Aa history Lovers 2004 moderators Nancy Olson and Glenn F. Chesnut page

measured, not by the nature of the government machinery he lives under [...]

but by the relative paucity of the restraints it imposes on him" (The Man

versus the State [1940], p. 19); the genuine liberal seeks to repeal those

laws that coerce and restrict individuals from doing as they see fit.

Spencer followed earlier liberalism, then, in maintaining that law is a

restriction of liberty and that the restriction of liberty, in itself, is

evil and justified only where it is necessary to the preservation of

liberty. The only function of government was to be the policing and

protection of individual rights. Spencer maintained that education,

religion, the economy, and care for the sick or indigent were not to be

undertaken by the state.

Law and public authority have as their general purpose, therefore, the

administration of justice (equated with freedom and the protection of

rights). These issues became the focus of Spencer's later work in political

philosophy and, particularly, in The Man versus the State. Here, Spencer

contrasts early, classical liberalism with the liberalism of the 19th

century, arguing that it was the latter, and not the former, that was a "new

Toryism"--the enemy of individual progress and liberty. It is here as well

that Spencer develops an argument for the claim that individuals have

rights, based on a 'law of life'. (Interestingly, Spencer acknowledges that

rights are not inherently moral, but become so only by one's recognition

that for them to be binding on others the rights of others must be binding

on oneself--this is, in other words, a consequence of the 'law of equal

freedom.') He concluded that everyone had basic rights to liberty 'in virtue

of their constitutions' as human beings (Social Statics, p. 77), and that

such rights were essential to social progress. (These rights included rights

to life, liberty, property, free speech, equal rights of women, universal

suffrage, and the right 'to ignore the state'--though Spencer reversed

himself on some of these rights in his later writings.) Thus, the

industrious--those of character, but with no commitment to existing

structures except those which promoted such industry (and, therefore, not

religion or patriotic institutions)--would thrive. Nevertheless, all

industrious individuals, Spencer believed, would end up being in fundamental

agreement.

Not surprisingly, then, Spencer maintained that the arguments of the early

utilitarians on the justification of law and authority and on the origin of

rights were fallacious. He also rejected utilitarianism and its model of

distributive justice because he held that it rested on an egalitarianism

that ignored desert and, more fundamentally, biological need and efficiency.

Spencer further maintained that the utilitarian account of the law and the

state was also inconsistent---that it tacitly assumed the existence of

claims or rights that have both moral and legal weight independently of the

positive law. And, finally, Spencer argues as well against parliamentary,

representative government, seeing it as exhibiting a virtual "divine

right"---i.e., claiming that "the majority in an assembly has power that has

no bounds." Spencer maintained that government action requires not only

individual consent, but that the model for political association should be

that of a "joint stock company", where the 'directors' can never act for a

certain good except on the explicit wishes of its 'shareholders'. When

parliaments attempt to do more than protect the rights of their citizens by,

for example, 'imposing' a conception of the good--be it only on a

minority--Spencer suggested that they are no different from tyrannies.

Assessment

Spencer has been frequently accused of inconsistency; one finds variations

in his conclusions concerning land nationalization and reform, the rights of

children and the extension of suffrage to women, and the role of government.

Moreover, in recent studies of Spencer's theory of social justice, there is

some debate whether justice is based primarily on desert or on entitlement,

whether the 'law of equal freedom' is a moral imperative or a descriptive

natural law, and whether the law of equal freedom is grounded on rights,

utility, or, ultimately, on 'moral sense'. Nevertheless, Spencer's work has

frequently been seen as a model for later 'libertarian' thinkers, such as

Robert Nozick, and he continues to be read--and is often invoked--by

'libertarians' on issues concerning the function of government and the

fundamental character of individual rights.

Bibliography

Primary Sources:

The Proper Sphere of Government. London: W. Brittain, 1843.

Social Statics. London: Chapman, 1851.

The Principles of Psychology. London: Longmans, 1855; 2nd edn., 2 vols.

London: Williams and Norgate, 1870-2; 3rd edn., 2 vols. (1890). [A System of

Synthetic Philosophy ; v. 4-5]

First Principles. London: Williams and Norgate, 1862; 6th edn., revised,

1904. [A system of Synthetic Philosophy ; v. 1]

Principles of Biology, 2 vols. London: Williams and Norgate, 1864, 1867; 2nd

edn., 1898-99).[A System of Synthetic Philosophy ; v. 2-3]

The Study of Sociology. New York: D. Appleton, 1874, [c1873]

The Principles of Sociology. 3 vols. London : Williams and Norgate,

1882-1898. [A System of Synthetic Philosophy, v. 6-8] CONTENTS: Vol. 1: pt.

1. The data of sociology. pt. 2. The inductions of sociology. pt. 3. The

domestic relations; Vol. 2: pt. 4. Ceremonial institutions. pt. 5. Political

institutions; v. 3: pt. 6. Ecclesiastical institutions. pt. 7. Professional

institutions. pt. 8. Industrial institutions.]

The Man versus the State: containing "The new Toryism," "The coming

slavery," "The sins of legislators," and "The great political superstition,"

London : Williams & Norgate, 1884; with additional essays and an

introduction by Albert Jay Nock. [adds "From freedom to bondage," and "Over-

legislation"] Intro. A.J. Nock. Caldwell, ID: Caxton, 1940.

Spencer, Herbert. The Factors of Organic Evolution. London: Williams and

Norgate, 1887.

Spencer, Herbert. The Principles of Ethics. 2 vols. London: Williams and

Northgate, 1892. [A system of synthetic philosophy ; v. 9-10]

An Autobiography. 2 v. London: Williams and Norgate, 1904.

Secondary Sources:

Andreski, S. Herbert Spencer: Structure, Function and Evolution. London,

1972.

Methuen, 1908.

Gray, T.S. The Political Philosophy of Herbert Spencer, Aldershot: Avebury,

1996.

Biological and Social Theory. Brighton, 1980.

Kennedy, James G. Herbert Spencer. Boston: Twayne Publishers, 1978.

Miller, David. Social Justice. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1976. Ch. 6

Paxton, N.L. George Eliot and Herbert Spencer: Feminism, Evolutionism, and

the Reconstruction of Gender. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press,

1991.

Peel, J.D.Y. Herbert Spencer: The Evolution of a Sociologist. London, 1971.

Political Philosophy of Mr Herbert Spencer, J.S. Mill and T.H. Green.

London: Swan Sonnenschein, 1891.

Taylor, M.W. Men versus the State: Herbert Spencer and late Victorian

Liberalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992.

Wiltshire, David. The Social and Political Thought of Herbert Spencer. New

York: Oxford, 1978.

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

++++Message 1687. . . . . . . . . . . . Living Sober

From: Joanna Whitney . . . . . . . . . . . . 3/3/2004 9:30:00 AM

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

Hi Group -- I am newly returning after a long stay away and glad to see you are all still here. I am really curious about the origins of the publication Living Sober and what conference approved it. Anybody?

Thanks, Joanna

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

++++Message 1688. . . . . . . . . . . . AA Literature at Unity retreats

From: victoria callaway . . . . . . . . . . . . 3/3/2004 9:20:00 AM

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

Can anyone clarify if some piece of AA literature was written at a

Nity Village retreat and what piece that is. this remark was made at

a meeting my sponsor was at and she wanted me to find out. Thanks

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

++++Message 1689. . . . . . . . . . . . Significant March dates in AA History - Revised

From: NMOlson@aol.com . . . . . . . . . . . . 3/3/2004 6:51:00 AM

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

Thanks to the two eagle-eyed members who spotted

errors in the original list posted March 1. One

of these days I'll get it right the first time.

Nancy

March 1:

article on AA.

1941 - Saturday Evening Post article by Jack

Alexander created national sensation. AA

membership quadrupled in one year from 2000 to

8000.

1947 - Nell Wing, Bill's secretary and first

archivist of AA, began her career at Alcoholic

Foundation Office.

March 4:

1891 - Lois Wilson was born.

March 5:

1945 - Time Magazine reported Detroit radio

broadcasts of AA members.

March 9:

who wanted to form a group in Wichita, Kansas.

March 11:

1947 - A Priest in St. Paul, Minnesota, founded

Calix International. Alcoholics in his parish

met after Saturday morning Mass to discuss the

readings for the upcoming Sunday and how their

faith melded with the Twelve Steps of Alcoholics

Anonymous.

March 12:

1940 - Ebby Thatcher, Bill Wilson's boyhood

friend and sponsor, was reported sober again.

March 14:

1941 - South Orange, NJ, AA held an anniversary

dinner at the Hotel Suburban with Bill Wilson as

the guest speaker.

March 15:

1941 - 1st AA group was formed in New Haven,

Connecticut.

March 16:

1940: Bill moved the Alcoholic Foundation office

to 30 Vesey St., NY. (30 Vesey St., NY, was

almost destroyed on September 11, 2001.)

March 18:

1951 - Cliff W. was elected 1st delegate from

Southern California.

March 21:

1881 - Anne Ripley, Dr. Bob's wife, was born.

1966 - Ebby Thatcher, Bill Wilson's sponsor,

died sober.

March 22:

1951 - Dr. William Duncan Silkworth died at

Towns Hospital.

1984 - Clarence Snyder, founder of Cleveland AA

and author of "Home Brewmeister," died at 81, 46

years sober.

March 23:

1936 - Bill & Lois Wilson visited Fitz Mayo,

"Our Southern Friend," in Maryland.

1941 - Sybil C.'s sobriety date. She was the

first woman to enter AA west of the Mississippi.

March 25:

1965 - Richmond Walker, author of "Twenty-Four

Hours a Day" book, died at age 72, almost 23

years sober.

March 29:

1943 - The Charleston Mail, WV, reported that

Bill Wilson had given a talk at St. John's

Parish House.

March 31:

1947 - 1st AA group was formed in London,

England.

date:

Quentin.

supervised by E.M. Jellinek.

1946 - The Jefferson Barracks AA Group in

Missouri was formed. It is thought to be the

first ever in a military installation.

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

++++Message 1690. . . . . . . . . . . . Re: Living Sober

From: Mel Barger . . . . . . . . . . . . 3/3/2004 2:16:00 PM

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

Hi Joanna,

I don't know what conference approved of Living Sober but I do know that

it was written by Barry Leach, now deceased. Barry was very devoted to Lois

Wilson---somewhat like a surrogate son---and even accompanied her on trips

when she was very elderly. I took a picture of Barry and Lois greeting Jack

Bailey (the famous Queen for a Day man) when he spoke in Akron in 1978. I

wish I could find a portrait of Barry for use in my Power Point

presentations.

Mel Barger

~~~~~~~~

Mel Barger

melb@accesstoledo.com
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

++++Message 1691. . . . . . . . . . . . Re: Living Sober

From: Jim Blair . . . . . . . . . . . . 3/4/2004 12:12:00 AM

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

Mel wrote

> I don't know what conference approved of Living Sober but I do know that

it was written by Barry Leach, now deceased.

This is from the unpublished history manuscript by Bob P.

"Living Sober," the other booklet, published in 1975, had a more tortuous

history. Around 1968, there were discussions by the Board of the need for a

pamphlet for sober old-timers, and the need to point out "traps" or "danger

signals." Members of the Literature Committee and others were asked to

submit their ideas. Out of this grew a specific proposal for a piece of

literature to be developed around the topic, "How We Stay Sober." It was in

outline form by October 1969, and was assigned to a professional writer on

the staff of a prestigious national magazine. After nearly two years of

work, he submitted a complete draft.. Which everyone agreed would not do at

all. They felt it needed such drastic revision that it should be started

again from scratch by a new author. Barry L., a seasoned, skillful freelance

writer/consultant for G.S.O. was given the task. With Bob H., general

manager of G.S.O., he negotiated a flat fee for the project. After four and

a half years of organizing material and writing . and probably some

procrastinating, as well, Barry came up with a simple, intensely practical,

charmingly written manual on how to enjoy a happy, productive life without

drinking. It was not spiritual and contained nothing about getting sober;

but it was chock-full of the kind of advice and suggestions a newcomer might

get from a super-sponsor. ("A.A.'s First Aid Kit" was Bayard's name for it.)

And it was written in a style unlike any other A.A. literature: breezy,

impertinent, colloquial and informal. "Living Sober" proved to be hugely

popular, and after it had sold nearly a million copies, Barry L. felt he

should have been compensated more generously and should receive some sort of

royalty. He sent a letter to all past Trustees and G.S.O. staff members with

whom he was acquainted, to advance his claim. The AAWS Board and the General

Service Board considered his case, but declined to take action. He then

threatened legal recourse, but perhaps realizing the weakness of his case,

never followed through.

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

++++Message 1695. . . . . . . . . . . . Marty Mann and Bill Wilson, 1956, Compiled from Previous Posts

From: NMOlson@aol.com . . . . . . . . . . . . 3/8/2004 7:54:00 AM

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

[17]

In 1956, Marty Mann had the pleasure of introducing Bill Wilson

This Committee was later to become the National Council on

Alcoholism (now the National Council on Alcoholism and Drug

Dependence).

Bill's talk, while it included his usual "bedtime story," was

also a call to cooperation and understanding and support of all

those who are trying to help the still suffering alcoholic.

Nancy

Annual Meeting

Hotel Statler, New York City, N.Y.

March 30, 1956

Introduction by the National Director of the National Committee

on Alcoholism, Mrs. Marty Mann.

Mr. President, distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen, I had

to have that formal beginning to find out if I had a voice. This

moment is of such import to me that I have been fearful for a

week that I would not be able to speak.

It's a moment I've been waiting for a long time. The National

Committee on Alcoholism was founded on a proof. Unless there had

been proof that alcoholics could recover there could have been

no National Committee on Alcoholism. That proof was available by

1944, the year of the founding of

the Committee because of what Alcoholics Anonymous had been

doing for nine years. And the work that Alcoholics Anonymous had

been doing for nine years is very largely due to a recovery of

an individual. Everything has to start somewhere.

We no longer look upon it as a divine plan, I think we should as

divine plans require instruments, instruments that we can see

and touch and hear, that can reach us. Such an instrument was

found in a man who had suffered deeply and terribly from

alcoholism and he was able to recover and he discovered that in

order to keep his recovery he had to share it, he had to pass it

on. I like to describe this as the discovery of a constructive

chain reaction.

Something was set in motion back in November 1934, that was to

become one of the great sources for good in our time. I was very

fortunate in coming in contact with this force when I most

desperately needed it. It was not easy for me to change the

pattern of my living from a negative one to a constructive one

and I had a little trouble from time to time in the beginning in

attempting my new life.

The most seriously difficulty I had was met by this same man who

sought me out and dug me out and whom I couldn't refuse to see

and when he spoke to me he said something that I'll never

forget. Something that is having is

culmination here today. He asked me if I wanted to stop

drinking. I said, "Yes." He put his arm around me and he said,

"I'm glad because we have a long way to go together."

Neither of us knew back in 1939 how far that road led or where

it was going to lead but we are still traveling that road

together and it's lead up all the way, up and on.

I believe that the contribution that was made by this

instrument, if you like, is a contribution past description,

past telling. I believe that it was largely through that

contribution which produced living proof that we have been able

to arrive at a meeting such as today where we have been able to

bring together representatives of all the professional

disciplines who are happily and gladly working in this field as

this wasn't always true fifteen years ago. But we were able to

get great names in medicine and psychiatry and social work and

psychology and in public health to be present at a meeting like

this, to take part in what we are doing, to join hands with that

little band of recovered alcoholics to help lick this problem.

Alcoholics Anonymous couldn't do it alone. We couldn't expect

any other victims of a particular affliction to carry the whole

burden of doing something about that particular disease and we

shouldn't expect it in this field. To lick a problem as complex,

as vast and as devastating as alcoholism requires the

cooperation of every one of us, of every area of our life. To

have that cooperation we had to have evidence that it could

produce them. That evidence exists in the growing ranks of

Alcoholics Anonymous and that truth exists because back in 1934,

one man got sober and allowed himself to be used as the great

instrument in spreading this word of hope. In my book he is one

of the greatest men of our times. I give you my friend, my

sponsor, the reason why I am here, Bill.

Address by Bill W.

Well, folks, our world is certainly a world of contrast, it was

only a few year ago that Westbrook Pegler wrote a piece in which

he described Dr. Bob and me as "the wet brain founders of

Alcoholics Anonymous." But very seriously and very happily, too,

I think that the A.A.'s present in and out of this Committee and

everywhere join in with Lois and me and are able to say that

this is one of the finest hours that has yet to come to us.

Some people say that destiny is a series of events held together

by a thin thread of change or circumstance. Other people say

that destiny is composed of a series of events strung on a cord

of cause and effect and still others say that the destiny of

good work is often the issue of the will of God and that he

forges the links and brings the events to pass. I've been asked

to come here to tell the story of A.A. and in that story,

everyone here I am sure can find justification for either of

those points of view.

But, I want to tell more than the story of A.A., this time. I

was beset, I must confess, by a certain reluctance and the

reluctance issues out of this fact, of course everybody is

fairly familiar with the fact that I once suffered from

alcoholism, but people are not so wise to the fact that I

suffer also from schizophrenia, split personality. I have a

personality say as a patriarch of A.A.,founding father, if you

like, and I also have a personality as an A.A. member and

between these personalities is a terrific gulf.

You see, a founding father of A.A. has to stand up to the A.A.

Tradition which says that you must not endorse anything or

anybody or even say good things about your friends on the

outside or even of Beemans chewing gum lest it be an

endorsement. So as the father of A.A. I am very strictly bound

to do nothing but tell the story of our society.

But as an A.A. member like all the rest, I am an anarchist who

revels in litter so I'm really going to say what I damn please.

So, if only you will receive me as Mr. Anonymous, one of the

poor old drunks still trying to get honest!

Now to our narrative and to the first links in the chain of

events that has led us to this magnificent hour. I was by no

means the first link in this chain and only one of very many. I

think the founder business ought to be well deflated and I'm

just going to take a minute or two to do it.

As a fact, the first link in the chain was probably forged about

twenty-five years ago in the office of a great psychiatrist,

Carl Jung. At that time he had as a patient a certain very

prominent American businessman. They worked together for a year.

My business friend Rowland was a very grim case of alcoholism

and yet under the doctor's guidance he thought he was going to

find release. He left the doctor in great confidence but

shortly, he was back drunk. Said he to Dr. Jung, "What now,

You*re my court of last resort."

The doctor looked at him and said, "I thought that you might be

one of those rare cases that could be touched with my art, but

you aren't. I have never seen," continued doctor Jung, "one

single case of alcoholism recover, so grave as yours under my

tutelage."

Well, to my friend Rowland this was tantamount to a sentence of

death. "But doctor," said he, "is there no other course, nothing

else."

"Yes," said Dr. Jung, "there is something. There is such a thing

"Well," Rowland beamed, "after all I've been a vestryman in the

Episcopal Church, I'm a man of faith."

"Oh," Dr. Jung said, "that's fine so far as it goes but it has

to go a lot deeper. I'm speaking of transforming spiritual

experiences."

"Where would I find such a thing," asked Rowland.

Dr. Jung said, "I don't know, lighting strikes here or there, it

strikes any other place. We don't know why or how. You will just

have to expose yourself in the religion of your own choice or a

spiritual influence as best you can and just try and ask and

maybe it will be open to you."

So my friend Rowland joined up with the Oxford Groups, the

sometime Buchmanites of that day, first in London and then came

to New York and lo and behold the lighting did strike and he

found himself unaccountably released of his obsession to drink.

After a time he heard of a friend of mine, a chap we call Ebby,

who sojourned every summer in Vermont, an awful grim case, he

had driven his father's bright, shiny new Packard into the side

of someone's house. He had bashed into the kitchen, pushing

aside the stove and had said to the startled lady there, "How

about a cup of coffee." The neighbors thought that this was

enough and that he needed to be locked up.

He was taken before Judge Graves in Bennington, Vermont, a place

not too far from my home, by the way, and there our friend

Rowland heard of it and gathering a couple of Oxford Groupers

together, one of them an alcoholic the other just a two fisted

drinker, they took Ebby in tow and they inoculated him with very

simple ideas: that he, Ebby, could not do this job on his own

resources, that he had to have help; that he might try the idea

of getting honest with himself as he never had before; he might

try the idea of making a confession of his defects to someone;

he might try the idea of making restitution or harms done; he

might try the idea of giving of himself to others with no price

tag on it; agnostic he was, he might try the idea of praying to

whatever God there was.

That was the essence of what my friend Ebby abstracted from the

Oxford Groups of that day. True, we later rejected very much of

the other things they had to teach us. It is true that these

principles might have been found somewhere else but as it

happens they were found there.

Ebby for a time got the same phenomenon of release and then he

remembered me. He was brought to New York and lodged at Calvary

Mission and soon called me up while I lay home drinking in

Brooklyn.

I will never forget that day as suddenly he stood in the

areaway, I hadn't seen him for a long time. By this time I knew

something of the gravity of my plight. I couldn't put my finger

on it but he seemed strangely changed, besides he was sober. He

came in and began to talk. I offered him some grog. I remember I

had a big jug of gin and pineapple juice there, the pineapple

juice was there to convince Lois that I wasn't drinking straight

gin. No, he didn't care for a drink. No, he wasn't drinking.

"What's got into you," I asked.

"Well," he said, "I've got religion."

Well, that was rough on me. He's got religion! He had

substituted religious insanity for alcoholic insanity. Well, I

had to be polite so I asked, "What brand is it."

And, he said, "I wouldn't exactly call it a brand. I've come

across a group of people who have sold me on getting honest with

myself; who sold me on the idea that I am powerless over my

problems and have taught me to help others so I'm trying to

bring something to you, if you want it. That's it."

So, in his turn, he transmitted to me these simple ideas across

the kitchen table.

Meanwhile, another chain of events had been taking place. In

fact, the earliest link in that chain runs back to William James

who is sometimes called the father of modern psychology. Another

link in the chain was my own Doctor William Duncan Silkworth,

who I think will someday be counted as a medical saint.

I had the usual struggle with this problem and had met Dr.

Silkworth at Towns Hospital. He had explained in very simple

terms what my problem was: an obsession that condemned me to

drink against my will and increasing physical sensitivity which

guaranteed that I would go mad unless I could somehow find

release, perhaps through re-education. He taught me the nature

of the malady.

But here I was, again drinking. But here was my friend talking

to me over the kitchen table. Already, you see, the elements

which lie today in the foundation of A.A. were already present.

The God of science in the persons of Dr. Silkworth and Dr. Jung

had said "No" on the matters of psychiatry, psychology and

medicine. They can't do it alone. Your will power can't do it

alone. So, the rug had been pulled out from under Rowland

Hazzard; and Hazzard, an alcoholic, had pulled the rug out from

under Ebby; and now he was pulling it out from under me while

quoting Dr. Jung and substantiating what Dr. Silkworth had let

leak back to me through Lois.

So, the stage was really set and it had been some years in the

setting before it ever caught up with me. Of course, I had

balked at this idea of a power greater than myself, although the

rest of the program seemed sensible enough. I was desperate,

willing to try anything, but I still did gag on the God

business. But at length, I said to myself as has every A.A.

member since, "Who am I to say there is no God? Who am I to say

how I am going to get well?"

Like a cancer patient, I am now ready to do anything, to be

dependent upon any kind of a physician and if there is a great

physician, I had better seek him out.

So, pretty drunk, I went back to Towns Hospital, was put to bed

and three days later my friend appears again. One alcoholic

talking to another across that strange powerful bond that we can

effect with each other. In his one hand and in the hands of the

doctor was hopelessness and on the other side was hope. He went

through his little list of principles; getting honest, making

restitution, working with other people, praying to whatever God

there was, then he left. When he had gone, I sunk into a

terrific depression, the like of which I had never known and I

suppose for a moment the last vestiges of my prideful obstinacy

were crushed out at great depth and I cried out like a child,

"Now I'll do anything, anything to get well," and with no faith

and almost no hope I again cried out, "If there is a God, will

he show himself."

Immediately the place lit up in a great light. It seemed to me

that I was on a mountain top, there was a sudden realization

that I was free, utterly free of this thing and as the ecstasy

subsided I am again on the bed and now I'm surrounded by a sense

of presence and a mighty assurance and a feeling that no matter

how wrong things were, ultimately all would be well. I thought

to myself, so this is the God of the preachers.

From that day to this, I have scarcely been tempted to drink, so

instantaneous and terrific was the release from the obsession.

At about the time of my release from the hospital, somebody

handed me a copy of William James' book Varieties of Religious

Experience. Many of us disagree with James' pragmatic philosophy

but I think that nearly all will agree that this is a great text

in which he examines these mechanisms. And in that book of his,

great numbers, the great majority of these experiences took off

from a base of utter hopelessness. In some controlling area of

the individual's life he had struck a wall and couldn't get

under, around or over. That kind of hopelessness was the

forerunner of the transforming experience and as I began to read

those common denominators stuck out of the cases cited by James.

I began to wonder. Yes, I fitted into that pattern but why

hadn't more alcoholics fitted into it before now? In other

words, what we needed was more deflation at depth to lay hold of

this transforming experience.

Then comes Dr. Silkworth with the answer, those two little

words: the obsession and the allergy. Not such little words, big

words, the twin ogres of madness and death, of science

pronouncing its verdict of hopelessness so far as our own

resources were concerned. Yes, I had had that dose. That had

perhaps laid the ground. One alcoholic talking to another had

convinced me where no others had brought me any conviction.

I began to race around madly trying to help alcoholics and in

gratitude I briefly joined the Oxford Group but they were more

interested in saving the world than other alcoholics. That

didn't last too long and I began to tell people of this sudden

mystic experience and I fear that I was preaching a

great deal and not one single drunk sobered up for a period of

six months.

Again, comes the man of medicine, Dr. Silkworth and he said,

"Bill, you've got the cart before the horse. Why don't you stop

talking about this queer experience of yours and of all this

morality? Why don't you pour into these people how medically

sick they are and then, maybe coming from you or with the

identification you can get with these other fellows, then maybe

you'll soften them up so they'll buy this moral psychology."

About that time I had been urged to get back into business and

quit being a missionary and I hooked onto a business deal which

took me to Akron, Ohio.

The deal fell through and for the first time I felt tempted to

drink. I was in the hotel with about ten dollars in my pocket

and my new found friends had disappeared. I thought to myself,

gee, you'd better look for another alcoholic to work with.

Then I realized as never before how working with other

alcoholics had played such a great part in sustaining my

original experience.

Well, again friends came to the rescue. I went down to the lobby

and looked at the Church Directory and absentmindedly drew my

finger down the list of

names and there appeared a rather odd one, the Reverend Tunks. I

said, "Well, I'll call up Tunks" and he turned out to be a

wonderful Episcopal clergyman. I said that I was a drunk looking

for another drunk to work on and tried to explain why. The good

man showed some alarm as it wasn't everyday someone called up

with my request but the good man gave me a list of about ten

names, some of them Oxford Groupers. I called all of these

people up. Well, Sunday was coming and maybe they would see me

in Church, some were going out of town.

I exhausted that list, all but one. None had time nor cared very

much. Something not very strange under the circumstances so I

went down and took another look in the bar and something said to

me "You had better call her

up."

Her name was Henrietta Seiberling and I took her to be the wife

this lady certainly isn't going to want to see me on a Saturday

afternoon. But I called and she said, "Come right out, I'm not

an alcoholic but I think I understand."

This led to the meeting with Dr. Bob, one of my many co-partners

in this enterprise, and as Dr. Silkworth had suggested I poured

into him how sick we were and that produced his immediate

recovery.

I went to live in the Smith's house and presently Bob said,

"Hadn't we better start working with alcoholics?"

I said, "Sure, I think we had."

We found an opportunity at City Hospital in Akron, who was being

brought in with D.T.'s on a stretcher. He'd been hospitalized

six times in four months and couldn't even get home without

getting stewed. That was to be A.A. number three, the first man

on the bed.

Dr. Bob and I went to see him and he said, "I'm too far gone and

besides, I'm a man of faith."

Nevertheless, we poured it into him, the medical hopelessness of

this thing so far as one's own resources are concerned. We

explained what had happened to us, we made clear to him his

future. And the next morning we came back and he was saying to

his wife, "Give me my clothes, were going to get up and get out

of here. These are the men, they are the ones who understand."

Right then and there was formed the first A.A. group in the

summer of 1935.

The synthesis in it's main outline was complete.

But Lord, we hadn't even started. The struggles of those next

few years. A wonderful thing to think about. Terribly slow was

our growth. We got way into 1939 before we had produced even a

hundred recoveries in Akron and in New York, a few in Cleveland,

Ohio.

us of such strength that the few A.A.'s in Cleveland were

flooded with hundreds of cases and that added one more needed

ingredient.

Up to this time it had been deadly slow. Could this thing

spread? Could we get into mass production?

Well, in a matter of months, twenty Clevelanders had sobered up

several hundred newcomers. But that required hospitalization and

we were not liked in the hospitals.

Now, I come to the subject of this Committee, it's relation with

A.A., and the linkage between us. Meanwhile, great events were

going on down here (New York), there had been in preparation a

book to be called Alcoholics Anonymous.

As a precaution we had made mimeograph copies to be passed

around and one of these copies was sent to a man who I consider

to be one of the greatest friends that this society can ever

have, Dr. Harry Tiebout, the onetime Chairman of this Committee.

Harry Tiebout was the man who got me before the medical

societies and that took great courage. Well, I'm getting ahead

of my story.

So Harry got one of the mimeographed copies of the A.A. book and

he hands it to a certain patient at the Blythewood Sanitarium in

Greenwich, Connecticut. The patient was a lady. She read the

book and it made her very mad so she threw it out the window and

got drunk. That was the first impact of Alcoholics Anonymous.

Harry got her sobered up and handed her the book again and a

phrase caught her eye, it was a trigger. "We cannot live with

resentments," the book said. This time she didn't throw it out

the window.

Presently she came to our little meeting and you must remember

that we were still less than a hundred strong in the early part

of 1939 at our little Brooklyn house at 182 Clinton Street. And

she came back from that meeting to Greenwich and made a remark

that today is a classic in A.A. She said to a fellow patient and

sufferer and friend in the sanitarium, "Grennie, we're not alone

anymore, this is it."

Well, that was the beginning for Marty. Much help by Harry and

Mrs. Willey, the proprietor of the place. Marty started the

first group on the grounds of the sanitarium. She began to

frantically work with alcoholics and became the dean of our

women alcoholics. So our society had made two terrific friends

in Dr. Harry and Marty.

Now, in the intervening years up to 1944, A.A. itself was in a

bad turmoil.

The Saturday Evening Post piece had been published which caused

6,000 frantic inquiries to hit our post office box here in New

York, from all over the country, indeed, all over the world. So

then the great question was posed. Could A.A. spread? Could it

function? Could it hang together with it's enormous neurotic

content that we have.

We just did not know. But again, it was do or die. In old Ben

Franklin's words, "We would either hang together or hang

separately."

Out of this group experience there began to evolve Traditions.

Traditions which had to do with A.A.'s unity and function and

relation with the world outside and our relations to such things

as money, property, prestige, all that sort of thing.

The Traditions of Alcoholics Anonymous you folks, for the most

part, are familiar with. Those principles began to take shape,

began to gather for us and little by little, order began to come

out of this seething mass of drunks in their quest for sobriety.

By now, the membership of the movement had run up into the many

thousands and as Marty observed, there was now proof that it can

be done. But we were still a long way from today. A.A. still

needed friends. Friends of medicine, friends of religion,

friends of the press. We had a handful but we needed a lot of

friends.

The public needed to know what sort of malady this was and that

something could be done about it. This Committee, much like

Alcoholics Anonymous is notable not only for what it has done in

its own sphere but for what it has set in motion.

I remember very well when this Committee started. It brought me

in contact with our great friends at Yale, the courageous Dr.

Haggard, the incredible Dr.Jellinek or "Bunky" as we

affectionately know him, and Seldon [Bacon] and all those

dedicated people.

The question arose, could an A.A. member get into education or

research or what not? Then ensued a fresh and great controversy

in A.A. which was not surprising because you must remember that

in that period we were like the people on Rickenbacker's raft.

Who would dare to rock us ever so little and precipitate us back

into the alcohol sea.

So, frankly, we were afraid and as usual we had the radicals and

we had the conservatives and we had moderates on this question

of whether A.A. members could go into other enterprises in this

field.

our own business." The radicals said, "Let's endorse anything

that looks like it will do any good, let the A.A. name be used

to raise money and to do whatever it can do for the whole

field," and the growing body of moderates took the position,

"Let any A.A. member who feels the call go into these related

fields, for if we are to do less it would be a very antisocial

outlook."

So that is where the Tradition finally sat and many were called

and many were chosen since that day to go into these related

fields which has now got to be so large in their promise that we

of Alcoholics Anonymous are getting down to our right size and

we are only now realizing that we are only a small part of a

great big picture.

We are realizing again, afresh, that without our friends, not

only could we not have existed in the first place but we could

not have grown. We are getting a fresh concept in A.A. of what

our relations with the world and all of these related

enterprises should be. In other words, we are growing up.

In fact last year at St. Louis we were bold enough to say we had

come of age and that within Alcoholics Anonymous the main

outlines of the basis for recovery, of the basis for unity and

of the basis for service or function were already evident.