
constructive ends and particularly in works of relief of human need and
suffering, and am accordingly prepared and ready to purchase $⸺ par
value of government obligations that may become available for such
purposes, when and as they are approved by the Mennonite Central
Committee to this end. I will subsequently make additional purchases as
my circumstances and the general situation may warrant.
Signed ⸺
As we learned when we went through The Mennonite
archives, the quest during World War Ⅱ for “Civilian Bonds” in the
U.S. that would not
be tainted by military spending ended up being the pursuit of a mirage. There
were some issues of government bonds that were not called war bonds,
and that some Mennonites eagerly purchased for that reason, but the money went
to the exact same place either way.
To date, no law or regulation has been passed compelling civilians (which
includes all of us not in the army) to participate in any way in the national
war effort. There is no governmental compulsion to buy war or defense bonds or
savings stamps, support the Red Cross, work in defense or war industries, or
participate in Civilian Defense activities. Therefore anyone who
participates in the various phases of the war effort does so voluntarily.
Pressures on our people to take part in these things may be strong, but they
are no stronger than the pressures on our drafted men to accept service in the
army. As sincere nonresistant people we should not yield to these pressures
and thus compromise our faith and our conscience. We should not be less
steadfast at home than those who are drafted to camp.
Gradual progress apparently is being made on the bond issue for which we have
been hoping. Just as soon as we have definite information, it will be sent
out. Meanwhile, we encourage the increased use of the Contributor’s
Certificates and the Statement of Readiness to Purchase Civilian Government
Bonds. These two expedients have proven effective in the relief of pressure to
buy Defense Bonds in most cases that have come to our attention where they
have been wisely employed.
There are constant inquiries about civilian government bonds. As yet there is
no definite information about them. When such information is at hand, it will
be passed on without delay. Meanwhile, there are the temporary expedients of
“Statement of Readiness to Purchase Civilian Government Bonds” and the
Contributor’s certificate. Probably these possibilities have not yet been
exhausted in most cases.
In the following issue ()
Hoover tried to make
the situation
more clear:
Judging from the constant flow of inquiries, there is obviously a rather
general misunderstanding concerning the purpose and use of Bonds,
Certificates, and stamps. The Mennonite Central Committee has adopted a
certificate for contributions to Relief or Civilian Public Service. This
serves as a form of receipt for contributions to the services administered by
the
M.C.C.
for the various co-operating groups. The minimum contribution for which these
certificates were formerly issued was ten dollars. This has now been changed,
so that any gift of five dollars or more will be recognized by a certificate.
For smaller amounts or for those who prefer the stamp-album plan stamps have
been provided as a receipt for contributions. When stamps have been
accumulated to the amount of five dollars, a certificate will be issued if
desired.
Possession of… certificates and stamps by individuals who cannot
conscientiously participate in the financial side of the military program,
indicates their eagerness to support an alternative program of constructive
service to their country and their fellowmen. These certificates and stamps
are not officially recognized by the United States Government as alternative
to defense bonds and stamps, but they are significant to the extent that they
represent genuine sacrifice on the part of the contributors, and support to
national service which they can conscientiously give.
Neither the certificates nor the stamps are redeemable. Their only dividend
is satisfaction in a service of good-will rendered in behalf of human freedom
and welfare.
The certificates and stamps are simply evidence of gifts made to this
testimony for peace and good-will, which is the spirit of Christ and is done
in His name. Such evidence of support given to such humanitarian and
constructive causes as are sponsored by the
M.C.C.
should have its effect in relieving pressure to contribute or lend to military
purposes. But these are not officially recognized as alternatives to defense
bonds.
As a direct answer to growing pressure to buy defense bonds the
M.C.C.
and other interested groups through the National Service Board are seeking to
have a special issue of Civilian Government Bonds or notes from the
U.S. Treasury
Department, which will be earmarked for Civilian services instead of for war.
There is reason to believe that such will eventually be available from the
Government. But this is not yet certain. These bonds are not yet available.
When they are issued, information as to where and how to obtain them will be
given.
Meanwhile, the continued and consistent use of the “Statement of Readiness to
Purchase Civilian Government Bonds” is encouraged. These have provided
temporary relief of pressure in most cases where wisely applied. These are
simply what the name implies, an indication that the individual is willing to
purchase Civlian Government Bonds if and when such are issued. It is well to
read carefully the statement which is carried on these. It should be
self-explanatory.
When new developments come, information will be given. Until then, it should
help substantially to relieve pressure if you have evidence of generous
contributions to the Relief and Civilian Public Service program now being
carried on by the Mennonite Central Committee.
We wish to reaffirm that it does not appear consistent for our members who are
conscientious objectors, to knowingly fail to register as such, voluntarily
continue to work in generally recognized direct war defence shops, or to
voluntarily purchase War Defense Bonds, Stamps, and such like.
Another note
in the edition showed that at
least a few Mennonites were endorsing some really flimsy fig leaves, like
buying war bonds and affixing stickers to them saying that the money should
only be used for nice things:
Mennonites Support Victory Loan.
Full co-operation of Ontario Mennonites was pledged toward the second Victory
Loan, it was announced by Jesse B. Martin of Waterloo. Secretary of the war
problems committee of the conference of historic peace churches,
Bro. Martin said Mennonites
would purchase two types of bonds. One is a non-interest bearing certificate,
Series B, which was instituted a year ago in lieu of war savings certificates.
The second is the regular Victory Bond to which a sticker will be attached
stating the money will be used “to finance expenditures to
alleviate distress and human suffering due to war.” The same applies to
the non-interest bearing bonds. Church officials in Waterloo North have
authorized letters to be sent to every Mennonite family asking their full
co-operation. Last year Mennonites loaned to the government without interest
and donated outright in relief work a total in excess of $35,000. ―Ernest
Gingerich in “Christian Conservator.”
The Peace Problems Committee of General Conference met at Akron,
Pa., on
, to take up matters
especially relating to the Civilian Bond question. It is believed that a
satisfactory solution to this problem has been found, and the Committee
expects to make a complete report in the near future.
Bro. H.S. Bender, chairman of
our Peace Problems Committee sends us the following:
The Secretary of the Treasury, Mr. Morgenthau, has approved in principle the
plan to issue civilian bonds which had been proposed to him by the Mennonite
Central Committee. Details are still to be worked out. Full announcement will
be made later. A meeting of representative church leaders will be called at
Chicago to present the entire matter at the earliest possible date.
The following article, from the Gospel Herald’s
“Christian Doctrine” supplement,
shows just how “voluntary” these bond drives were, at least for government
employees:
A general campaign will soon be under way to sell one billion dollars’ worth
of War Savings Bonds and Stamps each month. This campaign is to be purely
voluntary. Many people, however, have conscientious scruples about
participating to this extent in the war effort and yet are willing to
co-operate in preventing inflation.
Governor James of Pennsylvania, in a memorandum to State employees in
, stated,
“In the event that any employee has conscientious objections to purchasing
defense stamps or bonds, a pledge form for him must contain a statement to
that effect, showing the religious denomination or sect of which he is a
member. Such employee is expected to contribute, before the end of the
campaign, to a relief or service organization of his choice, such as the
Friends Service Committee, American Red Cross,
etc. The pledge
form must also contain a statement of his intentions to make such
contribution.”
On , the Deputy State
Administrator for Pennsylvania of the Treasury Department Defense Savings
Staff in a letter to the Field Secretary of Race Street Yearly Meeting of
Friends says, “We realize that your members are making large and generous
contributions in connection with the dictates of their own consciences. We
also realize that your members… would not like to have anyone feel that they
are not co-operating as far as possible in accordance with their personal
leanings.”
The letter then advises that contributions and pledges to the Civilian Public
Service Camps are an acceptable alternative to the purchase of War Savings
Bonds. Would not the governor of your state issue a similar statement, if he
were requested to do so? ―From “Peace Action.”
The “Civilian Bonds” scheme took at step forward in
, according to
this article
by Orie O. Miller:
Since last week’s release of Secretary of the Treasury, Henry M. Morgenthau
Jr.’s letter of
to Paul French, naturally many
inquiries have come to
M.C.C.
headquarters as to the necessary next steps in taking advantage of this
announced provision for purchase of non-war Bonds. A committee representative
of each of the several groups most interested in this has held a number of
meetings and is in process of completing arrangements with the Provident Trust
Company of Philadelphia to serve as intermediary in this matter. It is
expected that the detailed plans to make the arrangement effective will be
ready for submission to the responsible agencies in these several groups by
. It is hoped that fully detailed
information will be available for any one interested in using this provision
before . Naturally, all who
are concerned in this problem are appreciative of the Treasury Department’s
attitude.
On , at the call of the Peace
Problems Committee of General Conference, a group of fifty church leaders,
representing for the most part the constituent groups represented in or
co-operating with the Mennonite Central Committee, met at the Home Mission in
Chicago, to consider a plan for the issuance of Civilian Bonds for those who
are conscientiously opposed to the purchase of war or defense bonds.
It had been previously announced that the Secretary of the Treasury, Henry
Morganthau, Jr., had approved
the issuance of such bonds for those who cannot participate in the purchase of
war bonds. Tentative arrangements had been made for the sale of such bonds
through the Provident Trust Company of Philadelphia,
Pa., and it remained now
for the Mennonite Church and co-operating bodies to decide whether the
arrangements were satisfactory, and, if so, to make plans for publicity and
sale of the bonds and the placing of responsibility for supervision of the
work and continued contacts with the Provident Trust Company and the Treasury
Department.
After the plan was thoroughly explained it was approved by all present, and
the Mennonite Central Committee was designated as the publicity and
implementing agent for Mennonite and co-operating groups. Orie O. Miller was
designated as the Mennonite representative on a Civilian Bond Committee of
three, the other representatives to be limited to the Church of the Brethren,
and the Friends, who are also vitally interested in the issuance of these
bonds. Action was also taken to provide for the appointment of an advisory
committee to assist Bro.
Miller in his Civilian Bond work.
The meeting also passed the following resolution which should be of interest
to our church leaders as well as to all members who could participate in the
purchase of bonds:
Inasmuch as our government continues to need borrowed funds for its ongoing
civilian services as stated by the Secretary of the Treasury, and inasmuch as
it is our duty and privilege as Christians to support our government by the
means at our disposal within the limits of conscience, and inasmuch as an
acceptable plan has been provided whereby our people can purchase civilian
government bonds with the distinct recognition of our conscience by the
government, as reported and recommended by the Peace Problems Committee, we
hereby express our appreciation to the government for this privilege and
advise and encourage our people to purchase the Civilian Bonds provided for
the above plan, not grudgingly but cheerfully, in line with our financial
ability and what is expected of the nation as a whole in the way of financial
support of the government at the present time.
Official notice from the Peace Problems Committee will appear later in the
Gospel Herald stating more specifically the plan that has been worked out and
giving the date when money may be sent in for the purchase of these bonds.
Arrangements for the sale should be completed soon, and will fill a long-felt
need on the part of all who cannot conscientiously purchase war bonds. We may
well thank the Lord for this recognition of conscience on the part of our
government.
Orie O. Miller gave some further notes about the plan in the
issue:
A specially called meeting of the Mennonite Central Committee with about
[illegible] representatives from the several
M.C.C.
constituent groups met at the Mennonite Home Mission…
, to give consideration to the
detailed plans which have been developed from the promotion, purchasing, and
handling of Civilian Bonds to be made available as outlined in United States
Secretary of the Treasury, Henry Morgenthau,
Jr.’s
letter to Paul C. French. The plan
as presented was unanimously endorsed by the official committees representing
the several
M.C.C.
constituent groups. The Mennonite Central Committee was requested by all these
groups to serve their interests further in this matter. The Committee then
provided for the continuing program. Fuller details will appear in next
week’s notes, and it is hoped within another ten days to send directly to all
our congregations full information as to the operation of the plan.
I remind you that as far as I have been able to determine, there was no
practical difference between war bonds and “Civilian Bonds” except for their
names. In both cases, people who bought the bonds were loaning money to the
federal government that went into the general fund for Congress to spend on war
and everything else. The war bond / victory bond designations were only
marketing tools designed to make certain bond issues more appealing to war
supporters. So all of this fuss is just to figure out a way that Mennonites can
buy a bunch of government bonds during the war like everyone else is doing,
without having to buy bonds that are explicitly called “war” bonds.
Nonetheless, such bonds apparently “recognized the conscience of
nonresistant people” and “fill[ed] a longfelt need on the part of those who
cannot conscientiously purchase war or defense bonds,” as the following
editorial put it (, credited to
“H.” — possibly John L. Horst):
Elsewhere in this issue will be found a lengthy account of the development and
adoption of a nonwar bond plan which is acceptable both to the government and
to the peace churches. This new plan, which will soon be in operation, fills a
longfelt need on the part of those who cannot conscientiously purchase war or
defense bonds.
The article referred to explains the plan and how it will operate. It should
be noted that the purchases are to be made though the Provident Trust Company
of Philadelphia, Pa., and
that the bonds are a type similar to the series G of regular defense bonds in
this way: they are priced at par, and that the interest is paid periodically
by check from the United States Treasury. It should also be noted that $1.50
should be sent in addition to the par value of the bond, in order to pay the
Trust company for its services in purchasing the bond. This applies to all
denominations of bonds, that is, the purchaser of a $50 bond should send
$51.50, and he who buys a $500 bond should send $501.50. The plan will be
explained in greater detail in the circulars which will be sent to pastors of
all our churches. Your minister should be able to give you whatever
information you need concerning the purchase of Civilian bonds.
Since these bonds will be counted into the quotas which the government allots
to different geographical sections, this should relieve all pressure to buy
war bonds once local sponsors of bond drives understand the principle of the
plan as laid down by the government. It should also be said that, in line with
our duty to the government to support its nonwar functions, we should be
willing to buy bonds in quantities similar to what is expected of the nation
as a whole.
Once again the government has recognized the conscience of nonresistant people
and has made provision by which they can serve their country in accordance
with their consciences with regard to the support of war. May we therefore not
hesitate to avail ourselves of the privileges and opportunities which our
government gives to us as a people. We have another reason to praise the Lord
that we are living in America instead of in some dictator-dominated,
militaristic nation.
The following article, also from the issue, gave more details about the negotiations that went in to
the formation of the Civilian Bonds plan:
A concern for a Civilian Bond Purchase plan was first noted and discussed by
the National Service Board for Religious Objectors in
, at which time a Committee was
appointed to study possibilities. For many months all contacts with Treasury
Department officials seemed fruitless. , it was agreed that those groups most concerned should address
their petitions in writing to Secretary of the Treasury Henry Morgenthau, and
that Paul Comly French of the Committee would then present these letters in
person. Among these was the following letter, prepared under the direction of the Mennonite Central
Committee:
The Honorable Mr. Henry Morgenthau
Secretary of the Treasury
Washington, D.C.
Dear Mr. Morgenthau:
In the attached statement of the position of the Mennonite Church on “Peace,
War, and Military Service” adopted at its General Conference at Turner,
Oregon, in , you will note on
page 3, item 3 the following: “We can have no part in the financing of war
operations through the purchase of war bonds in any form or through voluntary
contributions to any of the organizations or activities falling under the
category described immediately above, unless such contributions are used for
civilian relief or similar purposes.” In other portions of this same
statement can be noted the implications of our position and the Biblical
basis for it as it relates to military service. All of the Mennonite bodies
co-operating through the agency of this Committee hold substantially this
position. As a religious group we appreciate most sincerely the respect
granted us in this position at the present time and the provision which has
been made for our conscripted young men to render their service to this
country through Civilian Public Service as provided for in “The Selective
Training and Service Act of ” and the
subsequent regulations by the Selective Service Administration. Current
contributions from the Committee’s membership constituency to the cost of
carrying forward the Committee’s administrative share of this program are
running between Thirty and Forty Thousand Dollars monthly.
In the numerous other relationships which the members of our groups have in
this country at the present time, we are endeavoring to consistently apply
our ideals and purposes outlined not only in this statement but also in other
similar statements of position made during our past four centuries of
history. The purpose of this letter, however, is to bring to your attention
the quotation noted above with the request that your office give
consideration to some technique by which our members could consistently aid
their government with the loan of financial means at their disposal without
violating conscience.
In this connection and through the agency of the National Service Board for
Religious Objectors… Paul Comly French, Executive Secretary, we have
on a number of occasions during the past months contacted individuals in your
department — among these, Mr. Graves, Mr. Houghtling, and Mr. Kuhns — and
have also explained our concern to Wayne Coy, Senator Robert A. Taft, and
others. Inasmuch as our constituents in Canada were faced with a similar
situation earlier than we, and since the Canadian government arranged to make
available to them two special types of investments (a Series B,
noninterest-bearing, nonnegotiable certificate, whose proceeds were
designated for reconstruction and relief work; and special stickers for the
regular Victory Bond Series, which served to designate such funds for the
same purpose), it was our earlier assumption that perhaps similar offerings
might be made available to our members in the United States. Through Mr.
French, however, we now learn that your Department has investigated this
Canadian provision and has stated that such provision would be too expensive
from the standpoint of administrative cost. Representatives of the Treasury
Department in Ottawa have advised our own leaders in Canada of their
satisfaction with the arrangement and of their appreciation of the
subscriptions to date. From the angle of our own position such an arrangement
as is provided in Canada would be entirely satisfactory. In the matter of the
cost of administration to the government in making such or similar offerings
available to our people here, we believe also that a plan could be worked out
to cover this administrative cost by and within our own group.
We have also been advised by Treasury Department representatives that the
type of certificate, bond, or evidence of indebtedness which would meet these
purposes is not available in the United States and could not be made
available except by an Act of Congress. On this point we, of course,
recognize that you yourself would be in the best position to know what might
be best or could be arranged. It has occurred to us however — inasmuch as our
Government does continue to have financial needs along a number of civilian
lines as heretofore — that perhaps some form of special, long-term,
low-interest-bearing, nonnegotiable Treasury Note might be made available in
units of One Hundred Thousand Dollars or more bearing a statement on its face
to the effect that the amount of money in question represents aid to the
Government in certain of its continuing civilian interests. We think, for
instance, of the budget requirements allowed to Selective Service — Camp
Operations Division — by which funds are provided for the “Work of National
Importance” technical agencies co-operating with our present Civilian Public
Service program. We do not know what this amounts to annually but assume that
the total is at least several millions of dollars. We would be happy to have
the proceeds of loans made by our people so indicated on the face of the
aforementioned Treasury Note.
The provision of such an arrangement as outlined in the foregoing paragraph
would also imply that the Treasury would recognize local subscriptions to
these on the part of our members as acceptable in lieu of subscriptions to
the regularly offered Defense Bond Series; in fact, it would be entirely
satisfactory to us to have such subscriptions channeled through the regular
local soliciting agencies as is being done in Canada.
The membership of Mennonite and co-operating groups in the United States
totals, in round numbers, 125,000 — our total constituency, including
children, is perhaps something under 200,000. We believe that the average
wealth and income of Mennonites is about the same as that of the average of
other American citizens, and we are certain that if a Treasury offering were
made available to us consistent with our group’s historic position on this
question our members throughout the country would subscribe their full share
and more. We will be glad to give you further full assurance of this, and
also as noted before, we will be happy to arrange to carry the additional
administrative costs for making available and handling such offerings
received through one of our group agencies. Because of the large number of
inquiries received at this office on this point we have made available some
months ago to our members a printed statement of “Readiness to Purchase
Civilian Government Bonds” as per attached copy. The large quantity of these
that have been ordered from our office and the continued large number of
letters received by us convince us of the growing concern of our members
throughout the country that if at all possible something consistent with the
position we hold might be arranged.
We will be glad to meet with you or any one in the Treasury Department whom
you designate to discuss this matter further at any time and place that you
suggest. We do hope for your favorable consideration of this petition and
request at any early date.
Very sincerely,
MENNONITE CENTRAL COMMITTEE
Orie O. Miller
Executive Secretary
Subsequent to this presentation and discussion of same in the office of
Under-Secretary of the Treasury, Daniel W. Bell, there was the following
further exchange of correspondence between Paul Comly French and the Treasury.
Mr. Henry Morgenthau, Jr.
Secretary of the State
Washington, D.C.
Dear Mr. Morgenthau:
This will confirm our conversation regarding the problem confronting the
members of the religious groups represented by the National Service Board for
Religious Objectors who feel conscientiously unable to purchase Defense
Bonds. They understand that there are continuing expenses for the regular
functions of the Government, totalling some six billion dollars annually.
Would it be possible for us to purchase regular issues of Treasury bonds and
notes and then redistribute them to our people in smaller denominations
through a nonprofit corporation we are organizing?
Any rate of interest established by the Treasury is agreeable to us, but we
would prefer a rate lower than that paid on Defense Bonds. We are willing to
accept notes with any maturity date which seems right to you. We would handle
all subscriptions, and the Treasury would not be required to assume any
additional clerical burden on our behalf.
If this plan is satisfactory to you, would it be possible for us to explain
to our neighbors that we are aiding in the financing of the Government in
ways that our consciences permit and that the United States Treasury has
approved our plan?
Cordially yours,
Paul Comly French
Dear Mr. French:
This will acknowledge your letter of
In line with our recent conversation, I think you understand that the
Treasury needs some six billion dollars annually to maintain civilian
services of the Government which are essential to the basic needs of human
life, to conserve our national resources, and to keep in repair our national
plant. The Treasury would be willing to have the funds to be subscribed by
your people invested in Treasury bills, Treasury certificate of indebtedness,
Treasury notes, and Treasury bonds which the Treasury offers publicly to the
people of the United States from time to time, and which are not designated
by their terms as “war issues.” I shall be glad to see that you are notified
each time an offering of this kind is made.
It is our understanding that you will buy such securities as are issued, in
amounts in line with the financial resources of your people, and then
distribute certificates of participation in smaller denominations through a
nonprofit corporation you are organizing. This plan is agreeable to us and
will, we believe, satisfy the American people that the groups you represent
are contributing to the support of the Government in ways their consciences
will permit.
We understand that the groups you represent are making contributions to the
support of the Civilian Public Service Camps for conscientious objectors
authorized by the Congress and the Selective Service System which would
otherwise have been a charge on the Treasury of the United States.
We are all seeking the same objectives and ail glad that our American
democracy is able to recognize the conscientious convictions of a minority of
our citizens.
Sincerely yours,
H. Morgenthau, Jr.
Secretary of the Treasury
After receiving the letter from Mr.
Morgenthau’s office, a meeting of representatives of interested groups was
called together in Philadelphia for discussion of further procedure. It was
there concluded that as intermediary between the subscribers and the
government for these bonds and as agent for these subscribers and the groups
they represent, an established, well-known, financial institution would be
preferable to any other plan that might be devised. Provident Trust Company of
Philadelphia was suggested. Contact was immediately made through one Provident
Trust Company’s Vice-President and the group was assured that this institution
would endeavor to serve in this capacity. A series of conferences with
officials of Provident Trust Company and a further conference with
Under-Secretary Daniel W.B[illegible] ironed out and developed further details
necessary before the plan could be presented to the groups concerned. By
, however, it was felt that the plan
was ready for such presentation.
A special meeting of representatives of the operating Mennonite and associated
groups was, therefore, called to meet with the
M.C.C.
at the Mennonite Home Mission… on . The Secretary of the Mennonite Central Committee presented to this
gathering the provision for purchase of Civilian Bonds by those who cannot
conscientiously purchase War Bonds and gave at the same time a review of the
work which had been done in this matter by the representatives of the
Committee and of the National Service Board, and stated: (a) that Provident
Trust Company will serve as agent for the purchase of Civilian Government
Bonds to be distributed to individuals, (b) That a representative of the
Mennonite Central Committee, with representatives of the Brethren Service
Committee and the American Friends Service Committee would constitute a
Civilian Bond Committee to supervise the plan and to apply for specific
Government Bond purchases, (c) That a charge of $1.50 for each bond purchased
by subscriber would cover all costs of the service.
A letter from Provident Trust Company to the
M.C.C.
tentatively outlining the arrangement for their services as agent was read.
Further explanation was also made to the gathering concerning the method of
promoting the sale of these bonds and of explaining the plan to our people.
After clarification of specific points in the plan, the gathering gave
consideration to it and what attitudes our several groups would want to take
toward same in separate
M.C.C.
constituent group meetings. Following this, the gathering reassembled for
receiving the reports from the several groups. Inasmuch as these were
practically unanimous in favoring the plan, the following resolution was then
moved and seconded as the evident mind of the meeting and passed by unanimous
vote:
That we approve the Civilian Bond plan submitted by Orie O. Miller, Executive
Secretary of the Mennonite Central Committee, and charge the Mennonite
Central Committee with the responsibility of representing the co-operating
Mennonite and associated groups in the administration and promotion of the
plan, and in any further needed representation to the government or private
agencies.
At this point the Mennonite Central Committee membership then took over
further action as noted in the following minutes:
That the Mennonite Central Committee accept the charge assigned to it in the
matter of the Civilian Bond Plan by the co-operating Mennonite and associate
groups and proceed to set up the organization and policies necessary to carry
out the plan.
Moved and passed that the promotion of the Civilian Bond program in the
churches be made the responsibility of the Peace Section, together with the
responsibility for raising the finances necessary for this work.
Moved and passed that Orie O. Miller be appointed the
M.C.C.
representative on the Civilian Bond Committee.
Moved and passed that the Executive Committee appoint an advisory committee
to assist O.O. Miller in his work as Mennonite representative on the Civilian
Bond Committee.
The Brethren Service Committee has similarly approved for its constituency the
program as outlined and has designated its representative on the Civilian Bond
Committee. The American Friends Service Committee still has the plan under
advisement with indication that this constituency will also co-operate. A
publicity folder approved by Provident Trust Company and the Civilian Bond
Committee, has been prepared and is in the printers’ hands now. A packet of
these with accompanying explanatory letter will be mailed to all M.C.C.
constituent group pastors just as soon as these are available from the
printer, from which time the plan then becomes operative.
Orie O. Miller,
Secretary of M.C.C.
Ⅱ. How to Use the Plan
Many anxious inquiries have come to us during the past few months, asking
whether we had a solution to offer to the growing pressure to buy Defense or
War Bonds. It was necessary for us repeatedly to inform you that nothing was
yet developed, but that we were diligently and hopefully employed in an
attempt to meet your requirements. Our hopes, prayers, and labors have at last
borne fruit. We can now offer our people subscriptions to Government Bonds
that are not for war purposes. Provision also is made for the recognition of
such subscriptions to alternative bonds, both by church group as well as by
county quota. This opens up an avenue of service for which many of our people
have long been hoping.
In the Chicago meeting of , after
explanation had been made by the Secretary of the Mennonite Central Committee,
it was practically unanimously agreed by all groups represented that we should
go ahead with the proposed plan as submitted. It was further agreed that the
M.C.C.
should be the implementing agency for the Mennonites and their affiliates. The
further promotion and publicizing of the program was given into the hands of
the Peace Section.
The circular which has been prepared will outline in detail the operation of
the plan. These descriptive circulars are being mailed to each minister or
pastor on the available mailing list, as furnished us by the various
conferences represented in the
M.C.C.
If for any reason your pastor does not receive the circulars and application
blanks within a few days, we invite you to get in touch with the Mennonite
Central Committee, Akron, Pennsylvania.
The Provident Trust Company will receive funds in denominations of $50.00,
$100.00 $500.00, or $1000.000 [plus $1.50 for each bond purchased to cover
costs of service] to be held by them until the Civilian Bond Committee
approves their subscription to a specified Government Bond issue. When such
subscription has been completed and the Treasury Department has made proper
registration of the bond, the bond will be returned to the Provident Trust
Company, which will in turn forward the bonds to the subscriber or to the
person or institution for whom the subscriber ordered it registered.
Anyone so desiring may subscribe to a bond in the name of a charitable
institution. The subscriber may designate a church institution, for example,
as the one for whom the bond is to be registered. Receipt for such
subscription would be forwarded to the subscriber. Such receipt would provide
him with evidence of his subscription to government obligations and he would
receive credit in the community quota. Such receipt would also be evidence for
income tax deductions. The bond would be mailed to the institution for which
it was subscribed and registered. The institution would be recipient of the
proceeds of the bond at its maturity.
The question of pay-roll allotment plans of certain industrial organizations
is also provided for. The employee concerned may instruct the proper officials
of the industrial organization to reserve that part of his pay roll which they
ordinarily deduct until sufficient has been accumulated for the purchase of at
least a minimum $50.00 bond. The industrial organization should be instructed
to forward such funds with the subscription order form to the Provident Trust
Company. The Provident Trust Company will subscribe the designated funds in
the next available issue of bonds as authorized by the Civilian Bond
Committee.
If you prefer, you may subscribe through the Defense Bond solicitor in your
local community. In case you use this method, proper precaution should be used
to insure the funds being invested through the channels outlined above. If
satisfactory arrangements can be agreed upon with the solicitor, it would
probably be helpful in more directly meeting the pressure by local groups for
Defense or War Bond purchases.
The Provident Trust Company is not prepared to receive funds in denominations
smaller than $50.00. In cases where individuals are not prepared to subscribe
for at least a minimum $50.00 bond but where they desire to have evidence of
smaller subscriptions which are possible for them to make, it might be helpful
to set up a plan in the local church congregation to put these smaller amounts
into a common congregation bond or to be held in trust by the congregation
with proper individual receipts. The specific application of such suggestion
would necessarily vary widely with local conditions. If there are difficulties
in the administration of a plan in your local community, or if there are
points which are not clear, please address all inquiries to the Mennonite
Central Committee…
Jesse W. Hoover,
Secretary, Peace Section.
The rollout had some glitches, as this release from the Peace Section noted:
The expected release on Civilian Government Bonds has again met with
unexpected delays. We are fairly certain that the publicity materials will
reach you nearly as soon as this news note, perhaps before. Should there be a
mistake again, we trust that you will be sympathetic with the problem. There
are some things which cannot be hurried.
In addition to the suggestions given in the previous article, a plan is being
made available for local congregations to hold in trust the fund of an
individual subscriber until sufficient has accumulated for the purchase of a
Civilian Government Bond. It was previously suggested that several individuals
might participate in a common Bond, to be registered in the name of one person
as trustee of the group. Or such Bond might be subscribed by the congregation
in the name of a properly authorized official. All this is of course designed
to enable the smaller contributor to share in this type of service.
We are in receipt of a copy of a letter from the Peace Section of the
Mennonite Central Committee, signed by
Bro. O.O. Miller, Executive
Secretary, and Bro. Jesse W.
Hoover, Peace Section Secretary. Six items are listed, to be sent to some
minister or other leader in each of the Mennonite congregations. The
literature explains in detail the opportunity for conscientious objectors to
subscribe for civilian bonds, instead of bonds to finance any enterprise
connected with war. The plan proposed is worthy the consideration of all
nonresistant people.
And here are some of the administrative details (from the
issue), along with a
tally of how many Civilian Bonds had been sold thusfar via the Mennonite
Central Committee:
Quite a few of our people seem to be misinformed concerning the service charge
on Civilian Bonds. A service fee is charged by the Fiscal Agent, (Provident
Trust Company) at the rate of $1.00 for each subscription of bonds for each
individual subscriber. This does not mean $1.00 for each bond, unless each
bond is registered in a different name.
For example, if John Doe wishes to subscribe to a $500 bond for himself, he
should forward $500 for the purchase of the bond plus $1.00 service charge.
Likewise, if John Doe wishes to subscribe to $250 of Bonds (for which he will
receive three (3) bonds; one at $50 and two at $100), he should forward $250
for the purchase of the bonds plus $1.00 service charge, not $3.00.
Quite a number of orders have come in with remittance of service charge on the
basis of $1.00 per bond rather than $1.00 per subscription order. This
necessitates the return of the extra fees by the Provident Trust Company,
making added work and expense.
Subscriptions received at the offices of the Provident Trust Company up to
from our
M.C.C.
constituency, totaled $76,160.
Information available from the Treasury Department indicates that it will be
two or three weeks before a suitable issue of bonds will be available to which
our funds can be subscribed.
A few more details, and another tally, from this Peace Section note by Jesse W.
Hoover ():
We would like to emphasize some further points of correction in filling out
the Subscription Orders for Bonds. Please use the full first name and not an
initial. If only the initial is used, it is necessary to write to the
subscriber asking for his full name before the order can be entered. In the
case of a wife making a subscription, she would use her own first name. For
example, Mrs. Mary Smith rather than Mrs. John Smith.
Postcard Receipts for subscriptions are sent directly to the individual
subscriber rather than to the treasurers or representatives of the groups. The
representatives of Provident Trust Company have agreed that they will write a
letter to such treasurers, listing the names registered with the appropriate
amounts, which will serve as receipt to the treasurer, if that is desired. May
we suggest that church treasurers, when sending in subscriptions for a number
of people, should ask for such letter of recognition from Provident Trust
Company.
Subscription orders to date from our
M.C.C.
constituencies have reached a total of $108,400.00.
The tally continued to rise, as shown in this Peace Section note from Grant M.
Stoltzfus ():
A report from the Civilian Bond Committee shows that civilian bonds have been
purchased by persons in 150 counties of 28 states during
.
During $18,200 worth were purchased and
during the amount was $188,300
bringing the total to $206,500. Subscriptions by Mennonites for
totalled $183,150.
Hoover & Miller co-wrote a Peace Section note
that described the “Civilian Bonds” it this way: “the Treasury Department is
not issuing special bonds for us. They have only agreed to make available from
time to time certain of their regular offerings which are not specifically for
war purposes.”
In connection with the Civilian Bond Plan we have been getting a great many
inquiries about the rate of interest and maturity dates of these alternate
Civilian Bonds. This is explained in the folder, but perhaps not made
sufficiently clear. One should consistently keep in mind that the Treasury
Department is not issuing special bonds for us. They have only agreed to make
available from time to time certain of their regular offerings which are not
specifically for war purposes. It is thus easy to understand that one offering
may be entirely different from another. The Civilian Bond Committee aims to
select such issues as will be most suitable to our people and which in a
general way compare in interest rate and maturity with current war bond
issues. Usually, however, the interest rate will be somewhat lower. It is
impossible in advance to issue a given rate of interest or any definite
maturity date.
To those congregations which have appointed solicitors among their own people,
we would like to give one bit of instruction: It is imperative that the
subscriber should sign his own subscription order form when sending in the
order to the Provident Trust Company. One other common difficulty is that our
people give the name of their local church or congregation rather than the
general church affiliation. This is confusing. We urge all who are making out
subscription forms to give the general church affiliation rather than the
local church.
,
the Civilian Bond Committee authorized Provident Trust Company of Philadelphia
to invest all funds then on hand in two per cent United States of America
Treasury Bonds of . This particular
offering was, however, not available in $50 denominations. Therefore, only
subscriptions of $100 and higher could be invested in this offering. A total
of $233,600 was used in this issue. Subscribers of $100 or higher whose
subscriptions were with Provident Trust Company before
should be
receiving their registrated bonds shortly. As of
, there was again available at
Provident Trust Company a total of $113,650.
Hoover & Miller again coordinated for a Peace Section Note, which reassured readers that their
Civilian Bond purchases would be reported to their local war bond czars so
that they would get credit for pitching in along with everyone else:
We call attention again to the necessity of having your full name on bond
subscriptions. Bonds cannot be registered with only the initials. Unless you
sign your full name, it only causes delay and added correspondence.
Civilian bond subscriptions continue to come to Provident Trust Company at the
rate of about $40,000 per week. The total subscribed from the beginning of
this plan to amounts to
$527,100.00. Approximately eighty-five per cent of this total so far has been
from Mennonite sources. No investment of funds at Provident Trust Company has
been authorized since that of .
The Civilian Bond Committee is assured that government issues suitable for
these funds will very soon be available. The Treasury Department
representatives have requested and are getting monthly reports of all
subscriptions received by Provident Trust Company, and we understand are now
making the information available to all county and state Bond Sales
Headquarters, concerned.
As of a total of $602,050
worth of Civilian Bonds have been subscribed. Of this amount $505,800 worth
are subscribed by Mennonites. The remaining subscriptions have been made by
Brethren, Quakers, and other peace groups.
Hoover & Miller were back on to explain the latest glitch in the program:
Many inquiries are reaching us as to the reason for the delay in the issuance
of bonds. No suitable issue has been available to us since .
We are at present endeavoring to work out a method that will be a bit more
prompt, therefore, more acceptable.
It might be noted, however, that even though subscriptions are uninvested, yet
as soon as they reach Provident Trust Company they are recorded on the State
and County Quotas. We get credit for them at once in lieu of war bonds.
Total number of subscriptions for Civilian bonds to Provident Trust Company
from beginning to — 5,439.
Total subscriptions in dollars — $774,350. Of this total subscriptions from
Mennonites — $641,650. Total funds at Provident Trust Company not yet invested
in bonds $540,750.
The federal government marketed their
Series E
U.S. Savings
Bonds as “War Savings Bonds.” The Series F and G bonds, though they
served the same purpose, did not carry the “War” or “Defense” marketing slogan.
That was good enough for the “Civilian Bond” promoters, as shown in this
Peace Section Note from Jesse
W. Hoover:
Inasmuch as the new F and G United States Government Savings Bonds are not
designated as “war issues,” they are being used currently by the Civilian Bond
Committee for all civilian bond subscriptions to Provident Trust Company. We
understand that the revised printing of the F and G’s is not yet available
except through this channel. In any case, it is the only channel through which
the subscriptions for these can be handled and due recognition given to the
subscriber’s conscience in the matter of purchasing war bonds and for
recognition of the subscription on state and county government bond sales
quotas.
The revised civilian bond folder indicates that these issues are available
currently in four denominations. G’s are available in denominations of $100,
$500, and $1000. This piece matures in twelve years — is a registered bond
with interest payable semi-annually at the rate of 2½% per annum. The fourth
piece available costs $18.50 and matures in twelve years at $25.00. The
subscription fee of $1.00 continues for all four of these items. Copies of the
revised folder describing the present plan in detail can be ordered from the
Mennonite Central Committee, Akron,
Pa.
Inasmuch as no $50.00 bonds have been available to the committee, nor promised
to be available, a letter has recently gone out from Provident Trust Company,
Philadelphia, to all $50.00 piece subscribers indicating how their
subscription can be handled in light of the F $18.50 availability or the
$100.00 G. From now on subscribers to Provident Trust Company of any of the
foregoing four available pieces will find their subscription promptly handled.
Oridinarily, the government bond certificate should be in the hands of the
subscriber within two to three weeks at the longest. The Civilian Bond
Committee is continuing its contacts with the Treasury in an endeavor to
procure still more suitable offerings to take care of subscriptions from those
who for reasons of conscience cannot subscribe to the war issues.
In the meantime, the arrangement now in effect will, we believe, provide for
most of our people and has been approved by the Mennonite Central Committee.
Civilian Bond Subscriptions Total $859,400
Provident Trust Company report as of ,
shows a total of $859,400.00 in Civilian Bond subscriptions entered at that
date. $712,500.00 of this was subscribed from Mennonite sources. The total
number of subscriptions was 5,948.
Gospel Herald went so far as to promote something of
a competition of which state could sell the most “Civilian Bonds” (the
magazine would periodically print updated rankings throughout the war):
As of a total of 6,896 bond
subscriptions had been made. These subscriptions totaled $1,063,293.50. Of
this amount $914,440.00 has actually been covered by bond issues, the balance
awaiting further issue of government bonds. Mennonite subscriptions total
$818,688.00.
Stoltzfus also tried to answer the question of what made these “Civilian Bonds”
different from any other bonds. The answer: When you buy the bonds through the
“Civilian Bond” program, you thereby register a “witness of sensitivity” which
indicates “such bonds as having been bought by persons with a conscience
against war financing.” This is selling your conscience mighty cheaply, says I.
Gospel Herald, :
What is the difference between bonds available at local banks and the bonds
purchased according to the plan of the Civilian Bond Committee through
Provident Trust Co. of
Philadelphia[?]
There is a difference and an important one. Bonds purchased through the
church-approved plan are registered with the United States Treasury as having
been bought by persons conscientiously unable to finance war. A witness of
sensitivity is thereby made to the government relative to this problem.
This testimony is lost when the bonds are bought locally since the United
States Treasury does not recognize such bonds as having been bought by persons
with a conscience against war financing.
Do bonds bought through the church-approved plan count on the county quota?
Yes, they do. Each month the Civilian Bond Committee reports to the United
States Treasury the amount of the bond purchases made by conscientious
objectors through Provident Trust
Co. of Philadelphia. The
Treasury informs the leaders in each county of the purchases thus made by
conscientious objectors within their area and in turn the respective leaders
can make the necessary adjustments for their counties.
The investments in government securities in the Civilian Bond program totalled
$1,602,338.50 as of .
Investments by Mennonite subscribers accounted for $1,260,030.00 of this sum.
As of the above date a total of 10,321 subscription orders have been made for
Civilian Bonds from subscribers of the various religious denominations.
During the recent national war bond drive there was a large purchase of
government bonds made by our people through the Civilian Bond Program. In fact
the subscriptions for Civilian Bonds were of such volume that subscribers will
have to wait a few weeks longer for their bonds than would normally be the
case. The postal card receipts, however, should reach the subscriber about as
usual.
The Committee regrets the delay but feels confident of the understanding of
our people in the matter.
The “Civilian Bond” program eventually was able to create its own “stamps”
with which people could invest gradually, in smaller amounts (Stoltzfus,
):
The Civilian Bond Saving Stamps have been designed for use in the purchase of
Civilian Bonds. As such they correspond to the War Saving Stamps which are
used for investment in War Bonds. The Civilian Bond Saving Stamps were
prepared by the Mennonite Central Committee’s Peace Section in response to
requests for such stamps.
The Plan
Interested congregations should appoint a treasurer who could well be the
regular person handling the Bond or
C.P.S.
matters.
The congregational treasurer can secure the Stamps (in denominations of
$1., 50¢, 25¢, and 10¢) from the treasurer of his respective church
group.
Those desiring to purchase Stamps will do so through their local treasurer
who will hold the money received from the sale of Stamps until the
purchaser submits at least $19.50 worth of Stamps. This amount will
purchase an $18.50 bond and will cover the $1.00 service fee. Bonds can be
registered in the name of the purchaser of a beneficiary and subscribed for
through the local treasurer.
(It should be kept in mind that Civilian Bond Saving Stamps are not issued by
the government and hence their official recognition may vary with localities.)
The following statistics on Civilian Bond purchases indicates a total of
$2,000,263.00 invested up to :
Up to
Total
Total
$1,843,954.50
$156,308.50
$2,000,263.00
Mennonites
1,436,940.00
71,157.50
1,508,097.50
Brethren
213,248.50
67,405.00
280,653.50
Friends
79,622.00
4,918.50
84,540.50
Others
114,144.00
12,827.50
126,971.50
This next update
(John H. Mosemann, ) puts
the matter amusingly. The purpose of “Civilian Bonds” is not to allow
purchasers to avoid violating their consciences, but to allow them “to
register their desire for non-participation in any effort which
violates the Christian conscience” (emphasis mine). This note is the first
explicit indication in Gospel Herald that Mennonites
were at all conscious of the utter bogosity of the “Civilian Bonds” scheme:
The present increased interest in Civilian Bonds is indicated by a larger
volume of inquiries which has been reaching the Akron office. Many continue to
appreciate the opportunity to register their desire for non-participation in
any effort which violates the Christian conscience. The limitations of the
present plan are readily recognized but appears to be the only course open for
those who are interested in making such purchases in line with our profession.
The drive for the $15,000,000,000 Third War Loan is on at the present time.
Naturally it vitally concerns all those who have conscientious scruples on
the matter of taking part in war bond drives and of investing money in this
way. The Peace Section of the Mennonite Central Committee has in the past
worked out with the Treasury Department an arrangement for the purchase of
Civilian Bonds, with which most of our people are familiar. We publish
herewith a statement released to ministers of the Mennonite Church and the
Brethren in Christ Church by the Peace Section. It gives their viewpoint at
the present time. Following this we print an article by
Bro. John M. Snyder who gives
another side to the picture. We print both of these articles in this open
forum so that people may be able to get a better grasp of the issues involved
in this matter. “Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind” (Rom. 14:5).
Dear Brethren:
Another War Bond campaign will soon begin. In this connection a few words of
information regarding our Civilian Bond program may be helpful.
The plan for investment in Civilian Government Bonds, as arranged by the
Mennonite Central Committee, continues essentially as begun, with apparent
satisfaction and value to a great many people. The total in subscriptions now
approaches $2,250,000. We appreciate the response to this alternate method f6r
conscientious investment, which demonstrates to the United States Treasury
officials that a considerable group of people have a conscience against war in
the matter of finances.
In the new War Bond drive we may expect renewed pressure for purchasing War
Bonds. Mennonite ministers again need to clarify the issues and help our
people in their thinking. Some are confused by local bankers who tell them
that the Civilian Bonds purchased through the channels set up by the Committee
are just the same as the non-war bonds which are for sale at the local banks.
Technically this is true, but morally there is a vast difference. All bonds
bought through local banks are counted in the War Bond quotas, which means
that their purchasers take part directly in the War Bond campaign. Bonds
bought through the Provident Trust in Philadelphia are not counted on the
quota, and hence their purchasers do not take part in the War Bond campaign.
What advantage has the Bond Purchase Plan, as sponsored by the
M.C.C.?
Simply this: by subscribing through the program provided, we leave a united
witness of conscience against war. The plan is not altogether what was desired
at the beginning, but is the best that could be gotten. Your committee has
consistently recognized this, but we have also consistently pointed out that
it is a step far in advance of anything achieved heretofore. By our response
and adherence to it we hope eventually to gain greater recognition and respect
on this issue.
But these Civilian Bonds are not counted on the quotas, someone objects. Is
this not exactly what our conscience desires? We do not want to be counted
with the war-supporters. It is true, however, that each county receives a full
record of alternative Civilian Bond purchases from the United States Treasury,
and accordingly the local quota board knows just what Civilian Bonds have been
purchased. These reports are furnished from the Treasury at Washington, on the
basis of the data furnished by our own secretary in the Provident Trust
Company office, which are in turn based on the subscriptions of our people.
Thus the local bond quota board knows that we are doing our part in
bond-buying and knows that it is not a part of the war campaign.
Should we continue to invest in this way? We are not a promotion agent of the
United States Treasury, and we do not presume to tell our people whether or
how much they should invest in Bonds. But if they do wish to subscribe in
Government securities, we believe they should leave a witness of conscience in
this matter of war financing. There is no other way to witness for our
position and still purchase government bonds, than the
M.C.C.
Civilian Bond plan. Please help your people to understand this and hold the
line of conscience firm and clear.
Harold S. Bender, Chairman
Jesse W. Hoover, Secretary
On the Civilian Bond Question
By John M. Snyder
The cost to the United States of this second World War is so tremendous that
it staggers the imagination. Hundreds of millions and billions of dollars are
being poured into armaments and the maintenance of armies greater in size and
destructive power than anything this world has ever seen. Words cannot
adequately convey, nor can our minds grasp, the stupendousness of the
expenditures being made for the prosecution of the war effort.
Where do these vast sums of money come from? Since the prosecution of the war
is a government function, and since our government is primarily not a
producing enterprise, it is apparent that the finances for the war program, as
well as for the civilian functions of government is authorized by law to
obtain funds for carrying on its authorized functions by two principal means,
namely, taxation and borrowing. Ultimately, taxation, used in a broad sense to
include various forms of levies upon the property of its subjects and others
with whom it maintains trade relationships,
etc., is the
principal source from which the government must derive the funds to defray the
costs which it incurs in the prosecution of its various undertakings.
Concerning the first of these means by which the government obtains needed
finances the Scriptural attitude of the Christian is clearly and specifically
defined. The example and teaching of Jesus
(Matt. 17:24–27; 22:21) and
the teaching of Paul and Peter
(Rom. 13:6;
Ⅰ Pet. 2:14, 15)
make it clear that it is the Christian’s duty to pay taxes levied upon him by
the State, even though that State be a military power, as was the case with
Rome. It is not the purpose of this discussion to enter into the principles of
the power of governments to tax their subjects. Suffice it to point out that
the State has legal right to confiscate and take possession of property
belonging to its subjects in payment of taxes levied, and the New Testament
does not dispute this right, but rather admonishes Christians to pay the taxes
assessed by the State.
Regarding the second means used by the State to obtain finances the New
Testament is not explicit. In fact, this is not even discussed. Here the State
chooses not to exercise its prerogative of taxation, enforceable by
confiscation, but instead calls upon its subjects to loan voluntarily to the
government from their accumulated wealth on the promise of the government to
repay at a stipulated time. For this use of the subjects’ money the government
offers compensation in the form of interest. There is no legal compulsion
involved here. The individual retains ownership of the wealth loaned to the
State, and it may be fairly assumed, and accompanying responsibility as to the
use made of it.
During the first World War our government promoted campaigns for encouraging
people to loan money for the prosecution of the war. It was presented as a
patriotic duty for every American to buy war bonds, known as Liberty Bonds,
etc. The majority
of Mennonites felt that to aid in the war effort in this way was inconsistent
with a nonresistant profession and contrary to the teaching of Scripture.
Despite the pressure of aroused public opinion and even persecution and
physical violence, many steadfastly refused to buy these war bonds, though
some succumbed to the pressure and yielded the point.
When the shadows of war again fell across our nation there was manifested a
conviction on the part of many Peace Church leaders that the nonresistant
Christian, being also a loyal citizen, ought to do more than refuse to do what
he considered to be wrong. He ought to find something which he could
conscientiously do, and do that with a will, both as a contribution for the
benefit of his country, and also as a demonstration of New Testament
Christianity as a constructive force for right ends, not only a negative
witness against evil. The
C.P.S.
Camp program is the outgrowth of efforts to bring about such a constructive
witness and contribution in connection with our refusal to accept military
service.
This same spirit was a motivating factor in the efforts which were made to
find an acceptable alternative to the purchase of war bonds, since it was
inevitable that there would again be intensive drives sponsored to promote
bond sales for financing the war effort.
Several different possibilities have been explored. One which has received
some recognition is that of making outright contributions to the
C.P.S.
Camp program, evidenced by the special certificates provided for this purpose
by the agencies operating the camps. A number of states have agreed to accept
these contributions in lieu of war bond subscriptions, inasmuch as the expense
of of operating these camps would be an obligation to be financed by the
Treasury Department if the churches did not assume it, and it is so recognized
in a letter written by Secretary of the Treasury Morgenthau.
Another proposal was the issuance by the Treasury of special government bonds,
the proceeds of which would be earmarked for some purpose acceptable to people
of nonresistant faith, such as relief and reconstruction, the alternate work
program for conscientious objectors in lieu of military service carried on in
the C.P.S.
Camps, or other similar projects. This proposal was not accepted by the
government because there is no legal authorization for the issuance of bonds
whose proceeds are earmarked in advance for certain specified purposes. All
Treasury borrowings and tax receipts go into the general fund from which
Congress makes appropriations as it sees fit, and it would require a special
act of Congress to authorize the issuance of such special bonds. However, this
proposal is still being worked upon in the hope that in some way money
received from bonds sold to conscientious objectors may still be designated
for uses acceptable to the consciences of the subscribers.
A third proposal, and the one which has been endorsed and put into effect, is
that the Treasury Department would recognize our objection to buying bonds
designated as war bonds, upon which we would be willing to subscribe to bonds
issued by the Treasury which are not so designated. The proceeds of these
bonds would go into the same general Treasury fund into which war bond
subscriptions are placed and would be appropriated by Congress as it might see
fit just as is done with funds received from other sources. The letter which
was duly received from Secretary of the Treasury Morgenthau states that the
government has some six billion dollars of expenses annually for essential
civilian activities and would be willing to have the money subscribed by our
people invested in regular Treasury offerings which are not designated as “War
Bonds.” The question in view in this discussion is, “Does this plan, known as
the Civilian Bond Plan, satisfy the scriptural objections to subscribing to
war bonds?”
The issues involved in war bond subscriptions include the following four
points which will be considered briefly in succeeding paragraphs:
The scripturalness, according to the Mennonite viewpoint, of the
Christian’s loaning money to the government for financing its
program.
The use of the Christian’s money for prosecution of the war effort.
The express, voluntary support of and alignment with the war propaganda by
buying “War Bonds” as such.
Control of inflationary tendencies by restricting the present purchasing
power of the people of the country, with a view to enlarging future
purchasing power at the time the bonds will be redeemed.
The question as to the scripturalness of the Christian’s loaning money to the
government for financing its program is not limited in its implications to war
financing. It applies equally to peace-time financing as well. Should the
Christian at any time invest his money in government securities issued to
raise funds to finance the costs of government activities? Two points are
suggested here for consideration in connection with this question:
First, there must be considered the Christian’s obligation to promote the
spreading of the Gospel with material means — his responsibility of Christian
stewardship. It is the Christian’s primary responsibility in life to make the
glorious message of salvation known to man. And how our present-day world
needs this message! This, and not the armies and armaments now being mustered
on the world’s battlefields, offers the effectual solution to the world’s
problems. God’s blessing of His people with abundance of material things is
for this purpose and none other. We have never yet reached the place in the
witnessing program of the Church where more funds cannot be used in spreading
the Gospel. And if we ever do seem to have reached it, it will not be because
too much has been given or the task is finished. It will only mean that some
of the givers should become goers, giving themselves to the work of spreading
the Message of Grace. In view of the pre-eminent and urgent claim of the
witnessing program of the Church upon the material resources of Christians,
can we afford — is it right — to divert to the purposes of a secular
government the possessions entrusted to our stewardship by God, our control of
which is not disputed by our government? The words of Jesus, “Let the dead
bury their dead,” perhaps are applicable here. For those functions of
government which might not be properly characterized among “the dead,”
Christians are willing to be taxed, indeed are being taxed.
In the second place, there is the principle held by our Anabaptist forefathers
and still maintained by a large body of Mennonites today that it is not for
the Chritsian to enter the sphere of political government and help to rule and
control the State. It is this principle which keeps us from exercising our
franchise as citizens to vote and hold political office. Is it consistent to
enter with our money a sphere which we cannot enter personally without
violation of principle? Bear in mind that the money remains ours. We can pay
taxes for the support of our government because the State asserts title to the
money it collects in taxes and assumes full responsibility for its use. But we
retain title to money loaned to the government, and our responsibility for its
use remains. It is not argued that to loan money makes the creditor
responsible for every act and deed of the borrower, but the question is being
raised as to the consistency of entering in a financial way a sphere of
interest and activity which we confess to be a violation of principle to enter
personally.
A more extreme illustration may bring out the issue involved here more
clearly. Suppose a brewer or distiller were to solicit loans among us to
finance a liquor manufacturing business. None of us would question the
inconsistency of a Chritsian’s being engaged in such a business. Would we
think it right to invest our money in his nefarious business? Of course, it is
recognized that the two cases are not parallel. Government is a legitimate,
constructive enterprise in its proper sphere, while liquor manufacture for
beverage purposes has no such proper sphere. And yet both have this in common
that neither is within the sphere in which we believe it is Scriptural for the
Chritsian to engage. Is it then Scriptural and consistent for us to invest our
money in the government enterprise from personal participation in which we
hold aloof for conscience’ sake?
The second and third main points constitute the crux of the whole problem
which gave rise to the attempt to find an alternative to the buying of war
bonds. They are related and may be briefly considered together. In this
connection it is pertinent to raise this question: “Do we object to the
purchase of war bonds because of their designation as such, or because of the
use to which the money subscribed is put?” Undoubtedly the answer is, “Both.”
There is likely to be little disagreement as to our attitudes on these points.
We do not want our money to be used for war purposes, and we do not want to
support or align ourselves with the war propaganda by buying bonds designated
as “War Bonds.” The issues here are clear, and the answer of the Mennonite
conscience is definite.
The fourth main point touches an area in which most of us find ourselves on
unfamiliar ground. The complexities of our involved economic system are pretty
much of a puzzle to us who are not experts in the study of economic laws and
theories. There is even some ground for suspicion that the experts, especially
those who disregard the Bible and its teachings in their theorizing, are not
always as clear on some of these economic problems as they might wish to be.
Certainly we regard inflation, with its resultant depression and inequitable
distribution of wealth, entailing hardship and suffering upon the masses, as
an evil to be averted if possible. And other things being equal, if our
government asks us to follow a course of action which its most competent
advisers believe will forestall a postwar inflation and depression, we should
willingly comply with such a request. Only if the course outlined should
involve a violation of Scriptural principles would we be warranted in
withholding our co-operation. In the case of war bonds we cannot co-operate
because of our conscience against contributing to the war effort, as well as
the feeling of some that they should not make loans of any sort to the
government.
Having considered some of the objections to purchasing war bonds, let us now
revert to the question raised earlier in this discussion,
viz., “Does the Civilian Bond Plan
satisfy the Scriptural objections to subscribing to war bonds?”
As to the first main point raised it is obvious that any valid objection to
buying war bonds on the grounds set forth in the discussion of this point
would also apply to civilian bonds, since the point is general and not limited
to wartime financing.
The fact that the plan does not entail the purchase of “War Bonds” as such
satisfies the objection presented in the third main point, that of the
propaganda aspect of war bond subscriptions. Secretary Morgenthau’s letter
specifically recognizes our conscience on this point. It is held by sponsors
of the present plan that the plan not only does not contribute to war
propaganda, but that it bears a positive witness to a conscience against
contributing to the war effort. That the plan does register a conviction
against buying “War Bonds” will not be gainsaid. However, in the light of the
discussion which follows on the use of the money derived from civilian bond
subscriptions, it may be questioned whether this witness is nullified at least
in the minds of people who give it sufficient thought to inquire into this
phase. If the witness value of the plan rests on the failure of the public to
inquire into the implications of our course of action, then it can hardly be
said to be a sound course of action for us to take.
Regarding the fourth main point, the civilian bonds would be as effective in
control of inflation as any other type of bond, so that if the idea of bond
purchases for this purpose is approved the civilian bonds offered would also
be acceptable. However, if the Mennonite Church is interested in promoting an
anti-inflationary effort on the part of its members it might be well as a
preliminary step to sponsor an exhaustive study of other possible means for
accomplishing the desired result, some of which might possibly be free from
undesirable characteristics of the bond purchase proposal.
There remains yet to be considered the second main point, namely, the use to
which the proceeds of subscriptions to civilian bonds will be put, which
constitutes one of the two principal objections advanced against buying war
bonds. Let us examine the plan from this angle:
In the first place, we note that Secretary Morgenthau’s letter calls attention
to the fact that “the Treasury needs some six billion dollars annually to
maintain civilian services of the government which are essential to the basic
needs of human life, to conserve our natural resources, and to keep in repair
our national plant.” The wording of the letter creates the impression at first
glance that money subscribed under this plan would be used to finance these
civilian functions. However, careful examination of the Secretary’s statements
makes it clear that he carefully refrained from making any such commitment
that it would be so used. The reason lies in the fact that he has no authority
to make such a commitment. He can only receive these funds into the general
treasury and disburse them according to the direction of Congress.
It might be argued here that it is the normal procedure for the government to
finance its normal and essential civilian activities principally by taxation,
and such extraordinary expenditures as cannot be met from this source are
financed temporarily by government borrowings. Since the taxes collected by
our government currently amount to more than six billion dollars annually we
might therefore assume that these charges for essential civilian services are
already provided for before we are asked to contribute to the government’s
finances through bond subscriptions. Even if tax receipts were insufficient to
cover this six billion dollars there remains the fact that there are financial
institutions and other investors who normally in peacetime buy government
bonds and thus provide all the funds necessary to finance peacetime
expenditures. These regular bond investors have not withdrawn from the
picture. Now, in the face of an extraordinary demand for funds for prosecution
of the war, can it logically be supposed that the receipts from these regular
sources are diverted for our convenience to others uses and the proceeds of
this newly inaugurated Civilian Bond Plan substituted for them as the means of
financing the six billion dollars?
The assumptions of the above argument can probably not be substantiated. Due
to the intangible nature of our medium of exchange, which in the last analysis
usually simmers down to a transfer of credit rather than the transfer of
physical wealth itself, it is impossible to trace any certain dollar through
the Treasury to its ultimate use. Therefore we are probably not justified in
saying that none of the proceeds of civilian bonds actually go into the
financing of civilian activities. But if we cannot be certain that all our
bond money goes to war financing, as is assumed in the preceding paragraph,
then by the same token we have no grounds for assuming that none of it goes
there. The most we can justifiably assume is that our contributions, along
with all other receipts of the government, are divided between civilian and
military uses in the proportion which each bears to the total expenditures of
the government, since they are all mixed up together in the same pot. In the
present situation, when our President announces that the government this year
will need to raise one hundred billion dollars to finance its program, it is
obvious that the proportion of essential civilian expenses will be extremely
small in relation to the whole.
The Secretary’s letter does not explicitly recognize our desire that the money
subscribed under the Civilian Bond Plan be not used to finance the war effort.
And we have no such official recognition in writing from any government
representative. Even if the government were to offer such recognition without
assurance that the funds would not be so used, it would be of doubtful value
so far as our position is concerned. It seems clear from the preceding
paragraph that Civilian Bond funds are used in exactly the same way as War
Bond funds. In fact, most of the offerings in the recent war bond drive were
not designated as “War Bonds,” but were “civilian bonds” propagandized as “War
Bonds.” The Civilian Bond Plan offers some of the same issues offered in the
war bond drive, and Civilian Bond Plan subscriptions go to fill the quotas set
by the Treasury as necessary for financing the war program.
There has, furthermore, been given official recognition in another connection
by the Mennonite Central Committee to the fact that funds which go into the
general Treasury without specific designation for other uses are used to
promote the war effort. The objection to the turning of emergency farm labor
wages earned by
C.P.S.
men over to the Treasury is referred to. Here is a case in which the pressure
of public sentiment has not been a factor to influence our thinking, and in
this case we have objected to turning over to the general Treasury certain
funds on the specific grounds that funds so turned over would be a
contribution to the war effort. And yet the funds raised by Civilian Bond
subscriptions have no more guarantee of not being used to finance the war
program than do the funds raised by labor of
C.P.S.
men.
Is it possible that we have accepted a specious line of wishful reasoning in
our desire to provide an acceptable alternative to the purchase of war bonds,
thus sparing ourselves the unpleasantness of an aroused public opinion due to
refusal to buy war bonds? Have we proceeded on the basis of a fiction created
in our own minds and not even participated in by the government to the extent
of offering us an unofffcial assurance that our funds would be used only for
civilian purposes?
It appears that we have come to a position similar to that of a boy who
protests that he doesn’t want to go swimming, and then justifies his swimming
excursion in violation of his father’s command by the fact that the boys in
the gang solemnly recognized his laudable desire not to go swimming, all the
while urgently pressing him to come along. We are co-operating with the
government in its announced intention to finance the war with public bond
subscriptions, satisfying our consciences with the reflection that “we said we
didn’t want to go,” and that the government seemed to be sympathetically
understanding in recognition of our desires. Why should they not be
sympathetic when by so doing they attain the ends which they set out to
accomplish, namely, the raising of a certain amount of money to finance the
costs of the war program? Do we not, like the boy, nullify our stated
intentions by our action in pouring our funds into the purse which pays the
war bills?
I’m glad somebody had the nerve to speak up.
That said, the money kept rolling in. Irvin B. Horst offered
this update:
The following statistics indicate Civilian Bond subscriptions according to the
fifteen highest states as of September 30,
1943. The total amount subscribed by all states was $2,748,289.00
Pennsylvania
$667,239.00
Illinois
442,096.00
Ohio
359,625.50
Kansas
253,394.50
Iowa
249,194.00
Indiana
179,271.00
California
85,106.00
Virginia
69,615.00
South Dakota
60,250.50
New York
48,956.50
Nebraska
39,792.50
Oklahoma
37,792.50
Oregon
30,628.50
Minnesota
27,944.50
Missouri
16,722.50
And he also noted
that in Canada (as of 19 October 1943) some
$2 million dollars had been contributed for “non-interest bearing certificates”
and “Victory Loan Bonds with a sticker attached (designating the use of the
funds for relief work)”.
A
further update noted that “The total amount subscribed by Mennonites in
Civilian Bonds as of November 17 [1943] was
$2,205,796.00. The amount subscribed by all groups was $3,097,475.00.”
Civilian Bond Sales: During the period of Jan. 20–26 [1944], 368 subscriptions were registered by the Provident Trust Company, amounting to $68,892. Of this amount $43,660 was subscribed by Mennonites.
In the 24 May 1944 issue Irvin B. Horst
acknowledged the “not entirely satisfactory” nature of the “Civilian Bonds”
program — and for the first time also acknowledged that some Mennonites might
“feel that they cannot buy civilian bonds” — and he promised negotiations were
underway for something better (spoiler alert: nothing better was in fact on the
way):
During the coming Fifth War Loan Drive, June
12–July 8, civilian bonds will again be available for conscientious
objectors. The plan remains the same as in other drives.… Savings stamps and
albums in various denominations are also available for school children and
others.
Civilian Bonds are Series F and G bonds registered through the Provident Trust
Comapny. While the same series may be secured through local channels,
Provident Trust Company is the only fiscal agent authorized to register them
as “conscience money.” Civilian bond subscriptions are officially reported to
county chairmen and there should be no difficulty to buy them in lieu of war
bonds.
The civilian bond plan is not entirely satisfactory and negotiations are under
way to secure a more satisfactory plan. Until a better arrangement is secured,
the plan will remain as before. To members who feel that they cannot buy
civilian bonds, relief certificates and stamps are recommended. Relief
certificates and stamps are, however, donations and not investments.
As of 5 July 1944,
“Civilian Bond” subscriptions totaled $4,527,748.50; $3,286,315.50 of that came
from Mennonite or Brethren in Christ groups. By 31
July 1944 the total had climbed to $4,769,673.00.
An unsigned editorial, in the 11 August 1944
edition, titled “Let Us Pray”
bemoaned the fact that “Somewhere between thirty and fifty per cent of our
young men have accepted military service, even though the government has made
it possible for the church to maintain a system of nonmilitary alternative
service. Others of the brotherhood are entangled in the war effort through
employment in defense plants and the voluntary purchase of war bonds.” So even
with the silly “Civilian Bonds” making such an option relatively painless, some
Mennonites were not going along with the doctrinal nonresistance position.
Efforts to come up with something meaningful that could replace the policy of
purchasing ordinary
U.S. Savings Bonds
and calling them “Civilian Bonds” went nowhere, according to
this Peace Section Note
from Jesse Hoover (25 October 1944):
The Peace Section has been trying for several months to interest the Treasury
Department in a special Relief Savings Bond to finance the Congressional
appropriation for United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Association.
Recently we received what appears to be the final reply from the Treasury
officials. There does not seem to be any prospect of obtaining such an issue.
With the probability of another Bond Drive in the not too far distant future,
we will have nothing more to offer our churches than the plan followed
previously. And while it has not been entirely satisfactory to many of our
people, we do want to urge again that if investments are made in government
securities, we should leave our testimony of nonsupport of war by registering
such investments through Provident Trust Company, by the plan which has been
in operation.
Two more tallies:
As of 22 November 1944 the cumulative total of civilian bond subscriptions was $5,009,059.50; from Mennonites, $3,629,456.00. As of 1 September 1945 those numbers had risen to $6,501,627.14 and $4,706,026.50.
The 19 December 1945 issue announced the
end of the “Civilian Bonds” program:
Inasmuch as the current bond drive, which officially came to a close
Dec. 8,
is the final war bond drive, the
M.C.C.
Executive Committee agreed on
Dec. 15
to a proposal that the civilian bond plan arrangement be terminated. The
civilian bond plan was the result of negotiations, in
the spring of 1942, of a Civilian Bond
Committee with the
U.S. Treasury
Department and was an arrangement whereby persons who felt unable to purchase
war bonds could subscribe to Government securities.
According to a summary of subscriptions under this plan, the amount of
securities purchased as of Dec. 15, 1945,
was $6,604,675.64. Of this amount, $4,786,276.50 was subscribed by Mennonites,
$1,103,800.00 by Brethren, $322,046.64 by Friends, and the remaining
$392,552.50 by other groups. A full report of subscriptions will be released
at a later date.
Those numbers had risen somewhat by the end of the
year:
As announced earlier, the Civilian Bond plan terminated on
Jan. 1, 1946.
During the time the plan was in operation 33,006 subscriptions were made;
these subscriptions amounted to $6,740,161.14. Of this total, $4,911,277.00
were subscribed by Mennonites; $1,108,592.50 by Brethren; $323,246.64 by
Friends; and $397,045.00 by all other groups.
Between 1942 and 1945 when the “Civilian
Bonds” program was in effect, the vast majority of money the
U.S. government was
receiving from taxes and bond sales was being spent on its war effort. By
purchasing “Civilian Bonds,” Mennnonites in the United States contributed over
$4 million to prosecuting the war, while congratulating themselves all the
while on having registered “our testimony of nonsupport of war” with each bond
purchase.