Search the Community

Attorney for the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society who played a major role in legal victories such as:West Virginia State Board of Education vs. Barnette (1940)They Oppose Freedom of Worship - 1953 "New World" Assembly at Yankee StadiumDefending and Legally Establishing the Good News (1950)Dorothy Covington, Wife of Civil Liberties Attorney Hayden Covington, Dies at 92 Interesting comment on a related post: Comments from an author on Hayden Covington below:Ali did not serve even five minutes of time in prison and that had zero to do with Hayden C. Covington.June 19, 1967 in Houston, Tex.There are a number of salient facts concerning this man who possessed a BIG REPUTATION. Covington and Rutherford were pretty much the Type A personalities who got along famously. In fact, Rutherford wanted Covington to be the next GB executive of the Watchtower corporation. Fred Franz and Nathan Knorr were the polar opposites to the (above) dynamic duo. These two would conspire to drive Covington out. Knorr hated Covington. Knorr was anti-intellectual and Covington disdained his lack of education. Both Rutherford and Covington were hard drinkers. Eventually, the drinking and bullying of Knorr would get Covington sideways with Franz and Knorr and the excuse would be given that Covington would "step down" from the Vice-President position because he wasn't of the heavenly class. This is bullshit for an obvious reason: he never claimed to be anointed in the first place, and this was never an obstacle before. Having an 80%win record with the Supreme Court, Covington was sought out by wealthy Jehovah's Witness families to represent their sons who had refused Alternate Service before the courts. For a retainer of $10,000 dollars, Covington would agree. A friend of mine who ended up in the same Federal Prison told me Covington botched his trial and cut short his presentation. Why? During his trial, Covington was offered a quarter of a million dollars if he could get Cassius Clay / Muhammed Ali out of his Draft refusal case._Here is the B.S. public relations spin on Covington:"Declaring the Good News Without Letup (1942-1975)", Jehovah's Witnesses - Proclaimers of God's Kingdom, page 91, "In September 1945, Brother Covington graciously declined to serve further as vice president of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society (of Pennsylvania), explaining that he wished to comply with what was then understood to be Jehovah's will for all members of the directorate and officers—that they be spirit-anointed Christians, whereas he professed to be one of the 'other sheep.'"_5. Covington racked up 37 Supreme Court victories representing the Watchtower's interests. This gave him tremendous clout.6. Covington had replaced Olin Moyle, who had had a huge confrontation and blow up with Rutherford. (Moyle sued Rutherford and won, but his monetary settlement was stretched out over many decades spitefully by the Society.) During and after the trial, Covington made ridiculous statements to the press such as this: "I take exception to remarks that this man is under the influence of the Muslims in any way." _ Lawyer Hayden Covington took the lazy way out and suggested Ali should accept a guilty sentence and seek to make a deal with the prosecutor, Morton Susman, United States Attorney. In fact, he talked Ali into requesting that the Judge sentence him immediately! It was this tactic which frustrated and upset Ali's first-hired attorney, Quinnan A. Hodges of Houston. It is also the reason Ali's handlers refused to pay Covington. (Attorney M.W. Plummer andAttorney Chauncey Eskridge are the real 'heroes' of the Ali story). But first: How was Covington's plan supposed to work? Federal District Judge Joe E. Ingraham sentenced Clay to five years in prison and fined him $10,000. This was the maximum penalty for the offense, which is a felony. The judge's sentence was pronounced immediately at Clay's request. "I'd appreciate it," the 25-year-old boxer said, "if the court will do it now, give me my sentence now, instead of waiting and stalling for time." Prosecutor Morton Susman and Hayden Covington had worked out a deal, but IT WAS NOT BINDING on the Judge! New York Time news article: "Both Mr. Covington and Mr. Hodges asked Judge Ingraham to put Clay on probation. Failing that, said Mr. Covington, the former champion should not be given a sentence more severe than those given in similar cases. "That's 18 months," he said." https://books.google.com/books?id=K7gDAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA51&lpg=PA51&dq=Quinnan+A.+Hodges+and+muhammad+ali&source=bl&ots=ycWXV3cKtq&sig=skAogRLT8Ei4i4Q1YDBrD6o2SPM&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CD8Q6AEwBWoVChMI9YGxmZSDyAIVjhOSCh1CWQvF#v=onepage&q=Quinnan%20A.%20Hodges%20and%20muhammad%20ali&f=falseHow then, did Muhammed Ali avoid serving a moment of incarceration?The appeals process allowed his competent attorney's M.W. Plummer and Attorney Chauncey Eskridgeto pursue the real problem in the case: Ali's Draft Board didn't consider him to be sincere as a real minister Ali failed the Army's intelligence test and did not qualify to serve The Supreme Court in Clay v. United States reversed his conviction in 1971. (Ali’s birth name was Cassius Clay.) “[T]he Department [of Justice] was simply wrong as a matter of law in advising that the petitioner’s beliefs were not religiously based and were not sincerely held,” the opinion said. Even though Ali prevailed 8-0 before the high court, Bob Woodward and Scott Armstrong later reported in The Brethren that the justices initially voted against him, finding that he wasn’t really a conscientious objector and that he should go to jail. Apparently, one of Justice John Marshall Harlan’s law clerks loaned the justice a copy of The Autobiography of Malcolm X. Harlan read the book and changed his views on Black Muslims.__Bottom line of all of this:There was bad blood between Knorr and Covington, but Hayden C. Covington was a legend. TheWatchtowr Organization NEEDED HIM for publicity purposes. He was reinstated before his death.My encounters with the Draft Board and my subsequent trial and imprisonment took place in October of 1967, after Cassius Clay / Muhammed Ali had his highly publicized clash with authorities.I cover this in some detail in my book I WEPT BY THE RIVERS OF BABYLON (A Prisoner of Conscience in a Time of War.)

Interview with Hayden C. Covington, former Watchtower Attorney on November 19, 1978. Covington represented Jehovah's Witnesses in several Supreme Court cases dealing with freedom of religion and freedom of press in the 1940s. He was also Vice President of the Watchtower Society from 1942 to 1945. Covington died two days after giving this interview. Transcript: Bro. Murray: Brother Covington, anybody can listen to you and tell you are from somewhere in the southwest, but exactly where and when did you come on the scene? Covington: I was born in January 19, 1911 in East Texas. I was raised on a farm in a place east of Dallas. I worked my way through school after that. My father was on the Texas Ranger Force and he was transferred to San Antonio, Texas and that's where I went to law school. Bro. Murray: How did you happen come into the truth then? Covington: I came into knowledge of the truth because my father was transferred from San Antonio, Texas down to the valley as a Texas Ranger. After that transfer I had to have a place to stay, so I stayed with two friends of mine that I went to school with. They asked me to move in with them and the father who was the head of the family was in bad health and he had all of us come on Sunday and listen to him talk about world conditions. He interested me and I got very interested in what he had to say because I was myself fed up with the way things were going and like all young kids I was dissatisfied with the establishment, and I was very much so at the time and I was flirting with controversial ideas and he was full of controversy against this system of things. What he preached appealed to me very much and so I listen to him and he would turn on the radio station KTSA that had the recorded broadcasts of Judge J. F. Rutherford, as he was as called and known; so he insisted on our listening and I was very pleased with what I heard. [Note Covington did not become a Witness due to his love for the scriptures or God but out of youthful rebellion]. Bro. Murray: Was the fact that Brother Rutherford was a lawyer, did that impress you too? Did that make it more interesting? Covington: Well he presented the thing in a way that was incontrovertible by me. As a lawyer I could see that he knew what he was talking about 100%. He was very persuasive and I was a ready, willing listener, and I was willing to join up with him in his opposition, for the truth. Bro. Murray: You were ripe for the truth! When did you first meet Brother Rutherford? Covington: In Houston in 1900 and, I forget the year, way before I came to Bethel. I went over to Houston with a group of brothers that knew they were having a special meeting over there, and Brother Rutherford was there because Brother Isaac lived down in Houston at that time. He's dead now, Joe Isaac, he was a great friend of the judge, and I heard his name all over Texas. Bro. Murray: Tell me this, when you took the truth, and you began to go to meetings, how did your Daddy react to that? Covington: Well he got to be very hostile against what I was doing when I was going to the Witness meetings because he had great ambitions for me to be a politician ... And I was then working in the county court house, in the county clerks office, and I had a political job. Whenever they were out campaigning, I was out preaching. So I had a political job and a political office, but I didn't go along with it. Bro. Murray: When were you actually admitted to the bar? Covington: I was admitted to the bar in year of 1933. Bro. Murray: So you practiced law for a little while before you went to Bethel? Covington: Oh yes, I was an active practitioner at the bar in San Antonio after I took the bar examination, and, incidentally, I took the bar examination a year before I graduated and passed it. Bro. Murray: Then you still had to go the extra year? Covington: I had to go the extra year to get my certificate of graduation. Bro. Murray: Did you set up your own law firm or did you join a law firm there? Covington: I was working for a big law firm when I was admitted to the bar and I passed it with such high grades that the head of the law firm "Moffison - Burkeson" came and offered me a job. Sis. Murray: How did you get involved then in defending Witnesses and working Brothers? Covington: That came about after I quit the Morrison firm and went over with R. H. Mercer, who was a defender of damage suits for the Maryland Casualty Company in San Antonio. And there was some brothers who got arrested down in the valley because of a meeting that was held down there and I went down and appeared on their behalf and got the case thrown out. And then it was my name reached the Society and they assigned me to represent the Society in a will contest case up in Curville, Texas, and I handled that for the Society And then the Brothers got involved in controversy with the San Antonio police and that is when we get into the matter of Brother Heath. We were having information marches, and the cops were trying to stop us. And it became necessary for me to have a conference with the Mayor of the City of San Antonio on whether Jehovah's Witnesses have the right to engage in information marches, carrying the sign that religion is a snare and a racket. Bro. Murray: And that made people mad didn't it? Sis. Murray: But how did you win that case? Covington: By pleading with the Mayor he saw then that we had the right, I made him, well I didn't make him, the Lord made him, but I was the one that offered the proposition (Brother Heath was in San Antonio on the occasion of that visit). Brother Heath was the secretary for Brother Rutherford at the time. Sis. Murray: So when he saw you there he invited you to Bethel? Covington: Well, he invited me not to Bethel, he invited me to attend the Madison Square Garden Convention. Bro. Murray: Is that the one where they had all of the riots? Covington: That's where the Catholic Action tried to break the meeting up in 1939. On the the record Government and Peace and you can hear the mob action from up the stairs. When the mob started, Brother Heath got down off the speaker's platform because he was in charge of all the ushers; and headed up there and when he headed, I headed too. He went up the meandering stairway up into the old Madison Square Garden, not the one that's there today. I followed him and we went together. They were screaming and mad, this was the same sort of noise that you hear on that Government and Peace record was yelled into our ears as we was going up there to maintain law and order in that religious gathering. Covington: The cops were on the outside and acting "hands off," allowing those Coglanites to go ahead and to break up the meeting, or try to break it up. We went up and we had canes to maintain order and we tried to push the mobsters out of the way and when we did one mobster grabbed Brother Heath and hurt him very badly, physically. And that's also written up in the Society publications. They grabbed him by the private parts as he was going up the stairway and he hit the mobster over the head with a cane in order to break up the crowd that was coming around us. And when he did that then the cops moved in from the outside (they were in conspiracy working with the mobsters) and they put Brother Heath under arrest because of his having hit one of the mobsters with the cane. He was in the right, Brother Heath was, but the cops didn't think so and they went ahead and did their part helping the mobsters and took Brother Heath into custody. Then I became the chief witness for the defense, meaning Brother Heath, and when the case went to the courts, I was called up from San Antonio, Texas, to testify. I made two or three trips up on the train, they were two or three day trips. Anyhow, in the end Brother Heath was tried by three judges, that were black robed representatives of the State of New York to enforce the felony law and they were going to try and get him. But the judges ruled, based on the testimony that I gave supporting Brother Heath's self-defense, that he was not guilty. They held that the testimony was given by a member of the bar whom they believed was more credible than the mobsters that had testified against him ... so Brother Heath was acquitted as a result of Jehovah's provision of having me there to give testimony on his behalf Sis. Murray: I remember Brother Rutherford on that record saying that they will not break up this meeting and he just went on non stop. Covington: He says "By God's grace the Nazis and the Fascists will not break this meeting up." And that is the way that it was, not broken up because the brothers maintained law and order. Bro. Murray: It was not broken up because you used those canes ... at that time there was already some litigation going on for example, I think, the Lowell case. Covington: The Lowell Case had gone on up and the judge had authorized the appeal of that and Mr. Moyle, who was at that time at Bethel, handled that case. I had nothing to do with that case. I didn't come into any of the Society's Supreme Court cases until after the Snyder case was argued. Brother Rutherford argued the Snyder case, Snyder against Irvington, New Jersey. Brother Rutherford and I were in that case together. This case was an ordinance against literature distribution case. Now the Flag case was a different case and that came up for a hearing in 1940; that was adverse to us, the first one, and then later they reversed themselves as a result of our taking that up. Bro. Murray: So that was the point where you went to the Madison Square Garden case? Covington: That's the one where the mobsters tried to break the meeting up in 1939. Bro. Murray: So it must have been shortly after that you were invited to Bethel. Covington: ... on account of the fact that I had made a firm defense for Brother Heath and the lawyer for the Society pulled out. He didn't believe in the self-defense. And he quit. Brother Rutherford was in need somebody so he called on me and I was not aware of what was going on at the time. But when it did happen, he invited me to come, and I came. Bro. Murray: You were in one field of law, but you almost got into Constitutional Law. Covington: Yes. I was originally in casualty insurance, defense, personal injury, and representing insurance companies in damage suit cases; then bond forfeiture cases and bond obligation cases. Then, when I went to Bethel I was in a different area altogether. But, still I had had enough trial experience in appellate argument and court experience that it was easy for me to shift into the position of defending Jehovah's Witnesses and it was good because I was able to do what I liked which was to defend my client. Also having got a righteous cause gives you a double barrel. Sis. Murray: That's right, a cause that you really believed in. Covington: I went to Bethel in 1939. Brother Rutherford called me in, but that was after the Madison Square Garden Riot case and that was because the fact that other lawyer by the name of Moyle quit, and left Brother Rutherford holding the bag. I got an invitation to come by special delivery from Rutherford, and I went immediately. I had to transfer cases to a dozen or two lawyers in order to make that change. Bro. Murray: You and Brother Rutherford were on a couple of cases together you mentioned. I always think of you as a lawyer and him as a writer, but was he a pretty good lawyer? Covington: Oh yes he was! He was a very, very good, he was an eloquent speaker and he maintained dignity and he got very high respect from members of the court that listened to him arguing the Gobitis Case. Bro. Murray: You got started in 1940. What were some of the first major cases that you were involved in? I know a little bit about some of the cases but what were some of the first ones? The "Flag Salute Case?" came along in 1940, Covington: The first Flag Salute case I worked along with Brother Rutherford, but I had nothing to do in the argument in that case. Brother Rutherford argued that one, but he did a good job. The reason that it was lost was not because of Brother Rutherford, but because of the times we were in. The war was going on and the heat was on us from every angle Bro. Murray: Then for a while the cases just piled up. Covington: Oh my, yes! They were coming at us fast and furious. It was an eighteen hour day for me to cope with it, but I was young and dedicated and devouring of any opposition that we had. I kept on going all the time. I was happy to do it. Bro. Murray: Some of these things here that I'm not too familiar with; you can tell me about some of them. For example I know about the Harlan, Kentucky case, but what can you tell me about this Connersville, Indiana case? Covington: Well that was a mob situation that occurred while we were trying that seditious conspiracy case in Connersville, a hot bed of American Legion action and they ruled the whole town. In the Connersville case I used Brother Franz as my witness and then the jury was put on and it was necessary for me to get to out the case and I finished the argument of the case at Connersville and I tried to get a postponement of the case in Maine but they wouldn't put it off. As result I had to race from Indianapolis to Cincinnati to catch the plane to Boston and that saved my life because that night they had conspired to kill me. I went to catch the airplane in Cincinnati out of Connersville, and then Brother Victor Schmidt, who was with me as co-council, he is now dead, he stayed, And he and his wife, Sister Schmidt, were mobbed by the crowed and as they mobbed them that night, in the darkness, after the case was over, they were screaming and yelling that they were going to kill me that night. The Lord delivered me at the right time and I would have been killed that night. I wanted to stay there for the verdict. The verdict was adverse and I took an appeal. I had to go back in to take the appeal afterwards and the same group of conspirators were there and I got in an out in a hurry. We made the appeal effective and got the case reversed on appeal, but that was after a tremendous effort was put forth and a lot of blood, sweat, and tears was involved. It was a part of the conspiracy to wipe us out in Connersville but by Jehovah's undeserved kindness they didn't. The good testimony was given but some sisters were convicted of conspiracy and were given jail terms I got them out of jail on bail and we appealed the case to the Supreme Court of Indiana. It was reversed and they were acquitted by the court on appeal (the decision came down on Pearl Harbor Day). Bro. Murray: I noticed that you got a note here about Oscar Pillars, a Brother that was in Texas. Covington: Yes, he was a Brother that was down in East Texas to show the intense prejudice in that area. They literally mobbed him and hung him up on a telephone pole and the rope was cut by the steel bars on the telephone pole the angle bars, that was the thing that saved his life Bro. Murray: That later went to court, and the persons that were guilty of trying to hang him to kill him fled the state. Now of course this Harlan County, Kentucky, Sister Murray and I served over there near Harlan County and we heard some interesting stories about Harlan, Kentucky. Covington: And Somerset too, Somerset and Harlan were both involved. Bro. Murray: Now what was their objection to the Witnesses in Harlan? Covington: Well the same as here. That was where the prosecutor said that if he got me back down into Harlan he was going to boil me in oil. They had a conspiracy charge against the Brothers, seditious conspiracy charge I then filed an injunction against the prosecution of that case in Federal court in London Federal Court And I got a injunction against the State of Kentucky and it's standing yet today, knocking that sedition law out as unconstitutional and the federal judges that heard the case gave us a vindication. It was highly controversial and hotly contested case. The thing that was interesting was that the prosecutor said he was basing his charge on the grounds that this literature was conspiratory and seditious. Then that chief federal court judge said "Mr. District Attorney its now 11 o'clock and court will adjourn and you be back tomorrow with the proof." So court was adjourned and when he came back the next day of course he had no proof. All he had were all those books and that's when he was making that statement to the other guys in the room that he if gets Covington back down to Harlan he's going to boil him in oil. Bro. Murray: I understand that some of the Brothers roomed next to his room that night. Covington: Yes they were, because we had taken up all the hotels, and all the officers of the law had to bunk up. Bro. Murray: Is that where they spent the whole night researching the literature? Covington: Yes, and that's where the Sheriff and the Marshals said to old Daniel Boone Smith to turn out the light we need some sleep. Oh that was funny. Bro. Murray: Yes, that's real funny now to tell about it, but it was pretty tough at the time. Covington: Yes, our life was at stake. When you are batting with your back to the wall, but Jehovah gave us vindication, but it was a tough time. Bro. Murray: You're not kidding!, You know, there are a couple of cases that you don't have down here, but that I know about personally. For example, did you fight the case about Jones versus O'Blancon? Covington: Yes that was the case that was taken up to the Supreme Court involving the validity of the license tax law. And that came up from Alabama. We lost at first, and that was a companion case of Jones against Opelika, and Jobin against Arizona, and another person against the state of Arkansas. Those three cases were put together and the Supreme Court heard them and they decided them adversely to us at first. Then on rehearing they set aside their opinion but that didn't come automatically. We had to argue with our backs to the wall and that's when Justice Murphy filed his dissenting opinion on the case; he complained about the Jehovah's Witnesses having been being persecuted by mob violence and all other sorts of conspiracies that public officials had used to stop their work. That's when Murphy gave his dissenting opinion in favor of Jehovah's Witnesses and then after that the other cases were taken in from Pennsylvania and that meant that the case would have to be reopened because that was a very serious question that the court hadn't grabbed a hold of and it was good too that they brought the other cases in because otherwise the case would have to stand and wouldn't be reheard. Bro. Murray: As I understand license tax cases, a municipality would say to sell your literature in our town you've got to have a license. Covington: Yes, if you wanted to come in to sell your literature here you've got to have a license. Bro. Murray: But when you went in to get a license they wouldn't sell you one because you didn't qualify. Covington: You didn't qualify. And that way we got prosecuted on account of not having the license, but we believed that the license was ungodly anyhow. We never would have got the license anyway, and we were defending the case because they were making an imposition upon our constitutional rights and contrary to our conscience. Justice Murphy filed a dissent in that case. Murphy got a good name among us because he was always dissenting in cases in our favor. They wrote an article about him in the Law Review, some guys did, to the effect that if Justice Murphy is ever sainted, it will be by the Jehovah's Witnesses, not the Catholic Church. He was a notorious Catholic. Bro. Murray: It's odd that he would be so strong for justice when he had that background. Covington: He was very much in favor of what we were doing. And he knew that the life of the country depended on it the success. Bro. Murray: But not all the Justices were that way. For example Justice Frankfurter, Covington: Oh! He was very adverse! He was so hostile yet he was a Jew. He was against us in the flag case and against us in the license tax cases. Bro. Murray: I read some of his opinions and it's amazing that he, coming from a persecuted minority, the Jewish minority, that he was so tough on the Witnesses. Covington: Oh boy, you said it. He was really vicious too. He tried to justify himself, but he was a hypocrite really, and my feelings about the matter is he was an enemy. Bro. Murray: Let me go back to this other point. In the Flaxwood Case, the first one, we got an adverse opinion in 1940, and on Flag Day in 1943 it was reversed. Covington: And the reason it was reversed was because I brought an injunction case in the United States District Court in the District of West Virginia, to restrain the enforcement of the state flag salute regulation that required compulsory saluting of the flag by children in the schools. I challenged that as unconstitutional and that gave me the opportunity to force the court into the position of deciding the matter again. I brought a injunction suit against the enforcement of the regulation and it gave me the right to empanel what they call a three Judge Statutory Court. Then that gave us automatically the right of appeal directly to the Supreme Court of the United States. Bro. Murray: Now, I don't understand that part. Covington: Well, it's a highly technical thing, but it gave us a speedy, quick decision and we needed a speedy quick decision. When we were arguing that case in the District Court, Judge John Jay Parker, who was from North Carolina, was presiding on the court. Then the Attorney General from West Virginia got up and said well it's not necessary for me to argue this case, because the Supreme Court of the United States has already decided this case for the Jehovah's Witnesses. As a consequence, Judge Parker said Mr. Attorney General if you are relying on the Gobitis Case you'd better argue this case. He said it wasn't necessary for him to argue. So Judge Parker said "You'd better argue this case." He was flabbergasted, the Attorney General was, taken off his feet; he didn't know what to figure. Bro. Murray: I thought that once the Supreme Court decided on something that was the final decision. Covington: The Supreme Court can always reverse themselves and reopen the thing, and that was the very thing that I had in mind when I filed that case to challenge that and get them to reopen it. And the only way I could do it quickly was to get a Three Judge Court and then bingo I could shoot right into the Supreme Court of the United States and bypass the intermediary appellate court and that way we have them on the run. Bro. Murray: That's interesting, did somebody have some indication that the Supreme Court would be willing to hear it again or did you just think that. Covington: I didn't have any inside information on that, because you never get any commitment out of the court. I knew that when Roy Gamble (who was one of Jehovah's Witnesses) who was painting the picture of Justice Murphy in Lansing, Michigan, as an artist there (he painted a picture to hang in the Capitol there in Lansing) said Justice Murphy made the statement to Roy Gamble, who complained about the adversity there that the Jehovah's Witnesses had been put in. Frank Murphy said to him, "I know that, someday we're going to do something about that." Bro. Murray: Now Let's see, I want to ask you something about the sedition laws because some of my friends had been involved in those sedition laws, particularly that one down in Mississippi. Covington: That Mississippi Case we took up to the Supreme Court of the United States along with the second Flag Case, West Virginia Board of Education against Barnett. I took the appeal of the Mississippi case sedition based on the refusal, explaining the reason for your refusal to salute the flag was in literature that had been distributed and that's what the Brothers were doing, putting literature out explaining why Jehovah's Witnesses did not salute the flag. And they were accused then of violating this seditious conspiracy law of Mississippi on that account. That was the case that we brought up along with the rehearing of the flag case in the West Virginia case. Covington: They all dovetailed in the court at the same time and only Jehovah could do it Bro. Murray: The papers said that day was a field day for Jehovah's Witnesses Covington: That was what Judge Waite said; that it was field day for Jehovah's Witnesses when they handed down those decisions on Flag day in 1943. Judge Waite wrote the article entitled the Constitutional Debt of the American People to the Jehovah's Witnesses, a long article in the Minnesota Law Review that covered about forty pages. He makes a detailed account of the decisions that were handed down on that day that including the Jones against Opelika being reversed, and Mississippi case being handed down and reversed at the Supreme Court of Mississippi. You see it was a field day for us! It turned the tide. Then the publicity turned the other way. The newspapers had been very adverse against the Jehovah's Witnesses all over the country and then when we gave them a licking, why then they went soft Bro. Murray: It was like Jehovah got swallowed up a flood of adversity against these people It's getting late but there's a couple more cases that come to mind. There the one that one involved me, you never knew the one that involved me; the draft cases. Covington: I was very much involved in the draft cases because I had to meet with all the military authorities in Washington when they were considering the case of whether Jehovah's Witnesses would be allowed exemption from the draft under the law as ministers of religion, and whether they were entitled to the benefit of conscientious objector status. They had a big room full of the guys that administrated the draft. And among that group was General Louis B. Hershey Bro. Murray: Now you get the opinion from reading that he was more or less in favor of allowing conscientious objectors Covington: He was in favor of giving us a good even break, he was really an honorable man, a man of integrity. I liked him very much. He died about three years ago in Indiana, in the country. He was an expert on the draft, the best in the world on conscription. That's why Roosevelt put him in charge of the draft administration registration. He was a corny type of a man, but very brilliant, sharp, quick. He defended himself very well before Congress and he was honorable and fair in his dealing with Jehovah's Witnesses. He agreed on certain of our demands and I said, well I guess we'll have to fight over the rest Sis. Murray: I guess they got real emotional and Patriotic. Covington: Oh, yes. But they were cold-blooded, too you know, those army men. To them that's just like cutting meat you know. They were as cold as a cucumber. Bro. Murray: Yes, to them a man was just a piece of material. Bro. Murray: How many of our Brothers finally wound up in prison during the war? Covington There were about 2500 that went to jail during the war, but we kept an awful lot of them out. We had a tremendous number of cases that were taken up and appealed under the draft law, and there was a big day that we had a turning of the tide in the Supreme Court in the draft cases there were about 3 or 4 of them that were set together and I argued them. Bro. Murray: I remember that, that was the early 50's wasn't it? Covington: We lost the Fileboat Case, that was the first draft case and they ruled against us on the grounds that we had not exhausted our remedies by taking an appeal. An appeal was taken inside the draft law, they held that we were supposed to take a second physical examination. And that was not necessary because the first physical examination was enough to settle the guys eligibility physically for the draft. They took the position that it was necessary for him to go back and take the second one, and I argued that was unnecessary, unreasonable, and arbitrary and capricious in order to get the benefit of law. Frankfurter was dead against us and so was a large number of the other judges, but in the end we won those draft cases on the second go around. We established the right to be heard on our defense as ministers. At first they held that we didn't even have the right to make a defense and then because of this business of not having taken the second physical, which I said in my argument to the court was not necessary because his acceptability had been predetermined on the first physical Bro. Murray: So that's the one that was established when I came along in 1957. By that time I wasn't pioneering yet but I just told them that I was one of Jehovah's Witnesses and they automatically gave me a conscientious objection. Covington: We had a lot of difficulty in establishing that, but in the end we prevailed. Jehovah gave us the victory in these cases. Not all of us got a deferment without difficulty, but in the end we finally won in the draft cases. We got the decision from the Supreme Court of the right to make a defense in the case of Louis Dabney Smith, who is now a circuit overseer down in this area. William Esteph, the other one, was from Pittsburgh, and Smith was from South Carolina. Smith had an interesting case because his old man caused him to be kidnapped. His old man got the cops to kidnapped him from home, and took him down forcibly to the induction station. The old man knew that his son wasn't going to show up, so he forcibly took him down there. Louis was there, and then I had to sue to get him out of the army. We went around and around in his case and we also went around and around in the others. That was a big battle in that draft thing. We gave them a receipt for every blow. They were getting ready to indict me, you see. Yeah they were, really. Bro. Murray: Lock you away boy. Covington: When they told me that, I said "you know my address" Bro. Murray: They knew where to get you. Did you get involved in Canadian problems? Covington: Oh yes I did, quite a lot. I spent a lot of time up in Canada then there was that Quebec situation that was very bad and I worked very closely with Brother Hal. I used him in the cases up there up there because I couldn't plead any cases in Canada. I worked with him and he was my alter ego. We gave a them a good run for their money in Canada. Actually we got very good results out of the Canadian Supreme Court. We went in the seditious libel cases that were brought against Jehovah's Witnesses. Also in a large number of other cases we had the Supreme Court split in Canada and on that account and the court ruled in our favor, a split decision before they came around in our favor and it was some very good decision that they gave us in Canada. Canada is based on common law. We went in there under the freedom of worship statue in Quebec. We made use of that for the first time in history; it was written for the Catholic Church, They never had to use it, but we used it successfully in the case involving Laurent Samour. The Laurier Sumur, a witnessing case. The other case involved the Brother that ran the restaurant and that case was won too. They tried to break him because he was signing bonds for the Brothers. Brother Frank Boccerelli ran the restaurant. He was a very fine Brother, He stood up for Jehovah's name in a very courageous way and really gave Duplessis a run for his money and we gave Duplessis a run for his money too in the courts up there. Bro. Murray: He said "I am the law!" Covington: That's the way he felt about it. He was a mean guy, Duplessis was. Brother Franz and I gave testimony up there in the Laurent Samour case in the Trial court and then it went on through the Appellate Courts and I was around when we argued the case. The case was argued in the Supreme Court of Canada too (but Glen Howe handled the argument very well and very capably) we worked very well together. Finally, Jehovah vindicated his people and his name in a very big way in Canada, and this book here entitled Jehovah's Witnesses in Canada, Champions of Freedom of Speech and Worship, by M. James Penton. It's a large book, several hundred pages long, three hundred and eighty six pages, and it's got references to a lot of our cases in Canada and elsewhere. It goes into the battle in Quebec, the second world war, and about our abstaining from blood. You know we had blood cases up there in Canada too, and it tells about the victory in the courts in Canada and that which involved the draft, alternative service, that was a draft case, and actually in one of the cases Leo Greenlees, who is on the governing body, I represented in the courts in Toronto That was in forties. It says here that the Leo case was back in the forties Percy Chapmann and Hayden C. Covington, the American legal consul for the two societies, visited Minister of Justice, St. Laurent, to request that the ban on those organizations be lifted. Percy and I went to see St. Laurent who was Minister of Justice in charge of Canada. And it points out on page 161, MacKenzie King was the Prime Minister and the Prime Minister caused the bans to removed after that. But it was a hot time in Canada, a bad place. There was a lot of persecution then, and now it is a place of prosperity for the Lord's people. Bro. Murray: Things have really changed haven't they? First we had to break down that wall. When you went to court, for example, in the flag salute case, and you go up to the Supreme Court, it must have involved a tremendous sum of money. Covington: Well yes, but the Lord owns all the cattle on seven hills and he can afford it. Bro. Murray: So when you win a case, though, do you still get paid? Covington: Sometimes you get your costs back and sometimes you don't. When Uncle Sam or the State is involved you don't get anything back. But in Canada we got it all back. Oh my! We took it off their head. But in the United States you can't get anything out of Uncle Sam. Bro. Murray: You got a chance to see ole Harry Truman one time. Covington: Oh yes, sure. Ole Harry Truman. Murray, he was a great guy. He was a hot potato We went in to see Harry because we were trying to get the pardon petition for the Jehovah's Witnesses who had been convicted under the draft, considered and allowed by him, as the President of the United States. It is not easy to get in to see the President, but Harry was approachable. I knew his next door neighbor, Jim Blair, who was Governor of Missouri, and who was with me in the first draft case out there in Texas. When we got down to that, I got in touch with Jim Blair, and he came into Washington to set up an appointment in the White House. And Jim, 1, and Brother Knorr wanted to get Brother Kennedy to come along because he was in the Army. That didn't make any impression on Harry. We went in and saw Harry Truman in the White House, in the Oval Room, and I'm going to tell it exactly as it is and if you want to censor it go ahead. Went in to see his honor, his nibs, and Jim Blair was there in the Oval Room and he found out what it was about, Ole Harry did, and he slammed his fist down on the desk and he nearly broke the presidential desk. He said, "I want to tell you, that I do not have a God damn bit of use for that SOB who didn't want to die for his country in time of war" and then Jim Blair threw his hands up and said, "Oh Mr. President, Mr. President!" So Harry, after we presented the matter to him, Harry come down off of his high horse, and out of his fury said "well I'll refer it to my Attorney General, that was Tom Clark who I knew, and who was from Texas incidentally. Old Tom was later appointed to the Supreme Court of the United States, by Harry Truman. And after he was appointed, Tom Clark gave us some favorable decisions in some of our cases. Not because we had influence, but because we were right. Bro. Murray: He had some character about him Covington: Oh yes he did, and actually his son, the Attorney General, was quite a liberal. His son was well known for his liberality. It surprised everybody too, and embarrassed Clark, but Clark turned out to be a very fine judge. Bro. Murray: Its amazing, some of those men had real character; like Murphy and Stone Covington: Oh boy, that Murphy! He was the greatest guy. Bro. Murray: The had character about them, they stood up for what they felt was right. Covington: Actually, Ole Frank Murphy, if you read that dissenting opinion that he wrote in that child custody case, the Prince case (Prince against Mass.). That is an eloquent thing, and he squared off against all the rest of them and recited about how horrible the Jehovah's Witnesses had been persecuted. He was a righteously disposed man. Bro. Murray: It is interesting with all these politician there is one thing I'd like to know about. For example, you only had a chance to work with Brother Rutherford for about three years rather closely, because he died in 1942. Covington: That's right, I worked with him from 1939 to 1942. 1 was there in 1939, and we were very, very close. We had to be because of the things that we working together on, and I went out to work with him on the Flag brief, on the Gobitis case in San Diego, that's where we put the Gobitis brief together, in San Diego. And he was eloquent! Bro. Murray: Yes that's right, he had a tremendous way with words. Was he that way in real life? Covington: Yes he was. He was very much a man with a great sense of humor too, and he was great to fly off the handle too! Which is only human you know. But I loved him with all my heart and I never feared him at all. Bro. Murray: I guess some people did fear him because of the authority he was. Covington: Well that may be true, but he still was a great man. If he did anything wrong he'd moke up for it. Sis. Murray: Do you know how Brother Rutherford came into the truth? Covington: He had been, in his younger life, a book agent selling books. He was going along in Missouri and he slipped and fell through the ice, and took pneumonia. He thought he was about to die, and he prayed to the Lord that if he came out of that, he would never turn a book agent away. He was in his office and heard his secretary chasing a book agent out of his office. He ran out of the door and balled him out for running the book agent out. It turned out to be one of Jehovah's Witnesses with Pastor Russell's books. Sis. Murray: I heard it was a Sister. Covington: And after that he got so deeply involved in with what he read, just like I did when I was listening to the Judge; he was reading Pastor Russell and he just went head over heels and bag and baggage for what Brother Russell was doing and he went for it unlimited with out any constraint. Then Brother Russell got into litigation on account of his wife. That suit with the divorce and that stuff about the miracle wheat and everything else. Brother Russell had to have someone to represent him and he called on Brother Rutherford to come and represent him on these matters. Bro. Murray: Rutherford was later arrested, but there was never anything to that trial and the imprisonment. He never would have been convicted. Covington: His conviction was reversed and that wiped the slate clean. Actually the convictions were malicious prosecution anyhow. May 24, 1919 was the day he was admitted to the Supreme Court, and that's the same year that he was admitted to the bar in the state of New York. And then he became council for Pastor Russell after that. Pastor Russell died on the train in Texas and then there was a big hassle in the organization after that, which is a matter of history. I don't have too much clarity on that. You know as much about that as I do by getting the records out and reading them. Bro. Murray: He really was a good lawyer then? Covington: Oh yes, don't kid yourself about that later. Brother Rutherford had to get away from the intense cold in the East in the winter time. He had a collapsed lung and there was a danger he could contact pneumonia because of that experience when he fell in the water and nearly froze to death in Missouri. Remember he said he wasn't turning any book agents away from his office. When Rutherford was behind bars he put his hands on the bar and said to Jehovah, "If you ever get me out of here I am going to give the old wore [the Catholic Church] the worst licking that she ever had..." and he dedicated his whole life, remaining life, to that pursuit. Sis. Murray: He sure did, he really let her have it! Bro. Murray: You came out here to San Diego, were you with him when he died? Covington: Yes. He died in San Diego because he had been operated on for cancer of the colon in Indiana ... cancer is a consuming thing, and it gradually began to eat his body down where there was little weight on him and he called Brother Knorr and Brother Franz and I out to San Diego. We went out on the Santa Fe train, the Chief and we went there to meet with him and he knew he was dying and he wasn't any maudlin ... he knew he wasn't going to live too long. So he put his hands on the heads of all of us boys and asked us to stick together. That's when I made that declaration that Fred Franz quoted at the assembly in Cincinnati. We all called him Pap, for short, meaning Pappy he was really our father, not our real father you know, but because of age we consider him to be giving us orders. So I said to him, "Well Pap, we'll fight them together till hell freezes over." Covington: When we were at the assembly in Cincinnati Fred Franz told the Brothers about that quote, which I meant to. It was like we skated on the ice. The lord will make it so. Bro. Murray: What happened the body, did he want to buried out in San Diego? Covington: He had no desire to be buried in any place but he had to. He knew he was dying and would have to be buried. He was sensible enough to know that he didn't want to have his bones hauled all the way back to Brooklyn. So he suggested to us that when the time came for him to be buried he wanted to be buried out there. We tried to get him buried there in the Beth Serum property. That was a big property in behind there, went all the way down to Montezuma Road, and then Brother Heath had that big house over across the way that his mother had given him money to build. It would cost a half a million dollars to build and duplicate now, or more. We tried to get him buried at that property and the board in San Diego turned us down. They didn't want him buried anywhere out there, there was so much hostility and hatred against the Judge out there. The authorities turned us down, every turn we took. I filed a lawsuit then in the courts out there in San Diego to force them to let us bury him out there on that property. Judge Mundo, who was the judge of the Superior Court, heard it and passed the buck, jumping from one thing to another, from one technicality to another, and finally after looking at the matter in a reasonable way Bill, Bonnie, and Nathan and all of us decided that we have fought enough on this and it looks like its the Lord's will that we take his body back to Brooklyn, and have him buried in Staten Island, which we did. So Bill and Bonnie were on the train with his body. And Fred, Nathan, and I had already come back and were working. I was trying to get his bones under the ground by legal mandate and we couldn't get it, and there was no other thing to do. And we did, and that ended that. He was laughing down from heaven at us scurrying around trying to get his bones buried. Bro. Murray: He was probably pleased that you finally decided to let it go! "Didn't I ever teach them boys anything?" He probably couldn't see how that was connected with anything. Since you loved the man that was why it was so important to you. Covington: We wanted to do his will as best we could, not his will, but Jehovah's will and he had to be buried someplace. It wasn't reasonable to haul his body all the way across the country, but we finally had to do that. Sis. Murray: Well how long did it take by train? Covington: It took about two and a half to three days. Two and half days from San Diego and I made that trip a lot of times. From New York to San Diego; it takes two and a half days on a Pullman. Of course, we rode Pullman. We went first class, Brother Rutherford told me, "I want you, whenever you travel, to travel first class." And so I did, and Brother Heath did, Nathan Knorr did, and Freddy Franz did too, all the whole bunch of us did. Sis. Murray: Well you needed your rest and it was more comfortable. Covington: It's not our comfort, but we were entitled to: the laborer is worthy of his hire. Bro. Murray: Through those years, you brought cases to court that you could see Jehovah's hand in it and how Jehovah built up a wall around his people. And the wall is still there as long as we don't abuse it, and the law will protect us. Covington: Yes, right! As long as we don't put our foot in the door. I'm just using that as a figure of speech. Abuse of it is it and I don't think that most of us do and or ever will and I'm sure that Jehovah is with us all the way. There's no question about it; this is Jehovah's organization. Like Peter said, wherever we've got to go Lord, there's no problem. Bro. Murray: It's good that you've really been engaged in a warfare. Paul talks about this spiritual warfare. This spiritual warfare has been on for a long time and sometimes has it been difficult to remember that we weren't fighting against men and their statues so much but we were fighting against unseen spirits behind the men Covington: Yes that's right; that's always been my conviction. Like Paul says here in this scripture. Where is the one that says I am convinced that nothing will separate us from his love? Sis. Murray: Romans, I think, the end of the seventh chapter. I think it was the seventh or eighth chapter of Romans. Bro. Murray: In Ephesians 6: 10 he talks about the fight against the wicked forces. Sis. Murray: Chapter eight, the end of chapter eight. Covington: Yes right here it is, I've got it underscored. Bro. Murray: "For I am convince that neither death, nor life, nor angles, nor governments, nor things now here, nor things to come, nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creation will be able to separate us from God's love that is in Christ Jesus, our Lord". So if you hadn't had Jehovah's backing you, you wouldn't be able to out maneuver demonic forces. Covington: Oh no and we know we don't wrestle with flesh and blood but against the demons and that's what you got to keep in mind all the time and if you don't, you're sure to lose. And you have got to recognize the power that's against us, without the power that Jehovah's got helping us out, we're dead ducks. Sis. Murray: That helps to keep us from hating people so much, because we know that they are just human. Covington: Yes, that's right, they are just pawns in the hands of the devil. Bro. Murray: Even someone who really dislikes the Witnesses very much, like old Frankfurter. Covington: He was a pawn in the hands of the devil. And after all Jehovah doesn't hold it against people. The main thing is that we keep on and never throw the sponge in, that's my philosophy. Sis. Murray: It was encouraging to me just listen to your experiences and to hear you talk has inspired me. I appreciate it very much. End of Taped Interview

1950_Defending_And_Legally_Establishing_The_Good_News.pdf Audio Files: 1978 Hayden Covington Interviewed By Jerry Murray Interview with Hayden C. Covington, former Watchtower Attorney on November 19, 1978. Covington represented Jehovah's Witnesses in several Supreme Court cases dealing with freedom of religion and freedom of press in the 1940s. He was also Vice President of the Watchtower Society from 1942 to 1945. Covington died two days after giving this interview. "They Oppose Freedom of Worship," by Hayden C. Covington. Talk given at the 1953 International Assembly of Jehovah's Witnesses"They Oppose Freedom of Worship," by Hayden C. Covington. Audio lecture given at the 1953 International Assembly of Jehovah's Witnesses. At the time, Covington was Chief Legal Counsel of Jehovah's Witnesses and had served as Vice President of the Watchtower Society in the 1940s. Covington helped secure several key legal victories for Jehovah's Witnesses before the Supreme Court of the United States in the 1940s. Read a copy of Covington's employment resume written after he left Bethel and his death certificate 1977-78_Hayden_Covingtons_Resume_and_Death_Certificate.pdf When I was in Bethel, I received a copy of Covington's resume and death certificate from a JW in California by the name of Jeannie Sears. She had been Covington's friend and secretary of sorts for a few years before he died and I think they both lived in the same apartment complex. Jean's deceased husband had been a former Bethelite who had been Covington's friend when they both were in Bethel in the 1950s and it's through him that Jeannie met Hayden. Interestingly, Covington wrote his memoir shortly before he died and shared it with Jeannie. She told me she was horrified when she read what he said about the organization and talked him out of publishing it. Later she watched him burn it in the yard. Jeannie never told me what was in that memoir and probably has died taking Covington's secrets with her to the grave. Hayden Covington (1911 - 1978) Hayden Covington was born in Hopkins County, Texas, in 1911. Around the time that he was studying for his law degree, he became involved with the Jehovah’s Witnesses. He defended some Witnesses in the San Antonio area and was eventually invited by the Witness leadership to New York. He joined the organization’s legal counsel in 1939 and served until 1963. In that time as the Witnesses’ attorney, Covington is said to have presented 111 petitions and appeals to the Supreme Court, and he won well above 80% of the 44 cases he brought before the Court. The cases dealt with issues ranging from compulsory flag-salute statutes, to street preaching, to door-to-door literature distribution. Later in his career Covington assisted prize-fighter Muhammad Ali in obtaining a draft exemption as a Muslim minister. Covington’s role as lawyer for the Jehovah’s Witnesses is recounted in Shawn Francis Peters’ Judging Jehovah's Witnesses: Religious Persecution and the Dawn of the Rights Revolution (2002). “Determined to Keep Close to the Lord”It was Brother Rutherford’s heartfelt wish that Jehovah’s Witnesses declare the good news without letup. So in mid-December 1941, several weeks before his death, he called together four directors of the two principal legal corporations used by Jehovah’s Witnesses and suggested that as soon after his death as possible, all the members of the two boards be called in joint session and a president and a vice president be elected.On the afternoon of January 13, 1942, just five days after Rutherford’s death, all the board members of the two corporations met jointly at Brooklyn Bethel. Several days earlier, the Society’s vice president, 36-year-old Nathan H. Knorr, had suggested that they earnestly seek divine wisdom by prayer and meditation. The board members recognized that while the brother elected president would administer the legal affairs of the Watch Tower Society, he would also serve as a principal overseer of the organization. Who had the needed spiritual qualifications for this weighty responsibility in caring for Jehovah’s work? The joint meeting was opened with prayer, and after careful consideration, Brother Knorr was unanimously elected president of the two corporations and 30-year-old Hayden C. Covington, the Society’s lawyer, vice president.Later that day, W. E. Van Amburgh, the Society’s secretary-treasurer, announced to the Bethel family the results of the election. R. E. Abrahamson, who was present on that occasion, recalled that Van Amburgh said: ‘I can remember when C. T. Russell died and was replaced by J. F. Rutherford. The Lord continued to direct and prosper His work. Now, I fully expect the work to move ahead with Nathan H. Knorr as president, because this is the Lord’s work, not man’s.’How did the Bethel family members in Brooklyn feel about the results of the election? A touching letter from them dated January 14, 1942, the day after the election, answers: “His [Rutherford’s] change shall not slow us up in the performance of the task the Lord has assigned to us. We are determined to keep close to the Lord and to one another, firmly pushing the battle to the gate, fighting shoulder to shoulder. . . . Our intimate association with Brother Knorr for approximately twenty years . . . enables us to appreciate the Lord’s direction in the choice of Brother Knorr as president and thereby the loving watch-care of the Lord over His people.” Letters and cablegrams of support soon poured into headquarters from around the world.There was no feeling of uncertainty as to what to do. A special article was prepared for the February 1, 1942, Watchtower, the very same issue that announced the death of J. F. Rutherford. “The final gathering by the Lord is on,” it declared. “Let nothing for one instant interrupt the onward push of his covenant-people in His service. . . . Now to hold fast our integrity toward the Almighty God is the ALL-IMPORTANT thing.” Jehovah’s Witnesses were urged to continue declaring the good news with zeal.But ‘holding fast their integrity’ was a real challenge in the early 1940’s. The world was still at war. Wartime restrictions in many parts of the earth made it difficult for Jehovah’s Witnesses to preach. Arrests and mob action against the Witnesses continued unabated. Hayden Covington, as the Society’s legal counsel, directed the legal fight, sometimes from his office at Brooklyn headquarters and sometimes from trains as he traveled caring for legal cases. Working with local lawyers, such as Victor Schmidt, Grover Powell, and Victor Blackwell, Brother Covington fought hard to establish the constitutional rights of Jehovah’s Witnesses to preach from house to house and to distribute Bible literature without restraint from local officials.- Declaring the Good News Without Letup (1942-1975)As the intensity of house-to-house witnessing increased, however, so did attempts to apply laws to abridge or prohibit it. Not all lands have legal provisions that make it possible to secure freedoms for minorities in the face of official opposition. But Jehovah’s Witnesses knew that the U.S. Constitution guaranteed freedom of religion, freedom of speech, and freedom of the press. So, when judges construed local ordinances in such a way as to hinder the preaching of God’s Word, the Witnesses appealed their cases to the higher courts.In reviewing what took place, Hayden C. Covington, who had a prominent role in legal matters for the Watch Tower Society, later explained: “Had the thousands of convictions entered by the magistrates, police courts and other lower courts not been appealed, a mountain of precedent would have piled up as a giant obstacle in the field of worship. By appealing we have prevented the erection of such obstacle. Our way of worship has been written into the law of the land of the United States and other countries because of our persistence in appealing from adverse decisions.” In the United States, scores of cases went all the way to the Supreme Court. Strengthening the Guarantees of FreedomOne of the first cases involving the ministry of Jehovah’s Witnesses to reach the Supreme Court of the United States originated in Georgia and was argued before the Court on February 4, 1938. Alma Lovell had been convicted in the recorder’s court of Griffin, Georgia, of violating an ordinance that prohibited the distribution of literature of any kind without a permit from the city manager. Among other things, Sister Lovell had offered people the magazine The Golden Age. On March 28, 1938, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the ordinance was invalid because it subjected freedom of the press to license and censorship.The following year J. F. Rutherford, as attorney for the petitioner, presented arguments to the Supreme Court in the case of Clara Schneider v. State of New Jersey. This was followed, in 1940, by Cantwell v. State of Connecticut, for which J. F. Rutherford drafted the legal brief and Hayden Covington presented oral argument before the Court. The positive outcome of these cases buttressed the constitutional guarantees of freedom of religion, freedom of speech, and freedom of the press. But there were setbacks.- ‘Defending and Legally Establishing the Good News’, WTB&TSHow the Governing Body Differs From a Legal Corporation ANNUAL meetings of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania have been held since January of 1885. When the ingathering of anointed Christians was underway in the late 19th century, the directors and officers of this corporation had the heavenly hope. In fact, this has almost always been the case.There was one exception. In 1940, Hayden C. Covington—then the Society’s legal counsel and one of the “other sheep,” with the earthly hope—was elected a director of the Society. (John 10:16) He served as the Society’s vice president from 1942 to 1945. At that time, Brother Covington stepped aside as a director to comply with what then seemed to be Jehovah’s will—that all directors and officers of the Pennsylvania corporation be anointed Christians. Lyman A. Swingle replaced Hayden C. Covington on the board of directors, and Frederick W. Franz was elected vice president.Why did Jehovah’s servants believe that all the directors and officers of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania should be anointed Christians? Because at the time, the board of directors and officers of the Pennsylvania corporation were closely identified with the Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses, which has always been made up entirely of spirit-anointed men.- Jan. 15, 2001 Watchtower, WTB&TS References from web to this book Judging Jehovah's Witnesses The University Press of Kansas publishes scholarly and regional books that contribute to the understanding of Kansas, the Great Plains, and the Midwest www.kansaspress.ku.edu/petjud.html JSTOR: Judging Jehovah's Witnesses: Religious Persecution and the **...** JUDGING JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES: RELIGIOUS PERSECUTION AND THE DAWN OF THE RIGHTS REVOLUTION. By Shawn Francis Peters. Lawrence, Kan: University Press of Kansas ... links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0748-0814(2001)16%3A2%3C547%3AJJWRPA%3E2.0.CO%3B2-E Vol. 10 No. 6 (June 2000) pp. 390-393. JUDGING JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES **...** JUDGING JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES: RELIGIOUS PERSECUTION AND THE DAWN OF THE RIGHTS REVOLUTION by Shawn Francis Peters. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas, ... www.bsos.umd.edu/gvpt/lpbr/subpages/reviews/peters.htm Judging Jehovah's Witnesses: Religious Persecution and the Dawn of **...** Peters, Shawn Francis Judging Jehovah's Witnesses: Religious Persecution and the Dawn of the Rights Revolution Lawrence: University Press of Kansas 342 pp., ... findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb3341/is_200006/ai_n8053293 Judging Jehovah's Witnesses: Religious Persecution and Judging Jehovah's Witnesses: Religious Persecution and the Dawn of the Rights Revolution. From: Journal of Church and State | Date: 1/1/2002 | Author: Smith ... www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-85033374.html Persecution of Jehovah's Witnesses in the United States **...** Judging Jehovah's Witnesses: Religious Persecution and the Dawn of the Rights Revolution. ^ Radio discourse, October 6, 1935 as cited in Jehovah's ... en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Jehovah's_Witnesses_in_the_United_States SSRN-Demythologizing the Legal History of the Jehovah's Witnesses **...** Shawn Francis Peters' Judging Jehovah's Witnesses: Religious Persecution and the Dawn of the Rights Revolution is the most recent, and broadest, ... papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1005705 | Book Review | The Journal of American History, 88.2 | The **...** Judging Jehovah's Witnesses: Religious Persecution and the Dawn of the Rights Revolution. By Shawn Francis Peters. (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, ... www.historycooperative.org/journals/jah/88.2/br_100.html UNH Magazine Spring 01--Book Reviews By Anne Downey '95G. (Book titles are linked to online booksellers. Also check Dimond Library's online card catalog for these titles) ... unhmagazine.unh.edu/sp01/bookssp01.html Jehovah's Witnesses: Guardians of Free Expression by Stephanie **...** ... closely enough before, according to Shawn Peters, author of Judging Jehovah's Witnesses: Religious Persecution and the Dawn of the Rights Revolution. ... docket.medill.northwestern.edu/archives/000039.php

Dorothy and Hayden Covington Transcript of Interview with Hayden C. Covington on November 19, 1978 (2 days before his death) Bro. Murray: Brother Covington, anybody can listen to you and tell you are from somewhere in the southwest, but exactly where and when did you come on the scene? Covington: I was born in January 19, 1911 in East Texas. I was raised on a farm in a place east of Dallas. I worked my way through school after that. My father was on the Texas Ranger Force and he was transferred to San Antonio, Texas and that's where I went to law school. Bro. Murray: How did you happen come into the truth then? Covington: I came into knowledge of the truth because my father was transferred from San Antonio, Texas down to the valley as a Texas Ranger. After that transfer I had to have a place to stay, so I stayed with two friends of mine that I went to school with. They asked me to move in with them and the father who was the head of the family was in bad health and he had all of us come on Sunday and listen to him talk about world conditions. He interested me and I got very interested in what he had to say because I was myself fed up with the way things were going and like all young kids I was dissatisfied with the establishment, and I was very much so at the time and I was flirting with controversial ideas and he was full of controversy against this system of things. What he preached appealed to me very much and so I listen to him and he would turn on the radio station KTSA that had the recorded broadcasts of Judge J. F. Rutherford, as he was as called and known; so he insisted on our listening and I was very pleased with what I heard. [Note Covington did not become a Witness due to his love for the scriptures or God but out of youthful rebellion]. Bro. Murray: Was the fact that Brother Rutherford was a lawyer, did that impress you too? Did that make it more interesting? Covington: Well he presented the thing in a way that was incontrovertible by me. As a lawyer I could see that he knew what he was talking about 100%. He was very persuasive and I was a ready, willing listener, and I was willing to join up with him in his opposition, for the truth. Bro. Murray: You were ripe for the truth! When did you first meet Brother Rutherford? Covington: In Houston in 1900 and, I forget the year, way before I came to Bethel. I went over to Houston with a group of brothers that knew they were having a special meeting over there, and Brother Rutherford was there because Brother Isaac lived down in Houston at that time. He's dead now, Joe Isaac, he was a great friend of the judge, and I heard his name all over Texas. Bro. Murray: Tell me this, when you took the truth, and you began to go to meetings, how did your Daddy react to that? Covington: Well he got to be very hostile against what I was doing when I was going to the Witness meetings because he had great ambitions for me to be a politician ... And I was then working in the county court house, in the county clerks office, and I had a political job. Whenever they were out campaigning, I was out preaching. So I had a political job and a political office, but I didn't go along with it. Bro. Murray: When were you actually admitted to the bar? Covington: I was admitted to the bar in year of 1933. Bro. Murray: So you practiced law for a little while before you went to Bethel? Covington: Oh yes, I was an active practitioner at the bar in San Antonio after I took the bar examination, and, incidentally, I took the bar examination a year before I graduated and passed it. Bro. Murray: Then you still had to go the extra year? Covington: I had to go the extra year to get my certificate of graduation. Bro. Murray: Did you set up your own law firm or did you join a law firm there? Covington: I was working for a big law firm when I was admitted to the bar and I passed it with such high grades that the head of the law firm "Moffison - Burkeson" came and offered me a job. Sis. Murray: How did you get involved then in defending Witnesses and working Brothers? Covington: That came about after I quit the Morrison firm and went over with R. H. Mercer, who was a defender of damage suits for the Maryland Casualty Company in San Antonio. And there was some brothers who got arrested down in the valley because of a meeting that was held down there and I went down and appeared on their behalf and got the case thrown out. And then it was my name reached the Society and they assigned me to represent the Society in a will contest case up in Curville, Texas, and I handled that for the Society And then the Brothers got involved in controversy with the San Antonio police and that is when we get into the matter of Brother Heath. We were having information marches, and the cops were trying to stop us. And it became necessary for me to have a conference with the Mayor of the City of San Antonio on whether Jehovah's Witnesses have the right to engage in information marches, carrying the sign that religion is a snare and a racket. Bro. Murray: And that made people mad didn't it? Sis. Murray: But how did you win that case? Covington: By pleading with the Mayor he saw then that we had the right, I made him, well I didn't make him, the Lord made him, but I was the one that offered the proposition (Brother Heath was in San Antonio on the occasion of that visit). Brother Heath was the secretary for Brother Rutherford at the time. Sis. Murray: So when he saw you there he invited you to Bethel? Covington: Well, he invited me not to Bethel, he invited me to attend the Madison Square Garden Convention. Bro. Murray: Is that the one where they had all of the riots? Covington: That's where the Catholic Action tried to break the meeting up in 1939. On the the record Government and Peace and you can hear the mob action from up the stairs. When the mob started, Brother Heath got down off the speaker's platform because he was in charge of all the ushers; and headed up there and when he headed, I headed too. He went up the meandering stairway up into the old Madison Square Garden, not the one that's there today. I followed him and we went together. They were screaming and mad, this was the same sort of noise that you hear on that Government and Peace record was yelled into our ears as we was going up there to maintain law and order in that religious gathering. Covington: The cops were on the outside and acting "hands off," allowing those Coglanites to go ahead and to break up the meeting, or try to break it up. We went up and we had canes to maintain order and we tried to push the mobsters out of the way and when we did one mobster grabbed Brother Heath and hurt him very badly, physically. And that's also written up in the Society publications. They grabbed him by the private parts as he was going up the stairway and he hit the mobster over the head with a cane in order to break up the crowd that was coming around us. And when he did that then the cops moved in from the outside (they were in conspiracy working with the mobsters) and they put Brother Heath under arrest because of his having hit one of the mobsters with the cane. He was in the right, Brother Heath was, but the cops didn't think so and they went ahead and did their part helping the mobsters and took Brother Heath into custody. Then I became the chief witness for the defense, meaning Brother Heath, and when the case went to the courts, I was called up from San Antonio, Texas, to testify. I made two or three trips up on the train, they were two or three day trips. Anyhow, in the end Brother Heath was tried by three judges, that were black robed representatives of the State of New York to enforce the felony law and they were going to try and get him. But the judges ruled, based on the testimony that I gave supporting Brother Heath's self-defense, that he was not guilty. They held that the testimony was given by a member of the bar whom they believed was more credible than the mobsters that had testified against him ... so Brother Heath was acquitted as a result of Jehovah's provision of having me there to give testimony on his behalf Sis. Murray: I remember Brother Rutherford on that record saying that they will not break up this meeting and he just went on non stop. Covington: He says "By God's grace the Nazis and the Fascists will not break this meeting up." And that is the way that it was, not broken up because the brothers maintained law and order. Bro. Murray: It was not broken up because you used those canes ... at that time there was already some litigation going on for example, I think, the Lowell case. Covington: The Lowell Case had gone on up and the judge had authorized the appeal of that and Mr. Moyle, who was at that time at Bethel, handled that case. I had nothing to do with that case. I didn't come into any of the Society's Supreme Court cases until after the Snyder case was argued. Brother Rutherford argued the Snyder case, Snyder against Irvington, New Jersey. Brother Rutherford and I were in that case together. This case was an ordinance against literature distribution case. Now the Flag case was a different case and that came up for a hearing in 1940; that was adverse to us, the first one, and then later they reversed themselves as a result of our taking that up. Bro. Murray: So that was the point where you went to the Madison Square Garden case? Covington: That's the one where the mobsters tried to break the meeting up in 1939. Bro. Murray: So it must have been shortly after that you were invited to Bethel. Covington: ... on account of the fact that I had made a firm defense for Brother Heath and the lawyer for the Society pulled out. He didn't believe in the self-defense. And he quit. Brother Rutherford was in need somebody so he called on me and I was not aware of what was going on at the time. But when it did happen, he invited me to come, and I came. Bro. Murray: You were in one field of law, but you almost got into Constitutional Law. Covington: Yes. I was originally in casualty insurance, defense, personal injury, and representing insurance companies in damage suit cases; then bond forfeiture cases and bond obligation cases. Then, when I went to Bethel I was in a different area altogether. But, still I had had enough trial experience in appellate argument and court experience that it was easy for me to shift into the position of defending Jehovah's Witnesses and it was good because I was able to do what I liked which was to defend my client. Also having got a righteous cause gives you a double barrel. Sis. Murray: That's right, a cause that you really believed in. Covington: I went to Bethel in 1939. Brother Rutherford called me in, but that was after the Madison Square Garden Riot case and that was because the fact that other lawyer by the name of Moyle quit, and left Brother Rutherford holding the bag. I got an invitation to come by special delivery from Rutherford, and I went immediately. I had to transfer cases to a dozen or two lawyers in order to make that change. Bro. Murray: You and Brother Rutherford were on a couple of cases together you mentioned. I always think of you as a lawyer and him as a writer, but was he a pretty good lawyer? Covington: Oh yes he was! He was a very, very good, he was an eloquent speaker and he maintained dignity and he got very high respect from members of the court that listened to him arguing the Gobitis Case. Bro. Murray: You got started in 1940. What were some of the first major cases that you were involved in? I know a little bit about some of the cases but what were some of the first ones? The "Flag Salute Case?" came along in 1940, Covington: The first Flag Salute case I worked along with Brother Rutherford, but I had nothing to do in the argument in that case. Brother Rutherford argued that one, but he did a good job. The reason that it was lost was not because of Brother Rutherford, but because of the times we were in. The war was going on and the heat was on us from every angle Bro. Murray: Then for a while the cases just piled up. Covington: Oh my, yes! They were coming at us fast and furious. It was an eighteen hour day for me to cope with it, but I was young and dedicated and devouring of any opposition that we had. I kept on going all the time. I was happy to do it. Bro. Murray: Some of these things here that I'm not too familiar with; you can tell me about some of them. For example I know about the Harlan, Kentucky case, but what can you tell me about this Connersville, Indiana case? Covington: Well that was a mob situation that occurred while we were trying that seditious conspiracy case in Connersville, a hot bed of American Legion action and they ruled the whole town. In the Connersville case I used Brother Franz as my witness and then the jury was put on and it was necessary for me to get to out the case and I finished the argument of the case at Connersville and I tried to get a postponement of the case in Maine but they wouldn't put it off. As result I had to race from Indianapolis to Cincinnati to catch the plane to Boston and that saved my life because that night they had conspired to kill me. I went to catch the airplane in Cincinnati out of Connersville, and then Brother Victor Schmidt, who was with me as co-council, he is now dead, he stayed, And he and his wife, Sister Schmidt, were mobbed by the crowed and as they mobbed them that night, in the darkness, after the case was over, they were screaming and yelling that they were going to kill me that night. The Lord delivered me at the right time and I would have been killed that night. I wanted to stay there for the verdict. The verdict was adverse and I took an appeal. I had to go back in to take the appeal afterwards and the same group of conspirators were there and I got in an out in a hurry. We made the appeal effective and got the case reversed on appeal, but that was after a tremendous effort was put forth and a lot of blood, sweat, and tears was involved. It was a part of the conspiracy to wipe us out in Connersville but by Jehovah's undeserved kindness they didn't. The good testimony was given but some sisters were convicted of conspiracy and were given jail terms I got them out of jail on bail and we appealed the case to the Supreme Court of Indiana. It was reversed and they were acquitted by the court on appeal (the decision came down on Pearl Harbor Day). Bro. Murray: I noticed that you got a note here about Oscar Pillars, a Brother that was in Texas. Covington: Yes, he was a Brother that was down in East Texas to show the intense prejudice in that area. They literally mobbed him and hung him up on a telephone pole and the rope was cut by the steel bars on the telephone pole the angle bars, that was the thing that saved his life Bro. Murray: That later went to court, and the persons that were guilty of trying to hang him to kill him fled the state. Now of course this Harlan County, Kentucky, Sister Murray and I served over there near Harlan County and we heard some interesting stories about Harlan, Kentucky. Covington: And Somerset too, Somerset and Harlan were both involved. Bro. Murray: Now what was their objection to the Witnesses in Harlan? Covington: Well the same as here. That was where the prosecutor said that if he got me back down into Harlan he was going to boil me in oil. They had a conspiracy charge against the Brothers, seditious conspiracy charge I then filed an injunction against the prosecution of that case in Federal court in London Federal Court And I got a injunction against the State of Kentucky and it's standing yet today, knocking that sedition law out as unconstitutional and the federal judges that heard the case gave us a vindication. It was highly controversial and hotly contested case. The thing that was interesting was that the prosecutor said he was basing his charge on the grounds that this literature was conspiratory and seditious. Then that chief federal court judge said "Mr. District Attorney its now 11 o'clock and court will adjourn and you be back tomorrow with the proof." So court was adjourned and when he came back the next day of course he had no proof. All he had were all those books and that's when he was making that statement to the other guys in the room that he if gets Covington back down to Harlan he's going to boil him in oil. Bro. Murray: I understand that some of the Brothers roomed next to his room that night. Covington: Yes they were, because we had taken up all the hotels, and all the officers of the law had to bunk up. Bro. Murray: Is that where they spent the whole night researching the literature? Covington: Yes, and that's where the Sheriff and the Marshals said to old Daniel Boone Smith to turn out the light we need some sleep. Oh that was funny. Bro. Murray: Yes, that's real funny now to tell about it, but it was pretty tough at the time. Covington: Yes, our life was at stake. When you are batting with your back to the wall, but Jehovah gave us vindication, but it was a tough time. Bro. Murray: You're not kidding!, You know, there are a couple of cases that you don't have down here, but that I know about personally. For example, did you fight the case about Jones versus O'Blancon? Covington: Yes that was the case that was taken up to the Supreme Court involving the validity of the license tax law. And that came up from Alabama. We lost at first, and that was a companion case of Jones against Opelika, and Jobin against Arizona, and another person against the state of Arkansas. Those three cases were put together and the Supreme Court heard them and they decided them adversely to us at first. Then on rehearing they set aside their opinion but that didn't come automatically. We had to argue with our backs to the wall and that's when Justice Murphy filed his dissenting opinion on the case; he complained about the Jehovah's Witnesses having been being persecuted by mob violence and all other sorts of conspiracies that public officials had used to stop their work. That's when Murphy gave his dissenting opinion in favor of Jehovah's Witnesses and then after that the other cases were taken in from Pennsylvania and that meant that the case would have to be reopened because that was a very serious question that the court hadn't grabbed a hold of and it was good too that they brought the other cases in because otherwise the case would have to stand and wouldn't be reheard. Bro. Murray: As I understand license tax cases, a municipality would say to sell your literature in our town you've got to have a license. Covington: Yes, if you wanted to come in to sell your literature here you've got to have a license. Bro. Murray: But when you went in to get a license they wouldn't sell you one because you didn't qualify. Covington: You didn't qualify. And that way we got prosecuted on account of not having the license, but we believed that the license was ungodly anyhow. We never would have got the license anyway, and we were defending the case because they were making an imposition upon our constitutional rights and contrary to our conscience. Justice Murphy filed a dissent in that case. Murphy got a good name among us because he was always dissenting in cases in our favor. They wrote an article about him in the Law Review, some guys did, to the effect that if Justice Murphy is ever sainted, it will be by the Jehovah's Witnesses, not the Catholic Church. He was a notorious Catholic. Bro. Murray: It's odd that he would be so strong for justice when he had that background. Covington: He was very much in favor of what we were doing. And he knew that the life of the country depended on it the success. Bro. Murray: But not all the Justices were that way. For example Justice Frankfurter, Covington: Oh! He was very adverse! He was so hostile yet he was a Jew. He was against us in the flag case and against us in the license tax cases. Bro. Murray: I read some of his opinions and it's amazing that he, coming from a persecuted minority, the Jewish minority, that he was so tough on the Witnesses. Covington: Oh boy, you said it. He was really vicious too. He tried to justify himself, but he was a hypocrite really, and my feelings about the matter is he was an enemy. Bro. Murray: Let me go back to this other point. In the Flaxwood Case, the first one, we got an adverse opinion in 1940, and on Flag Day in 1943 it was reversed. Covington: And the reason it was reversed was because I brought an injunction case in the United States District Court in the District of West Virginia, to restrain the enforcement of the state flag salute regulation that required compulsory saluting of the flag by children in the schools. I challenged that as unconstitutional and that gave me the opportunity to force the court into the position of deciding the matter again. I brought a injunction suit against the enforcement of the regulation and it gave me the right to empanel what they call a three Judge Statutory Court. Then that gave us automatically the right of appeal directly to the Supreme Court of the United States. Bro. Murray: Now, I don't understand that part. Covington: Well, it's a highly technical thing, but it gave us a speedy, quick decision and we needed a speedy quick decision. When we were arguing that case in the District Court, Judge John Jay Parker, who was from North Carolina, was presiding on the court. Then the Attorney General from West Virginia got up and said well it's not necessary for me to argue this case, because the Supreme Court of the United States has already decided this case for the Jehovah's Witnesses. As a consequence, Judge Parker said Mr. Attorney General if you are relying on the Gobitis Case you'd better argue this case. He said it wasn't necessary for him to argue. So Judge Parker said "You'd better argue this case." He was flabbergasted, the Attorney General was, taken off his feet; he didn't know what to figure. Bro. Murray: I thought that once the Supreme Court decided on something that was the final decision. Covington: The Supreme Court can always reverse themselves and reopen the thing, and that was the very thing that I had in mind when I filed that case to challenge that and get them to reopen it. And the only way I could do it quickly was to get a Three Judge Court and then bingo I could shoot right into the Supreme Court of the United States and bypass the intermediary appellate court and that way we have them on the run. Bro. Murray: That's interesting, did somebody have some indication that the Supreme Court would be willing to hear it again or did you just think that. Covington: I didn't have any inside information on that, because you never get any commitment out of the court. I knew that when Roy Gamble (who was one of Jehovah's Witnesses) who was painting the picture of Justice Murphy in Lansing, Michigan, as an artist there (he painted a picture to hang in the Capitol there in Lansing) said Justice Murphy made the statement to Roy Gamble, who complained about the adversity there that the Jehovah's Witnesses had been put in. Frank Murphy said to him, "I know that, someday we're going to do something about that." Bro. Murray: Now Let's see, I want to ask you something about the sedition laws because some of my friends had been involved in those sedition laws, particularly that one down in Mississippi. Covington: That Mississippi Case we took up to the Supreme Court of the United States along with the second Flag Case, West Virginia Board of Education against Barnett. I took the appeal of the Mississippi case sedition based on the refusal, explaining the reason for your refusal to salute the flag was in literature that had been distributed and that's what the Brothers were doing, putting literature out explaining why Jehovah's Witnesses did not salute the flag. And they were accused then of violating this seditious conspiracy law of Mississippi on that account. That was the case that we brought up along with the rehearing of the flag case in the West Virginia case. Covington: They all dovetailed in the court at the same time and only Jehovah could do it Bro. Murray: The papers said that day was a field day for Jehovah's Witnesses Covington: That was what Judge Waite said; that it was field day for Jehovah's Witnesses when they handed down those decisions on Flag day in 1943. Judge Waite wrote the article entitled the Constitutional Debt of the American People to the Jehovah's Witnesses, a long article in the Minnesota Law Review that covered about forty pages. He makes a detailed account of the decisions that were handed down on that day that including the Jones against Opelika being reversed, and Mississippi case being handed down and reversed at the Supreme Court of Mississippi. You see it was a field day for us! It turned the tide. Then the publicity turned the other way. The newspapers had been very adverse against the Jehovah's Witnesses all over the country and then when we gave them a licking, why then they went soft Bro. Murray: It was like Jehovah got swallowed up a flood of adversity against these people It's getting late but there's a couple more cases that come to mind. There the one that one involved me, you never knew the one that involved me; the draft cases. Covington: I was very much involved in the draft cases because I had to meet with all the military authorities in Washington when they were considering the case of whether Jehovah's Witnesses would be allowed exemption from the draft under the law as ministers of religion, and whether they were entitled to the benefit of conscientious objector status. They had a big room full of the guys that administrated the draft. And among that group was General Louis B. Hershey Bro. Murray: Now you get the opinion from reading that he was more or less in favor of allowing conscientious objectors Covington: He was in favor of giving us a good even break, he was really an honorable man, a man of integrity. I liked him very much. He died about three years ago in Indiana, in the country. He was an expert on the draft, the best in the world on conscription. That's why Roosevelt put him in charge of the draft administration registration. He was a corny type of a man, but very brilliant, sharp, quick. He defended himself very well before Congress and he was honorable and fair in his dealing with Jehovah's Witnesses. He agreed on certain of our demands and I said, well I guess we'll have to fight over the rest Sis. Murray: I guess they got real emotional and Patriotic. Covington: Oh, yes. But they were cold-blooded, too you know, those army men. To them that's just like cutting meat you know. They were as cold as a cucumber. Bro. Murray: Yes, to them a man was just a piece of material. Bro. Murray: How many of our Brothers finally wound up in prison during the war? Covington There were about 2500 that went to jail during the war, but we kept an awful lot of them out. We had a tremendous number of cases that were taken up and appealed under the draft law, and there was a big day that we had a turning of the tide in the Supreme Court in the draft cases there were about 3 or 4 of them that were set together and I argued them. Bro. Murray: I remember that, that was the early 50's wasn't it? Covington: We lost the Fileboat Case, that was the first draft case and they ruled against us on the grounds that we had not exhausted our remedies by taking an appeal. An appeal was taken inside the draft law, they held that we were supposed to take a second physical examination. And that was not necessary because the first physical examination was enough to settle the guys eligibility physically for the draft. They took the position that it was necessary for him to go back and take the second one, and I argued that was unnecessary, unreasonable, and arbitrary and capricious in order to get the benefit of law. Frankfurter was dead against us and so was a large number of the other judges, but in the end we won those draft cases on the second go around. We established the right to be heard on our defense as ministers. At first they held that we didn't even have the right to make a defense and then because of this business of not having taken the second physical, which I said in my argument to the court was not necessary because his acceptability had been predetermined on the first physical Bro. Murray: So that's the one that was established when I came along in 1957. By that time I wasn't pioneering yet but I just told them that I was one of Jehovah's Witnesses and they automatically gave me a conscientious objection. Covington: We had a lot of difficulty in establishing that, but in the end we prevailed. Jehovah gave us the victory in these cases. Not all of us got a deferment without difficulty, but in the end we finally won in the draft cases. We got the decision from the Supreme Court of the right to make a defense in the case of Louis Dabney Smith, who is now a circuit overseer down in this area. William Esteph, the other one, was from Pittsburgh, and Smith was from South Carolina. Smith had an interesting case because his old man caused him to be kidnapped. His old man got the cops to kidnapped him from home, and took him down forcibly to the induction station. The old man knew that his son wasn't going to show up, so he forcibly took him down there. Louis was there, and then I had to sue to get him out of the army. We went around and around in his case and we also went around and around in the others. That was a big battle in that draft thing. We gave them a receipt for every blow. They were getting ready to indict me, you see. Yeah they were, really. Bro. Murray: Lock you away boy. Covington: When they told me that, I said "you know my address" Bro. Murray: They knew where to get you. Did you get involved in Canadian problems? Covington: Oh yes I did, quite a lot. I spent a lot of time up in Canada then there was that Quebec situation that was very bad and I worked very closely with Brother Hal. I used him in the cases up there up there because I couldn't plead any cases in Canada. I worked with him and he was my alter ego. We gave a them a good run for their money in Canada. Actually we got very good results out of the Canadian Supreme Court. We went in the seditious libel cases that were brought against Jehovah's Witnesses. Also in a large number of other cases we had the Supreme Court split in Canada and on that account and the court ruled in our favor, a split decision before they came around in our favor and it was some very good decision that they gave us in Canada. Canada is based on common law. We went in there under the freedom of worship statue in Quebec. We made use of that for the first time in history; it was written for the Catholic Church, They never had to use it, but we used it successfully in the case involving Laurent Samour. The Laurier Sumur, a witnessing case. The other case involved the Brother that ran the restaurant and that case was won too. They tried to break him because he was signing bonds for the Brothers. Brother Frank Boccerelli ran the restaurant. He was a very fine Brother, He stood up for Jehovah's name in a very courageous way and really gave Duplessis a run for his money and we gave Duplessis a run for his money too in the courts up there. Bro. Murray: He said "I am the law!" Covington: That's the way he felt about it. He was a mean guy, Duplessis was. Brother Franz and I gave testimony up there in the Laurent Samour case in the Trial court and then it went on through the Appellate Courts and I was around when we argued the case. The case was argued in the Supreme Court of Canada too (but Glen Howe handled the argument very well and very capably) we worked very well together. Finally, Jehovah vindicated his people and his name in a very big way in Canada, and this book here entitled Jehovah's Witnesses in Canada, Champions of Freedom of Speech and Worship, by M. James Penton. It's a large book, several hundred pages long, three hundred and eighty six pages, and it's got references to a lot of our cases in Canada and elsewhere. It goes into the battle in Quebec, the second world war, and about our abstaining from blood. You know we had blood cases up there in Canada too, and it tells about the victory in the courts in Canada and that which involved the draft, alternative service, that was a draft case, and actually in one of the cases Leo Greenlees, who is on the governing body, I represented in the courts in Toronto That was in forties. It says here that the Leo case was back in the forties Percy Chapmann and Hayden C. Covington, the American legal consul for the two societies, visited Minister of Justice, St. Laurent, to request that the ban on those organizations be lifted. Percy and I went to see St. Laurent who was Minister of Justice in charge of Canada. And it points out on page 161, MacKenzie King was the Prime Minister and the Prime Minister caused the bans to removed after that. But it was a hot time in Canada, a bad place. There was a lot of persecution then, and now it is a place of prosperity for the Lord's people. Bro. Murray: Things have really changed haven't they? First we had to break down that wall. When you went to court, for example, in the flag salute case, and you go up to the Supreme Court, it must have involved a tremendous sum of money. Covington: Well yes, but the Lord owns all the cattle on seven hills and he can afford it. Bro. Murray: So when you win a case, though, do you still get paid? Covington: Sometimes you get your costs back and sometimes you don't. When Uncle Sam or the State is involved you don't get anything back. But in Canada we got it all back. Oh my! We took it off their head. But in the United States you can't get anything out of Uncle Sam. Bro. Murray: You got a chance to see ole Harry Truman one time. Covington: Oh yes, sure. Ole Harry Truman. Murray, he was a great guy. He was a hot potato We went in to see Harry because we were trying to get the pardon petition for the Jehovah's Witnesses who had been convicted under the draft, considered and allowed by him, as the President of the United States. It is not easy to get in to see the President, but Harry was approachable. I knew his next door neighbor, Jim Blair, who was Governor of Missouri, and who was with me in the first draft case out there in Texas. When we got down to that, I got in touch with Jim Blair, and he came into Washington to set up an appointment in the White House. And Jim, 1, and Brother Knorr wanted to get Brother Kennedy to come along because he was in the Army. That didn't make any impression on Harry. We went in and saw Harry Truman in the White House, in the Oval Room, and I'm going to tell it exactly as it is and if you want to censor it go ahead. Went in to see his honor, his nibs, and Jim Blair was there in the Oval Room and he found out what it was about, Ole Harry did, and he slammed his fist down on the desk and he nearly broke the presidential desk. He said, "I want to tell you, that I do not have a God damn bit of use for that SOB who didn't want to die for his country in time of war" and then Jim Blair threw his hands up and said, "Oh Mr. President, Mr. President!" So Harry, after we presented the matter to him, Harry come down off of his high horse, and out of his fury said "well I'll refer it to my Attorney General, that was Tom Clark who I knew, and who was from Texas incidentally. Old Tom was later appointed to the Supreme Court of the United States, by Harry Truman. And after he was appointed, Tom Clark gave us some favorable decisions in some of our cases. Not because we had influence, but because we were right. Bro. Murray: He had some character about him Covington: Oh yes he did, and actually his son, the Attorney General, was quite a liberal. His son was well known for his liberality. It surprised everybody too, and embarrassed Clark, but Clark turned out to be a very fine judge. Bro. Murray: Its amazing, some of those men had real character; like Murphy and Stone Covington: Oh boy, that Murphy! He was the greatest guy. Bro. Murray: The had character about them, they stood up for what they felt was right. Covington: Actually, Ole Frank Murphy, if you read that dissenting opinion that he wrote in that child custody case, the Prince case (Prince against Mass.). That is an eloquent thing, and he squared off against all the rest of them and recited about how horrible the Jehovah's Witnesses had been persecuted. He was a righteously disposed man. Bro. Murray: It is interesting with all these politician there is one thing I'd like to know about. For example, you only had a chance to work with Brother Rutherford for about three years rather closely, because he died in 1942. Covington: That's right, I worked with him from 1939 to 1942. 1 was there in 1939, and we were very, very close. We had to be because of the things that we working together on, and I went out to work with him on the Flag brief, on the Gobitis case in San Diego, that's where we put the Gobitis brief together, in San Diego. And he was eloquent! Bro. Murray: Yes that's right, he had a tremendous way with words. Was he that way in real life? Covington: Yes he was. He was very much a man with a great sense of humor too, and he was great to fly off the handle too! Which is only human you know. But I loved him with all my heart and I never feared him at all. Bro. Murray: I guess some people did fear him because of the authority he was. Covington: Well that may be true, but he still was a great man. If he did anything wrong he'd moke up for it. Sis. Murray: Do you know how Brother Rutherford came into the truth? Covington: He had been, in his younger life, a book agent selling books. He was going along in Missouri and he slipped and fell through the ice, and took pneumonia. He thought he was about to die, and he prayed to the Lord that if he came out of that, he would never turn a book agent away. He was in his office and heard his secretary chasing a book agent out of his office. He ran out of the door and balled him out for running the book agent out. It turned out to be one of Jehovah's Witnesses with Pastor Russell's books. Sis. Murray: I heard it was a Sister. Covington: And after that he got so deeply involved in with what he read, just like I did when I was listening to the Judge; he was reading Pastor Russell and he just went head over heels and bag and baggage for what Brother Russell was doing and he went for it unlimited with out any constraint. Then Brother Russell got into litigation on account of his wife. That suit with the divorce and that stuff about the miracle wheat and everything else. Brother Russell had to have someone to represent him and he called on Brother Rutherford to come and represent him on these matters. Bro. Murray: Rutherford was later arrested, but there was never anything to that trial and the imprisonment. He never would have been convicted. Covington: His conviction was reversed and that wiped the slate clean. Actually the convictions were malicious prosecution anyhow. May 24, 1919 was the day he was admitted to the Supreme Court, and that's the same year that he was admitted to the bar in the state of New York. And then he became council for Pastor Russell after that. Pastor Russell died on the train in Texas and then there was a big hassle in the organization after that, which is a matter of history. I don't have too much clarity on that. You know as much about that as I do by getting the records out and reading them. Bro. Murray: He really was a good lawyer then? Covington: Oh yes, don't kid yourself about that later. Brother Rutherford had to get away from the intense cold in the East in the winter time. He had a collapsed lung and there was a danger he could contact pneumonia because of that experience when he fell in the water and nearly froze to death in Missouri. Remember he said he wasn't turning any book agents away from his office. When Rutherford was behind bars he put his hands on the bar and said to Jehovah, "If you ever get me out of here I am going to give the old wore [the Catholic Church] the worst licking that she ever had..." and he dedicated his whole life, remaining life, to that pursuit. Sis. Murray: He sure did, he really let her have it! Bro. Murray: You came out here to San Diego, were you with him when he died? Covington: Yes. He died in San Diego because he had been operated on for cancer of the colon in Indiana ... cancer is a consuming thing, and it gradually began to eat his body down where there was little weight on him and he called Brother Knorr and Brother Franz and I out to San Diego. We went out on the Santa Fe train, the Chief and we went there to meet with him and he knew he was dying and he wasn't any maudlin ... he knew he wasn't going to live too long. So he put his hands on the heads of all of us boys and asked us to stick together. That's when I made that declaration that Fred Franz quoted at the assembly in Cincinnati. We all called him Pap, for short, meaning Pappy he was really our father, not our real father you know, but because of age we consider him to be giving us orders. So I said to him, "Well Pap, we'll fight them together till hell freezes over." Covington: When we were at the assembly in Cincinnati Fred Franz told the Brothers about that quote, which I meant to. It was like we skated on the ice. The lord will make it so. Bro. Murray: What happened the body, did he want to buried out in San Diego? Covington: He had no desire to be buried in any place but he had to. He knew he was dying and would have to be buried. He was sensible enough to know that he didn't want to have his bones hauled all the way back to Brooklyn. So he suggested to us that when the time came for him to be buried he wanted to be buried out there. We tried to get him buried there in the Beth Serum property. That was a big property in behind there, went all the way down to Montezuma Road, and then Brother Heath had that big house over across the way that his mother had given him money to build. It would cost a half a million dollars to build and duplicate now, or more. We tried to get him buried at that property and the board in San Diego turned us down. They didn't want him buried anywhere out there, there was so much hostility and hatred against the Judge out there. The authorities turned us down, every turn we took. I filed a lawsuit then in the courts out there in San Diego to force them to let us bury him out there on that property. Judge Mundo, who was the judge of the Superior Court, heard it and passed the buck, jumping from one thing to another, from one technicality to another, and finally after looking at the matter in a reasonable way Bill, Bonnie, and Nathan and all of us decided that we have fought enough on this and it looks like its the Lord's will that we take his body back to Brooklyn, and have him buried in Staten Island, which we did. So Bill and Bonnie were on the train with his body. And Fred, Nathan, and I had already come back and were working. I was trying to get his bones under the ground by legal mandate and we couldn't get it, and there was no other thing to do. And we did, and that ended that. He was laughing down from heaven at us scurrying around trying to get his bones buried. Bro. Murray: He was probably pleased that you finally decided to let it go! "Didn't I ever teach them boys anything?" He probably couldn't see how that was connected with anything. Since you loved the man that was why it was so important to you. Covington: We wanted to do his will as best we could, not his will, but Jehovah's will and he had to be buried someplace. It wasn't reasonable to haul his body all the way across the country, but we finally had to do that. Sis. Murray: Well how long did it take by train? Covington: It took about two and a half to three days. Two and half days from San Diego and I made that trip a lot of times. From New York to San Diego; it takes two and a half days on a Pullman. Of course, we rode Pullman. We went first class, Brother Rutherford told me, "I want you, whenever you travel, to travel first class." And so I did, and Brother Heath did, Nathan Knorr did, and Freddy Franz did too, all the whole bunch of us did. Sis. Murray: Well you needed your rest and it was more comfortable. Covington: It's not our comfort, but we were entitled to: the laborer is worthy of his hire. Bro. Murray: Through those years, you brought cases to court that you could see Jehovah's hand in it and how Jehovah built up a wall around his people. And the wall is still there as long as we don't abuse it, and the law will protect us. Covington: Yes, right! As long as we don't put our foot in the door. I'm just using that as a figure of speech. Abuse of it is it and I don't think that most of us do and or ever will and I'm sure that Jehovah is with us all the way. There's no question about it; this is Jehovah's organization. Like Peter said, wherever we've got to go Lord, there's no problem. Bro. Murray: It's good that you've really been engaged in a warfare. Paul talks about this spiritual warfare. This spiritual warfare has been on for a long time and sometimes has it been difficult to remember that we weren't fighting against men and their statues so much but we were fighting against unseen spirits behind the men Covington: Yes that's right; that's always been my conviction. Like Paul says here in this scripture. Where is the one that says I am convinced that nothing will separate us from his love? Sis. Murray: Romans, I think, the end of the seventh chapter. I think it was the seventh or eighth chapter of Romans. Bro. Murray: In Ephesians 6: 10 he talks about the fight against the wicked forces. Sis. Murray: Chapter eight, the end of chapter eight. Covington: Yes right here it is, I've got it underscored. Bro. Murray: "For I am convince that neither death, nor life, nor angles, nor governments, nor things now here, nor things to come, nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creation will be able to separate us from God's love that is in Christ Jesus, our Lord". So if you hadn't had Jehovah's backing you, you wouldn't be able to out maneuver demonic forces. Covington: Oh no and we know we don't wrestle with flesh and blood but against the demons and that's what you got to keep in mind all the time and if you don't, you're sure to lose. And you have got to recognize the power that's against us, without the power that Jehovah's got helping us out, we're dead ducks. Sis. Murray: That helps to keep us from hating people so much, because we know that they are just human. Covington: Yes, that's right, they are just pawns in the hands of the devil. Bro. Murray: Even someone who really dislikes the Witnesses very much, like old Frankfurter. Covington: He was a pawn in the hands of the devil. And after all Jehovah doesn't hold it against people. The main thing is that we keep on and never throw the sponge in, that's my philosophy. Sis. Murray: It was encouraging to me just listen to your experiences and to hear you talk has inspired me. I appreciate it very much. End of Taped Interview. Muhammad Ali vs. the United States of America Hayden C. Covington: From Wikipedia MEETING WITH U.S. PRESIDENT HARRY TRUMAN

Jerry Murray: Bruder Covington, jeder, der dir zuhört, weiß, daß du von irgendwo aus dem Südwesten [der USA] kommst, aber genau wo kommst du her und wann? Covington: Ich wurde am 19. Januar 1911 in Osttexas geboren. Ich wurde auf einer Farm in einem Ort östlich von Dallas aufgezogen. Danach kämpfte ich mich durch die Schule. Mein Vater war bei den Texas Rangers, und er wurde nach San Antonio, Texas, versetzt, und dort machte ich dann meine Juristenausbildung. J.M.: Wie kamst du dann zur Wahrheit? Covington: Ich lernte die Wahrheit kennen, weil mein Vater von San Antonio, Texas, als Texas Ranger hinunter ins Tal versetzt wurde. Nach dieser Versetzung brauchte ich einen Platz, wo ich bleiben konnte. So blieb ich bei zwei Freunden, mit denen ich zur Schule ging. Sie baten mich, bei ihnen einzuziehen, und der Vater, der das Haupt der Familie war, war bei schlechter Gesundheit, und er ließ uns alle Sonntags zu sich kommen und ihn über die schlechten Weltverhältnisse reden hören. Er interessierte mich, und ich wurde sehr interessiert an dem, was er zu sagen hatte, weil ich von der Art und Weise, wie die Dinge liefen, genug hatte und wie alle Jugendlichen unzufrieden mit dem Establishment war, und davon gerade zu der Zeit randvoll genug hatte. Ich liebäugelte mit kontroversen Ideen, und er war voller Unzufriedenheit mit diesem System der Dinge. Was er predigte, sagte mir sehr zu, und so hörte ich ihm zu und er schaltete die Rundfunkstation KTSA an, die aufgezeichnete Ansprachen von Richter J. F. Rutherford, wie er genannt wurde und als der er bekannt war, brachte. So bestand er darauf, daß wir zuhörten, und mir sagte das, was ich hörte, sehr zu [Bemerkenswert: Covington wurde kein Zeuge aus Liebe zur Bibel, sondern aus jugendlicher Rebellion heraus]. J.M.: Machte die Tatsache, daß Bruder Rutherford Rechtsanwalt war, einen Eindruck auf dich, beeindruckte dich das auch? Machte das die Angelegenheit für dich interessanter? Covington: Nun, er stellte die Dinge in einer Weise dar, die für mich unwiderlegbar war. Als Anwalt konnte ich sehen, daß er 100 %-ig wußte, worüber er sprach. Er hatte sehr viel Überzeugungskraft, und ich war ein bereitwilliger Zuhörer, und ich war bereit, mich ihm in seiner Gegnerschaft anzuschließen, für die Wahrheit. J.M.: Du warst reif für die Wahrheit! Wann hast du Bruder Rutherford zum ersten Mal getroffen? Covington: In Houston 1900-und, ich habe das Jahr vergessen, lange bevor ich ins Bethel kam. Ich ging mit einer Gruppe von Brüdern hinüber nach Houston, die wußten, daß dort eine besondere Zusammenkunft stattfand, und Bruder Rutherford war dort, weil Bruder Isaac damals unten in Houston lebte. Er ist schon tot, Joe Isaac, er war ein großer Freund des Richters, und ich hörte seinen Namen in ganz Texas. J.M.: Sag einmal: Als du die Wahrheit annahmst und begannst, zu den Zusammenkünften zu gehen, wie reagierte dein Vater darauf? Covington: Nun, er war sehr feindlich eingestellt gegenüber dem, was ich tat, als ich zu den Zusammenkünften der Zeugen ging, weil er Großes mit mir vorhatte, Politiker zu werden ... Und ich arbeitete damals im Bezirksgerichtshaus, im Büro der Bezirksanwälte, und ich hatte einen politischen Job. Wann immer sie Feldzüge veranstalteten, war ich draußen zum Predigen. Ich hatte also einen politischen Job und ein politisches Büro, aber ich machte dabei nicht mit. J.M.: Wann wurdest du zur Anwaltskammer zugelassen? Covington: Ich wurde 1933 zur Anwaltskammer zugelassen. J.M.: So hast du für kurze Zeit als Anwalt gearbeitet, ehe du ins Bethel gingst? Covington: O ja, ich war schon sehr rege vor Gericht in San Antonio, nachdem ich die Prüfung dafür gemacht hatte. Nebenbei bemerkt, ich machte diese Prüfung ein Jahr, bevor ich den Studienabschluß hatte. J.M.: Dann mußtest du immer noch dieses Extrajahr machen? Covington: Ich mußte das Extrajahr machen, um mein Diplom zu erhalten. J.M.: Hast du deine eigene Kanzlei aufgemacht, oder hast du ich einer anderen angeschlossen? Covington: Ich habe in einer großen Kanzlei gearbeitet, als ich zur Anwaltschaft zugelassen wurde, und ich hatte so gute Abschlußnoten erhalten, daß der Chef der Kanzlei "Moffison-Burkeson" kam und mir einen Job anbot. Murray's wife: Wie kamst du dazu, die Zeugen zu verteidigen und für die Brüder zu arbeiten? Covington: Das kam, als ich die Morrison-Kanzlei verließ und zu R. H. Mercer ging, der Anwalt in Schadensersatzprozessen für die Maryland Casualty Company in San Antonio war. Und es waren da ein paar Brüder, die unten im Tal verhaftet wurden, weil dort eine Zusammenkunft abgehalten wurde, und ich ging hinunter und stand ihnen bei und bewirkte, daß der Fall abgelehnt wurde. Und dann wurde mein Name der Gesellschaft bekannt, und sie ernannten mich, die Gesellschaft in einem Verfahren in Curville, Texas, zu vertreten, wo ein Testament angefochten wurde, und ich nahm das für die Gesellschaft in die Hand. Und dann gerieten die Brüder in einen Streit mit der Polizei von San Antonio, und hier kommen wir auf die Sache mit Bruder Heath zu sprechen. Wir hatten Informationsmärsche, und die Polizisten versuchten, uns zu stoppen. Und es wurde notwendig, daß ich ein Gespräch mit dem Bürgermeister der Stadt San Antonio darüber hatte, ob Jehovas Zeugen das Recht haben, Informationsmärsche zu veranstalten und ein Plakat mit sich zu führen, daß die Religion eine Falle und ein Schwindel ist. J.M.: Und das machte die Leute verrückt, nicht wahr? Murray's wife: Aber wie hast du den Fall gewonnen? Covington: Indem ich den Bürgermeister ersuchte . . . Er sah dann, daß wir im Recht waren; ich brachte ihn dazu. Nun ja, eigentlich brachte ich ihn nicht dazu, der Herr brachte ihn dazu, aber ich war der, der den Vorschlag machte (Bruder Heath war bei der Gelegenheit in San Antonio zu Besuch). Bruder Heath war damals der Sekretär von Bruder Rutherford. Murray's wife: Als er dich sah, hat er dich ins Bethel eingeladen? Covington: Nun, er lud mich nicht ins Bethel ein; er lud mich zum Kongreß im Madison Square Garden ein. J.M.: Ist das der Kongreß, wo es all die Ausschreitungen gab? Covington: Das war, als die Katholische Aktion versuchte, die Zusammenkunft im Jahre 1939 zu sprengen. Auf der Aufnahme von Government and Peace kann man die Pöbelaktion von den Treppen oben hören. Als der Mob begann, verließ Bruder Heath die Rednertribüne, weil er für alle Ordner verantwortlich war, und ging in diese Richtung. Und ich ging mit ihm in diese Richtung. Er ging die sich windenden Treppen zum alten Madison Square Garden hinauf, nicht zu dem, der heute da ist. Ich folgte ihm, und wir gingen zusammen. Sie waren wie verrückt am Schreien, das war der gleiche Krach, den man auf der Aufnahme von Government and Peace hören kann. Sie schrieen uns in die Ohren, als wir dort hinaufgingen, um für Recht und Ordnung in dieser religiösen Versammlung zu sorgen. Die Polizisten waren draußen und hielten sich aus der Sache heraus; sie ließen zu, daß diese Leute weitermachten und die Zusammenkunft sprengten oder es zumindest versuchten. Wir gingen hinauf, und wir hatten Stöcke, um die Ordnung aufrechtzuerhalten, und wir versuchten, die Banditen aus dem Weg zu schieben. Und als wir das taten, ergriff einer der Banditen Bruder Heath und verletzte ihn sehr schlimm, körperlich. Und das steht auch in den Publikationen der Gesellschaft. Sie griffen ihn an den Genitalien, als er die Treppe hinaufging, und er schlug dem Banditen mit einem Stock auf den Kopf, um die Menge zu zersprengen, die sich um uns versammelte. Und als er das tat, da kamen die Polizisten auf einmal von draußen herein (sie hatten sich mit den Banditen verschworen) und stellten Bruder Heath unter Arrest, weil er den Banditen mit dem Stock geschlagen hatte. Bruder Heath war im Recht, aber das dachten die Polizisten nicht. Sie fuhren fort und taten ihr Teil, den Banditen zu helfen, und nahmen Bruder Heath in Gewahrsam. Dann wurde ich der Hauptzeuge für die Verteidigung von Bruder Heath, und als der Fall vor Gericht kam, wurde ich aus San Antonio, Texas, herbeigeholt, um meine Zeugenaussage zu machen. Ich unternahm zwei oder drei Reisen mit dem Zug, das waren zwei oder drei Tagereisen. Wie auch immer, am Ende wurde Bruder Heath von drei Staatsanwälten vor Gericht gestellt, schwarz gekleideten Vertretern des Staates New York, um das Strafrecht durchzusetzen, und sie wollten ihn vor Gericht stellen und kriegen. Doch die Richter urteilten auf der Grundlage meiner Zeugenaussage, die ich zur Unterstützung der Verteidigung von Bruder Heath machte, daß er nicht schuldig war. Sie glaubten, sie dachten, die Zeugenaussage eines Mitgliedes der Anwaltskammer sei glaubwürdiger als die Banditen, die gegen ihn ausgesagt hatten. ... So wurde Bruder Heath als Ergebnis der Vorkehrung Jehovas freigesprochen -- der Vorkehrung, daß ich da war, um für ihn auszusagen. Murray's wife: Ich erinnere mich, daß Bruder Rutherford auf der Aufnahme sagte, sie würden diese Zusammenkunft nicht sprengen, und er redete einfach weiter. Covington: Er sagt: "Durch Gottes Gnade werden Nazis und Faschisten diese Zusammenkunft nicht sprengen." Und so war es dann auch; sie wurde nicht gesprengt, weil die Brüder für Recht und Ordnung sorgten. J.M.: Sie wurde nicht gesprengt, weil ihr Stöcke benutzt habt ... Damals gab es schon einen Prozeß; ich denke zum Beispiel, der Fall Lowell. Covington: Der Fall Lowell war hochgekommen, und der Richter hatte die Berufung zugelassen, und Mr. Moyle, der zu der Zeit im Bethel war, handhabte den Fall. Ich hatte mit dem Fall nichts zu tun. Ich kam erst an die Fälle der Gesellschaft vor dem Supreme Court, nachdem der Fall Snyder verhandelt worden war. Bruder Rutherford führte den Fall Snyder; Snyder gegen Irvington, New Jersey. Bruder Rutherford und ich waren in dem Fall zusammen. Es ging da um eine Verordnung gegen die Verbreitung von Literatur. Nun war die Flaggengeschichte ein anderer Fall, und er kam 1940 vor Gericht; dieser erste Fall ging gegen uns aus, und später dann revidierte sich das Gericht, nachdem wir uns weiter für die Sache eingesetzt hatten. J.M.: Das war also der Punkt, wo du zu dem Fall Madison Square Garden gingst? Covington: Das ist der, wo die Banditen 1939 versuchten, die Zusammenkunft zu sprengen. J.M.: So mußt du also kurz darauf ins Bethel eingeladen worden sein. Covington: ... aufgrund der Tatsache, daß ich Bruder Heath standhaft verteidigt und der Anwalt der Gesellschaft sich zurückgezogen hatte. Er glaubte nicht an die Verteidigung. Und er warf das Handtuch. Bruder Rutherford brauchte jemanden, so bat er mich, und ich war mir nicht bewußt, was damals vor sich ging. Aber als es passierte, lud er mich ein zu kommen, und ich kam. J.M.: Du warst in einem Bereich des Rechts tätig, aber du kamst fast an das Verfassungsrecht. Covington: Ja. Mein ursprüngliches Gebiet waren Versicherungsfälle, Verteidigung, persönliche Beleidigungen, und ich trat als Vertreter von Versicherungen in Schadensfällen auf; dann noch in Fällen von Verwirkung von und Verpflichtungen aus Schuldverschreibungen. Dann, als ich ins Bethel ging, war ich auf einem völlig anderen Gebiet. Doch ich hatte immer noch genügend Erfahrungen bei Berufungsverfahren und Gerichtserfahrung, so daß es leicht für mich war, auf die Stellung zu wechseln, Jehovas Zeugen zu verteidigen, und das war gut, weil ich damit in der Lage war, das zu tun, was mir Spaß machte, nämlich meine Mandanten zu verteidigen. Und einen gerechten Fall zu haben, macht doppelt Freude. Murray's wife: Das ist richtig; das war eine Sache, an die du geglaubt hast. Covington: Ich ging 1939 ins Bethel. Bruder Rutherford bat mich, aber das war nach dem Fall, wo es um den Aufruhr im Madison Square Garden ging, und es war, weil der andere Anwalt, der Moyle hieß, das Handtuch warf und Bruder Rutherford mit der Sache alleine ließ. Ich bekam die Einladung, zu kommen, mit besonderer Zustellung von Rutherford, und ich ging sofort. Ich mußte Fälle an ein oder zwei Dutzend Anwälte abgeben, um diese Änderung vorzunehmen. J.M.:Du und Bruder Rutherford, ihr wart bei ein paar Fällen zusammen, die du erwähnt hast. Ich stelle mir immer dich als Anwalt und ihn als Schriftsteller vor, aber war er ein brauchbarer Anwalt? Covington: O ja, das war er! Er war sehr, sehr gut; er war ein gewandter Redner und wahrte die Würde, und er wurde von den Mitgliedern des Gerichts hoch geachtet, die ihm bei der Argumentation im Fall Gobitis zuhörten. J.M.:Du fingst 1940 an. Was waren einige der ersten wichtigeren Fälle, die du zu bearbeiten hattest? Ich weiß ein bißchen über einige der Fälle; aber was waren einige der ersten? Die Fahnengrußgeschichten? Covington: Im ersten Fall, wo es um den Fahnengruß ging, arbeitete ich mit Bruder Rutherford zusammen, aber ich hatte nichts mit der Verteidigung vor Gericht zu tun. Bruder Rutherford führte die Verteidigung, und er hat seine Sache gut gemacht. Der Grund, warum der Fall verloren wurde, lag nicht bei Bruder Rutherford, sondern an der Zeit, in der wir lebten. Der Krieg war im Gange, und die Glut traf uns von allen Seiten. J.M.: Dann sammelten sich die Fälle eine Zeitlang auf. Covington: O Gott, ja! Sie erreichten uns schnell und rasant. Ich mußte mit einem Achtzehn-Stunden-Tag fertig werden, aber ich war jung und eifrig bei der Sache, und wir haben jede Gegnerschaft, die wir hatten, überwunden. Ich blieb die ganze Zeit dabei. Ich war glücklich, daß ich es tat. J.M.: Da gibt es einige Dinge, die mir nicht bekannt sind; du kannst mir einiges darüber erzählen. Zum Beispiel weiß ich von dem Fall Harlan in Kentucky, aber was kannst du mir über den Fall Connersville in Indiana sagen? Covington: Nun, das war eine Situation mit einer Pöbelrotte, die entstand, während wir den aufwieglerischen Fall von Verschwörung in Connersville vor Gericht brachten, einem Nest der Tätigkeit der American Legion, und sie beherrschten die ganze Stadt. Im Fall Connersville griff ich auf Bruder Franz als meinem Zeugen zurück, und dann wurde die Jury eingesetzt, und ich mußte unbedingt aus dem Fall herauskommen, und ich beendete meine Beweisführung im Fall in Connersville und versuchte, einen Aufschub in dem Fall in Maine zu erreichen, aber sie wollten ihn nicht verschieben. Daher mußte ich von Indianapolis nach Cincinnati eilen, um das Flugzeug nach Boston zu erreichen, und das rettete mein Leben, weil sie sich an jenem Abend verschworen hatten, mich umzubringen. Ich ging also, um das Flugzeug in Cincinnati aus Connersville heraus zu erreichen, und da blieb Bruder Victor Schmidt -- inzwischen ist er tot --, der als Mitverteidiger bei mir war. Und da fiel der Pöbel über ihn und seine Frau, Schwester Schmidt, her, und als das an dem Abend geschah, in der Dunkelheit, nachdem der Fall vorüber war, kreischte und johlte die Menge, daß sie mich an dem Abend umbringen wollten. Der Herr befreite mich zur rechten Zeit, sonst wäre ich an dem Abend umgebracht worden. Ich wollte noch wegen des Urteils dableiben. Das Urteil ging gegen uns aus, und ich ging in Berufung. Ich mußte noch einmal zurück, um Berufung einzulegen, und dieselbe Gruppe von Verschwörern war da, und ich ging schnell hinein und wieder heraus. Wir machten die Berufung gültig, und der Fall ging in der Berufung für uns aus, aber das war nach einer gewaltigen Anstrengung und einer Menge Blut, Schweiß und Tränen. Es war Teil der Verschwörung, uns in Connersville auszuradieren, aber aufgrund der unverdienten Güte Jehovas gelang ihnen das nicht. Das gute Zeugnis wurde gegeben, aber einige Schwestern wurden der Verschwörung überführt und kamen ins Gefängnis. Ich brachte sie gegen Kaution heraus, und wir gingen vor dem Supreme Court von Indiana in Berufung. Der Berufung wurde stattgegeben, und sie wurden vom Berufungsgericht freigesprochen (Die Entscheidung kam am Jahrestag von Pearl Harbor). J.M.: Mir fiel auf, daß du hier eine Notiz über Oscar Pillars hast, einen Bruder, der in Texas war. Covington: Ja, das war ein Bruder, der unten in Osttexas war, um die gewaltigen Vorurteile in dem Gebiet aufzuzeigen. Der Pöbel stürzte sich buchstäblich auf ihn und hing ihn an einem Leitungsmast auf, und das Seil wurde von den stählernen Haltern, den abgewinkelten Trägern am Leitungsmast, zerschnitten. Das war das, was ihm das Leben rettete. J.M.: Der Fall kam später vor Gericht, und die Personen, die sich des Versuchs schuldig gemacht hatten, ihn durch das Aufhängen umzubringen, flohen in einen anderen Bundesstaat. Nun natürlich dieses Harlan County, Kentucky -- Schwester Murray und ich haben dort drüben in der Nähe von Harlan County gedient, und wir hörten einige interessante Geschichten über Harlan, Kentucky. Covington: Und auch Somerset; Somerset und Harlan waren beide betroffen. J.M.: Was hatten nun die Leute in Harlan gegen die Zeugen? Covington: Dasselbe wie hier. Das war, als der Staatsanwalt sagte, wenn er mich zurück nach Harlan kriegte, würde er mich in Öl sieden. Sie hatten eine Anklage wegen Verschwörung gegen die Brüder, staatsgefährdende Verschwörung. Ich habe dann eine gerichtliche Verfügung gegen die Verfolgung des Falles im Bundesgericht, im London Federal Court, eingereicht. Und ich bekam eine gerichtliche Verfügung gegen den Bundesstaat Kentucky, und die besteht noch heute und wirft das Gesetz gegen Staatsgefährdung als verfassungswidrig um, und die Bundesrichter, die den Fall angehört haben, rehabilitierten uns. Es war ein höchst kontroverser und heißumkämpfter Fall. Was an der Sache interessant war: Der Staatsanwalt sagte, er gründe seine Anklage darauf, daß diese Literatur verschwörerisch und staatsgefährdend sei. Da sagte der vorsitzende Bundesrichter: "Herr Bezirksstaatanwalt, es ist jetzt 11 Uhr. Die Verhandlung wird unterbrochen, und morgen sind Sie mit den Beweisen da." So wurde die Verhandlung unterbrochen, und als er am nächsten Tag wiederkam, hatte er natürlich keine Beweise. Alles, was er hatte, waren alle diese Bücher, und dann machte er die Bemerkung gegenüber den anderen in dem Raum, wenn er Covington in Harlan zu fassen kriege, werde er ihn in Öl sieden. J.M.: Soviel ich weiß, logierten einige der Brüder in dieser Nacht neben seinem Zimmer. Covington: Ja, das taten sie, weil wir alle Hotels in Beschlag genommen hatten, und alle Justizbeamten mußten in Etagenbetten schlafen. J.M.: War das, als sie die ganze Nacht damit verbrachten, die Literatur zu durchsuchen? Covington: Ja, und wo der Sheriff und die Marshals zum alten Daniel Boone Smith sagten, er solle das Licht ausmachen, wir brauchten etwas Schlaf. Oh, das war spaßig. J.M.: Ja, jetzt darüber zu reden, ist spaßig, aber damals war es ganz schön unangenehm. Covington: Ja, unser Leben stand auf dem Spiel. Wenn man mit dem Rücken zur Wand um sich schlägt ... Jehova rehabilitierte uns, aber es war unangenehm. J.M.: Du machst keinen Spaß! Du weißt, es gibt da ein paar Fälle, die du nicht hier hast, die ich aber persönlich kenne. Hast du zum Beispiel in dem Fall Jones gegen O'Blancon gekämpft? Covington: Ja, das war der Fall, dessen sich der Supreme Court annahm und in dem es um die Gültigkeit des Gesetzes über Konzessionssteuern ging. Und der kam aus Alabama. Zuerst haben wir verloren, und das war ein Begleitfall von Jones gegen Opelika, und Jobin gegen Arizona, und von noch jemand anderem gegen den Staat Arkansas. Diese drei Fälle wurden zusammengefaßt, und sie kamen vor den Supreme Court, und dort entschied man zuerst gegen uns. Dann befaßten sie sich nochmals damit und hoben das Urteil auf, aber das kam nicht automatisch. Wir mußten mit dem Rücken zur Wand argumentieren, und das war, als Richter Murphy seine abweichende Meinung in dem Fall zu Protokoll gab; er beklagte sich darüber, daß die Zeugen Jehovas von Pöbelrotten und allen anderen möglichen Verschwörungen verfolgt wurden, die die Beamten angewandt hatten, um ihr Werk aufzuhalten. Das war, als Richter Murphy seine abweichende Meinung zugunsten der Zeugen Jehovas abgab, und dann wurden die anderen Fälle aus Pennsylvania mit einbezogen, und das bedeutete, daß der Fall noch einmal von vorne begonnen werden mußte, weil das eine sehr ernste Frage war, derer sich das Gericht nicht angenommen hatte, und es war auch gut, daß sie die anderen Fälle mit einbezogen hatten, weil der Fall sonst Bestand gehabt hätte und nicht noch einmal wieder aufgerollt worden wäre. J.M.: Wie ich das Gesetz über Konzessionssteuern verstehe, würde eine Gemeinde sagen, um eure Literatur in unserer Stadt zu verkaufen, braucht ihr eine Konzession. Covington: Ja, wenn man kommen und hier Literatur verkaufen wollte, mußte man eine Konzession haben. J.M.: Aber als ihr eine solche Konzession haben wolltet, haben sie euch keine verkauft, weil ihr dafür nicht in Frage kamt. Covington: Wir kamen dafür nicht in Frage. Und so wurden wir strafrechtlich verfolgt, weil wir keine Konzession hatten, aber wir glaubten, daß eine Konzession sowieso gottlos war. Wir hätten die Konzession in keinem Fall bekommen, und wir begründeten unsere Verteidigung damit, daß sie etwas mit Abgaben belegen wollten, was unser verfassungsmäßiges Recht ist, und gegen unser Gewissen. Richter Murphy gab in dem Fall seine abweichende Meinung zu Protokoll. Murphy bekam bei uns einen guten Namen, weil er in verschiedenen Fällen eine abweichende Meinung zu unseren Gunsten hatte. Einige Leute schrieben in der Law Review einen Artikel über ihn, wenn Richter Murphy je heilig gesprochen werde, würden das die Zeugen Jehovas tun, nicht die katholische Kirche. Er war ein notorischer Katholik. J.M.: Merkwürdig, daß er so sehr für das Recht eintrat, wenn er diesen Hintergrund hatte. Covington: Er war sehr für das eingestellt, was wir taten. Und er wußte, daß das Leben im Lande von diesem Erfolg abhing. J.M.: Aber nicht alle Richter waren so. Zum Beispiel Richter Frankfurter. Covington: Oh! Er war ein großer Gegner! Er war so feindselig, wo er doch ein Jude war. Er war in dem Flaggengrußfall und in dem Konzessionssteuerfall gegen uns. J.M.: Ich habe einige seiner Urteile gelesen, und es ist erstaunlich, daß er, aus einer verfolgten, der jüdischen Minderheit kommend, so hart gegenüber den Zeugen war. Covington: Da hast du was gesagt. Er war auch wirklich bösartig. Er versuchte, sich zu rechtfertigen, aber er war wirklich ein Heuchler, und ich denke in dieser Sache, daß er wirklich ein Gegner war. J.M.: Ich möchte auf diesen anderen Punkt zurückkommen. Im Fall Flaxwood, dem ersten, bekamen wir 1940 ein abschlägiges Urteil, und an Flag Day im Jahre 1943 wurde es wieder umgestoßen. Covington: Und der Grund, warum es umgestoßen wurde, war, daß ich eine gerichtliche Verfügung vor den United States District Court im Bezirk West Virginia brachte, um der Erzwingung der Fahnengrußregelung der Staatsflagge Einhalt zu gebieten, die den zwangsweisen Fahnengruß von Kindern in den Schulen verlangte. Ich habe das als verfassungswidrig abgelehnt, und das gab mir die Gelegenheit, das Gericht in die Position zu zwingen, die Sache noch einmal zu entscheiden. Ich brachte die Erzwingung dieser Anordnung vor Gericht, und das gab mir das Recht, die Einsetzung eines sogenannten Judge Statutory Court zu verlangen. Und das gab uns dann automatisch das Recht, direkt vor dem Supreme Court der Vereinigten Staaten Berufung einzulegen. J.M.: Das verstehe ich nicht. Covington: Nun, das ist eine hoch technische Angelegenheit, aber es gab uns eine umgehende, schnelle Entscheidung, und wir brauchten eine schnelle Entscheidung. Als wir diesen Fall vor dem District Court verhandelten, hatte Richter John Jay Parker, der aus North Carolina stammte, den Vorsitz. Dann stand der Generalstaatsanwalt aus West Virginia auf und sagte, es sei nicht nötig, daß ich den Fall verhandelte, denn der Supreme Court der Vereinigten Staaten habe in diesem Fall bereits pro Zeugen Jehovas entschieden. Daher sagte Richter Parker: "Herr Generalstaatsanwalt, wenn sie sich auf den Fall Bobitis stützen, sollten sie den Fall besser verhandeln." Der sagte, es sei nicht nötig, daß er den Fall verhandele. So sagte Richter Parker: "Sie sollten ihn aber besser verhandeln." Er war verblüfft, das hat den Generalstaatsanwalt umgehauen; er wußte nicht, wie er auftreten sollte. J.M.:Ich dachte, der Supreme Court entschied in einer Sache, und das sei die endgültige Entscheidung gewesen. Covington: The Supreme Court kann sich immer selbst revidieren und einen Fall nochmals eröffnen, und genau das hatte ich im Sinn, als ich den Fall einreichte, um ihn anzufechten und noch einmal eröffnet zu bekommen. Und der einzige Weg, es schnell zu bekommen, war der, einen Three Judge Court zu bekommen, und dann konnte ich direkt vor den Supreme Court der Vereinigten Staaten gehen und das dazwischenliegende Berufungsgericht umgehen, und so sind wir die Sache angegangen. J.M.: Das ist interessant. Gab es irgendwelche Anzeichen, daß der Supreme Court bereit gewesen wäre, die Sache nochmals zu verhandeln, oder habt ihr das nur geglaubt? Covington: Ich hatte keine Insiderinformation darüber, weil aus dem Gericht nie etwas nach außen gelangt. Ich wußte das, als Roy Gamble (der ein Zeuge Jehovas war), der Richter Murphy in Lansing, Michigan, als Künstler gemalt hatte (er malte ein Bild, das im Capitol in Lansing hängen sollte), sagte, Richter Murphy habe das ihm, Roy Gamble, gesagt, der sich über die Gegnerschaft beklagte, der Jehovas Zeugen dort ausgesetzt waren. Frank Murphy sagte zu ihm: "Ich weiß das, eines Tages werden wir etwas dagegen unternehmen." J.M.: Jetzt möchte ich dich einmal etwas über die Gesetze gegen Volksverhetzung fragen, weil einige meiner Freunde von diesen Gesetzen betroffen waren, insbesondere unten in Mississippi. Covington: Den Fall in Mississippi brachten wir zusammen mit dem zweiten Flaggengrußfall, West Virginia Board of Education gegen Barnett, vor den Supreme Court der Vereinigten Staaten. Ich nahm mich des Falles in Mississippi wegen der Volksverhetzung, basierend auf der Weigerung, an und erklärte, daß der Grund für unsere Weigerung, die Fahne zu grüßen, in der Literatur stand, die verteilt wurde, und genau das hätten die Brüder getan, nämlich Literatur herauszubringen, die erklärte, warum Jehovas Zeugen nicht die Fahne grüßen. Und dann wurden sie der Verletzung des Gesetzes gegen aufrührerische Verschwörung in Mississippi angeklagt. Das war der Fall, den wir zusammen mit der Wiederaufnahme des Flaggenfalles in West Virginia vorbrachten. Sie wurden alle im Gericht zur selben Zeit koordiniert, und nur Jehova konnte das tun. J.M.: Die Zeitungen meinten, das war ein großer Tag für Jehovas Zeugen. Covington: Das war das, was Richter Waite sagte; daß es ein großer Tag für Jehovas Zeugen war, als sie am Flaggentag 1943 diese Urteile verkündeten. Richter Waite schrieb den Artikel mit der Überschrift Verfassungsmäßige Schuld des amerikanischen Volkes gegenüber Jehovas Zeugen, einen langen Artikel in der Minnesota Law Review, der etwa vierzig Seiten Umfang hatte. Er berichtet ausführlich über die Urteile, die an diesem Tag verkündet wurden; darunter der revidierte Fall Jones gegen Opelika und der Fall in Mississippi, verkündet und revidiert vom Supreme Court of Mississippi. Du siehst, es war ein großer Tag für uns! Das wendete das Blatt. Dann änderte sich die Publicity in die andere Richtung. Die Zeitungen im ganzen Land waren sehr gegnerisch gegen Jehovas Zeugen eingestellt gewesen, und dann bekamen sie von uns eine richtige Abreibung, und da wurden sie sanft. J.M.: Es war so, als ob Jehova diese Leute eine Flut von Widrigkeiten schlucken ließ. Es wird schon spät, aber ich erinnere mich noch an ein paar weitere Fälle. Da gibt es einen, der mich betraf, du kennst den nicht, der mich betraf; da gab es diese Fälle von Einberufung. Covington: Ich war an den Einberufungsverfahren sehr beteiligt, weil ich mit all den Militärbehörden in Washington zusammenkommen mußte, als sie überlegten, ob Jehovas Zeugen unter dem Gesetz als Religionsdiener von einer Einberufung ausgenommen werden dürften und ob sie berechtigt seien, den Dienst aus Gewissengründen zu verweigern. Da war ein großer Raum voller Leute, die die Einberufungsfälle verwalteten. Und in dieser Gruppe war General Louis B. Hershey. J.M.: Wenn man über die Sache liest, kommt man zu der Meinung, er sei mehr oder weniger dafür gewesen, eine Verweigerung aus Gewissensgründen zuzulassen. Covington: Er war dafür, uns die Chance zu geben; er war wirklich ein ehrenwerter Mann, ein Mann von Redlichkeit. Ich mochte ihn sehr. Er starb vor etwa drei Jahren in Indiana, auf dem Lande. Er war ein Experte für Einberufungen, der beste auf der Welt. Darum hat ihm Roosevelt auch die Verantwortung für die Einberufungsbehörden übertragen. Er war ein altmodischer Typ Mensch, aber sehr brillant, scharfsinnig und schnell. Er verteidigte sich sehr gut vor dem Kongreß, und er war aufrichtig und fair, wenn er mit Jehovas Zeugen zu tun hatte. Er stimmte gewissen Forderungen von unserer Seite zu, und ich sagte, um den Rest müßten wir wohl kämpfen. Murray's wife: Ich nehme an, sie wurden sehr emotional und patriotisch. Covington: O ja. Aber weißt du, sie waren auch sehr kaltblütig, diese Militärs. Für die ist das wie das Schneiden von Fleisch. Sie waren sehr gelassen. J.M.: Ja, für sie war das alles nur Menschenmaterial. Wie viele unserer Brüder fanden sich während des Krieges schließlich im Gefängnis wieder? Covington: Etwa 2.500 kamen während des Krieges ins Gefängnis, aber wir erreichten, daß eine ganze Menge draußen blieben. Wir hatten eine gewaltige Zahl von Fällen, die aufgenommen wurden und bei denen wir unter dem Gesetz über Einberufungen vor Gericht Berufung einlegten, und es gab einen großen Tag, als sich das Blatt im Supreme Court in den Einberufungsfällen wendete; drei oder vier von ihnen wurden zusammengefaßt, und ich verhandelte sie. J.M.: Ich erinnere mich. Das war in den frühen 50er Jahren, nicht wahr? Covington: Wir verloren den Fileboatfall; das war der erste Einberufungsfall, und sie entschieden gegen uns, weil wir unsere Möglichkeiten nicht erschöpft hatten, in Berufung zu gehen. Im Rahmen des Einberufungsgesetzes wurde Berufung eingelegt; sie glaubten, daß man die Leute zum zweiten Mal körperlich untersuchen sollte. Und das war nicht nötig, weil die erste körperliche Untersuchung genügte, um die physische Eignung für eine Einberufung festzustellen. Sie waren der Ansicht, daß es notwendig sei, daß sie zurückgehen und sich zum zweiten Mal untersuchen lassen sollten, und ich argumentierte, dies sei unnötig, unvernünftig, willkürlich und nur einer Laune folgend, um in den Vorteil des Gesetzes zu kommen. Frankfurter war total gegen uns, und das war auch eine große Zahl der anderen Richter, aber am Ende gewannen wir diese Einberufungsfälle in der zweiten Runde. Wir begründeten das Recht, zu unserer Verteidigung als Religionsdiener gehört zu werden. Zuerst glaubten sie, wir hätten nicht einmal das Recht, uns zu verteidigen, und dann war es die Geschichte, weil die Männer sich nicht ein zweites Mal hatten untersuchen lassen, was, so in meinem Plädoyer vor Gericht, nicht nötig war, weil die Eignung schon bei der ersten körperlichen Untersuchung feststand. J.M.: Das ist das, was begründet war, als ich 1957 daherkam. Zu der Zeit stand ich noch nicht im Pionierdienst, aber ich sagte ihnen nur, daß ich Zeuge Jehovas sei, und automatisch erkannten sie meine Verweigerung aus Gewissensgründen an. Covington: Wir hatten eine Menge Schwierigkeiten, das zu etablieren, aber am Ende behielten wir die Oberhand. Jehova gab uns den Sieg in diesen Fällen. Nicht alle von uns wurden ohne Schwierigkeiten zurückgestellt, aber am Ende gewannen wir schließlich in den Einberufungsfällen. Wir erhielten das Urteil des Supreme Court mit dem Recht, im Falle von Louis Dabney Smith, der jetzt Kreisaufseher hier in der Gegend ist, eine Verteidigung vorzunehmen. William Esteph, der andere, kam aus Pittsburgh, und Smith kam aus South Carolina. Smith hatte einen interessanten Fall, weil sein Vater ihn kidnappen ließ. Sein Vater brachte die Polizei dazu, ihn von zu Hause zu entführen, und dann nahm er ihn mit Gewalt zum Einberufungsbüro. Der Mann wußte, daß sein Sohn nicht vorhatte, sich dort blicken zu lassen, so nahm er ihn mit Gewalt dorthin mit. Louis war da, und dann mußte ich Klage erheben, um ihn aus der Armee herauszubekommen. Wir drehten uns in seinem wie in den anderen Fällen im Kreis. Diese Einberufungssache war eine große Schlacht. Für jeden Schlag gaben wir ihnen die Quittung. Allmählich waren sie bereit, mich unter Anklage zu stellen, sieht du. Ja, das waren sie wirklich. J.M.:Sie wollten dich also einsperren. Covington: Als sie mir das erzählten, sagte ich: "Sie kennen meine Anschrift." J.M.: Sie wußten, wo sie dich kriegen konnten. Hattest du auch mit den kanadischen Problemen zu tun? Covington: O ja, eine Menge sogar. Ich verbrachte damals viel Zeit in Kanada. Da war so eine Situation in Quebec, die war sehr schlimm, und ich arbeitete sehr eng mit Bruder Hal zusammen. Ich brauchte ihn in den Fällen dort, weil ich in den Fällen in Kanada nicht plädieren konnte. Ich arbeitete mit ihm, und er war mein alter ego. Wir haben ihnen in Kanada ordentlich eingeheizt. Tatsächlich erzielten wir sehr gute Ergebnisse im kanadischen Supreme Court. Wir machten uns an die Fälle von Volksverhetzung, die gegen Jehovas Zeugen vorgebracht wurden. Und in einer großen Anzahl von Fällen war der Supreme Court in Kanada gespalten; und jedenfalls, das Gericht urteilte zu unseren Gunsten, ein gespaltenes Urteil, ehe sie sich zu unseren Gunsten aussprachen, und es war ein sehr gutes Urteil, das sie in Kanada sprachen. Kanada gründet sich auf dem Gewohnheitsrecht. Wir gingen dorthin unter dem Gesetz der Anbetungsfreiheit in Quebec. Wir machten zum ersten Mal in der Geschichte davon Gebrauch; es war eigentlich für die katholische Kirche aufgesetzt. Sie brauchte sich nie auf dieses Gesetz zu berufen, aber wir machten im Fall Laurent Samour erfolgreich Gebrauch davon. Im Fall Laurent Samour ging es um das Zeugnisgeben. Der andere Fall betraf den Bruder, der ein Restaurant betrieb, und auch diesen Fall gewannen wir. Sie versuchten, ihn in den Bankrott zu treiben, weil er Schuldscheine für die Brüder unterschrieb. Bruder Frank Boccerelli betrieb das Restaurant. Er war ein sehr feiner Bruder. Er ergriff sehr mutig Partei für Jehova und heizte Duplessis richtig ein, und wir heizten Duplessis im Gericht ebenfalls gut ein. J.M.: Er sagte: "Ich bin das Gesetz." Covington: Ja, so dachte er. Duplessis war ein hinterhältiger Kerl. Bruder Franz und ich leisteten dort im Fall Laurent Samour vor Gericht unsere Zeugenaussage, und dann ging es durch die Berufungsgerichte, und ich war anwesend, als wir in dem Fall plädierten. Der Fall kam auch vor den Supreme Court of Canada (doch Glen Howe argumentierte sehr gut und fähig in dem Fall), wir arbeiteten sehr gut zusammen. Schließlich rehabilitierte Jehova sein Volk und seinen Namen in Kanada in sehr großem Maße, und ich habe hier ein Buch mit dem Titel Jehovah's Witnesses in Canada, Champions of Freedom of Speech and Worship von M. James Penton. Es ist ein dickes Buch, mehre hundert Seiten Umfang, dreihundertsechsundachtzig Seiten, und man bezog sich darauf in einer ganzen Reihe von Fällen in Kanada und anderswo. Es handelt vom Kampf in Quebec, vom Zweiten Weltkrieg und von unserer Weigerung, Blut zu uns zu nehmen. Weißt du, wir hatten da in Kanada auch Fälle, wo es um Blut ging, und es berichtet vom Sieg in den Gerichten in Kanada, wo es um Einberufungen ging, und ich vertrat Leo Greenlees, der zur leitenden Körperschaft gehört, vor Gericht in Toronto. Das war in den 40er Jahren. Hier heißt es, daß der Fall von Leo in den 40er Jahren stattfand. "Percy Chapmann und Hayden C. Covington, der amerikanische Rechtsberater für die beiden Gesellschaften, besuchten den Justizminister, St. Laurent, um zu fordern, daß das Verbot dieser Organisationen aufgehoben werde." Percy und ich gingen zu St. Laurent, der der verantwortliche Justizminister in Kanada war. Und auf Seite 161 wird darauf hingewiesen daß MacKenzie King der Premierminister war, und der Premierminister ließ das Verbot danach aufheben. Aber es war eine heiße Zeit in Kanada, ein schlimmes Land. Da gab es viel Verfolgung, und jetzt ist es ein Ort, wo das Volk der Herrn gedeiht. J.M.: Die Dinge haben sich doch wirklich verändert, oder? Wir mußten erst die Mauer einreißen. Als du beispielsweise vor Gericht gingst, in dem Fahnengrußfall, und dann vor dem Supreme Court warst, da muß es um eine gewaltige Menge Geld gegangen sein. Covington: Naja, dem Herrn gehört das Vieh auf allen Weiden, und er kann es sich leisten. J.M.: Du bekommst also immer noch Bezahlung, wenn ein Fall gewonnen wird? Covington: Manchmal bekommt man seine Kosten zurück, und manchmal nicht. Wenn Uncle Sam oder der Staat betroffen ist, bekommt man nichts zurück. Aber in Kanada haben wir alles zurückerhalten. Mein Gott, ja, das war leicht!. Aber in den Vereinigten Staaten bekommt man nichts aus Uncle Sam heraus. J.M.: Du hattest einmal die Gelegenheit, den alten Harry Truman zu sehen. Covington: O ja, sicher. Den alten Harry Truman. Murray, das war ein großartiger Kerl. Ein heißes Eisen. Wir haben Harry besucht, weil wir versuchten, eine Amnestie für die Jehovas Zeugen zu erhalten, die unter dem Einberufungsgesetz verurteil worden waren; er als Präsident der Vereinigten Staaten möge die Sache überdenken und gewähren. Es ist nicht leicht, zum Präsidenten zu gelangen, aber Harry war zugänglich. Ich kannte seinen Nachbarn nebenan, Jim Blair, der Gouverneur von Missouri war und der im ersten Einberufungsfall unten in Texas auf meiner Seite war. Als wir die Sache in Angriff nahmen, kam ich mit Jim Blair in Berührung, und er kam nach Washington, um einen Termin mit dem Weißen Haus zu vereinbaren. Und Jim, ich und Bruder Knorr wollten, daß Bruder Kennedy mitkam, weil er in der Armee war. Das machte auf Harry nicht den geringsten Eindruck. Wir gingen hin und sahen Harry Truman im Weißen Haus, im Oval Office, und jetzt erzähle ich es genauso, wie es ist, und wenn du es zensieren willst, dann los. Wir gingen hinein, um Seine Ehren zu sehen, den hohen Herrn, und Jim Blair war im Oval Office, und er fand heraus, worum es ging. Der alte Harry hat es herausgefunden, und er schlug mit der Faust auf den Schreibtisch und zerbrach den präsidialen Schreibtisch fast. Er sagte: "Ich will Ihnen sagen, daß ich nicht den geringsten gottverdammten Gebrauch von diesem Dreckskerl machen möchte, der in Kriegszeiten nicht für sein Land sterben will", und dann warf Jim Blair seine Hände in die Höhe und sagte: "Oh, Mr. President, Mr. President!" So stieg Harry von seinem hohen Roß herunter, als wir ihm die Sache vorgelegt hatten, und aus seiner Wut heraus sagte er: "Nun, ich werde die Sache an meinen Generalstaatsanwalt weitergeben". Das war Tom Clark, den ich kannte, und der zufällig aus Texas stammte. Der gute alte Tom wurde später in den Supreme Court der Vereinigten Staaten berufen, von Harry Truman. Und nachdem Tom Clark ernannt worden war, erließ er in einigen unserer Fälle für uns günstige Urteile. Nicht, weil wir Einfluß besaßen, sondern weil wir im Recht waren. J.M.: Das war ein ehrenwerter Mann. Covington: O ja, das war er, und eigentlich war sein Sohn, der Generalstaatsanwalt, ein recht liberaler Typ. Sein Sohn war bekannt für seine Liberalität. Es überraschte jeden und ärgerte Clark, aber Clark erwies sich als sehr feiner Richter. J.M.: Erstaunlich, einige dieser Männer hatten doch Charakter; wie Murphy und Stone. Covington: Oh ja, dieser Murphy! Er war der großartigste Kerl. J.M.: Die hatten Charakter, die traten für das ein, was ihrer Meinung nach richtig war. Covington: Ja wirklich, der gute alte Frank Murphy, wenn du sein abweichendes Urteil liest, das er in diesem Sorgerechtsfall schrieb ... dem Fall Prince (Prince gegen Mass.). Das ist eine beredte Sache, und er erhob gegen den Rest von ihnen allen die Fäuste zählte auf, wie schrecklich Jehovas Zeugen verfolgt worden waren. Er war ein gerecht gesonnener Mann. J.M.: Eine interessante Sache, diese ganze Politik. Es gibt da etwas, das ich gerne wissen möchte. Du hattest beispielsweise nur etwa drei Jahre lang die Möglichkeit, enger mit Bruder Rutherford zusammenzuarbeiten, weil er 1942 starb. Covington: Das stimmt, Ich arbeitete mit ihm von 1939 bis 1942 zusammen. Ich war 1939 da, und wir waren sehr, sehr eng zusammen. Wir mußten das sein wegen der Dinge, an denen wir zusammen arbeiteten, und ich begann mit ihm am Flaggenschriftsatz, im Fall Gobitis in San Diego, das war dort, wo wir unsere Mandate zusammenlegten, in San Diego. Und er war wortgewandt! J.M.: Ja, das stimmt, er war sehr wortgewaltig. War er denn auch im wirklichen Leben so? Covington: Ja, das war er. Er hatte auch sehr viel Sinn für Humor, und er konnte auch sehr ausrasten! Doch das ist nur menschlich. Aber ich mochte ihn von ganzem Herzen, und ich hatte überhaupt keine Angst vor ihm. J.M.: Einige Leute haben ihn wohl wegen der Autorität, die er darstellte, gefürchtet? Covington: Naja, das mag so sein, aber er war doch ein großer Mensch. Wenn er etwas verkehrt machte, machte er es auch wieder gut. Murray's wife: Weißt du, wie Bruder Rutherford zur Wahrheit kam? Covington: Er war in seiner Jugend Büchervertreter; er hat Bücher verkauft. Er ging so in Missouri umher und rutschte aus und fiel durch Eis. Er zog sich eine Lungenentzündung zu. Er dachte, er müßte sterben und betete zum Herrn, wenn er wieder gesund würde, würde er nie einen Büchervertreter abweisen. Er war in seinem Büro und hörte, wie sein Sekretär einen Büchervertreter aus dem Büro jagte. Er lief zur Tür hinaus und machte ihn fertig, weil er den Büchervertreter hinausgeworfen hatte. Der stellte sich als ein Zeuge Jehovas mit Pastor Russells Büchern heraus. Murray's wife: Ich hörte, daß es eine Schwester war. Covington: Und danach hat er sich so sehr auf das eingelassen, was er las, ebenso wie ich es tat, als ich den Richter reden hörte; er las Pastor Russell und strebte mit vollen Segeln nach dem, was Bruder Russell tat, und er tat es ohne jede Einschränkung. Dann wurde Bruder Russell wegen seiner Frau der Prozeß gemacht. Das Verfahren mit der Scheidung und die Geschichte mit dem Wunderweizen und so etwas alles. Bruder Russell brauchte jemanden, der ihn vertrat, und er bat Bruder Rutherford, zu kommen und ihn in diesen Dingen zu vertreten. J.M.: Rutherford kam später ins Gefängnis, aber es war nichts an dem Prozeß und der Verhaftung dran. Er wurde niemals einer Straftat überführt. Covington: Seine Verurteilung wurde aufgehoben, und damit hatte er wieder eine weiße Weste. Die Verurteilungen waren sowieso bösartige Strafverfolgung. Der 24. Mai 1919 war der Tag, an dem er zum Supreme Court zugelassen wurde, und das ist dasselbe Jahr, in dem er zur Anwaltskammer des Bundesstaates New York zugelassen wurde. Und danach wurde er Rechtsberater für Pastor Russell. Pastor Russell starb im Zug in Texas, und danach gab es in der Organisation einen großen Krach, aber das ist Geschichte. Mir ist das nicht allzu klar. Du weißt darüber soviel wie ich, wenn du dir die Aufzeichnungen herausholst und sie liest. J.M.: Er war also ein wirklich guter Anwalt? Covington: O ja, mach dir darüber über später nichts vor. Bruder Rutherford mußte von der starken Kälte im Osten in den Wintern wegkommen. Er hatte eine kollabierende Lunge, und es bestand die Gefahr, daß er sich als Spätfolge der Erfahrung, als er in Missouri ins Wasser fiel und fast erfror, eine Lungenentzündung zuzog. Erinnere dich daran, daß er sagte, er werde keinen Büchervertreter aus seinem Büro weisen. Als Rutherford hinter Gittern war, legte er seine Hände um die Gitterstäbe und sagte zu Jehova: "Wenn du mich hier herausholst, dann werde ich der alten Hure [der katholischen Kirche] die schlimmste Abreibung verpassen, die sie je hatte . . .", und er weihte sein ganzes Leben, sein verbleibendes Leben, diesem Streben. Murray's wife: Das tat er; er hat es ihr wirklich gegeben! J.M.: Du kamst hierher nach San Diego. Warst du bei ihm, als er starb? Covington: Ja. Er starb in San Diego, weil er in Indiana an einem Darmkrebs operiert wurde . . . Krebs frißt einen auf, und er begann allmählich, seinen Körper aufzuzehren, so daß er nur noch wenig wog; und er rief Bruder Knorr und Bruder Franz und mich herauf nach San Diego. Wir fuhren mit dem Santa Fe-Zug, und wir kamen, um ihn zu sehen, und er wußte, daß er im Sterben lag, und er war überhaupt nicht rührselig ... er wußte, daß er nicht mehr sehr lange zu leben hatte. So legte er uns allen die Hände auf den Kopf und bat uns, immer zusammenzuhalten. Das war, als ich diese Erklärung abgab, die Fred Franz auf dem Kongreß in Cincinnati anführte. Wir haben ihn alle Pap genannt, abgekürzt für Papi; er war wirklich unser Vater, natürlich nicht unser leiblicher Vater, aber wegen seines Alters durfte er uns Befehle erteilen. So sagte ich zu ihm: "Nun, Pap, wir werden sie zusammen bekämpfen, bis in der Hölle das Feuer ausgeht." Als wir auf dem Kongreß in Cincinnati waren, erzählte Fred Franz den Brüdern von diesem Zitat, das ich auch so meinte. Es war, als ob wir uns auf dünnem Eis bewegten. Der Herr wird es so machen. J.M.: Was geschah mit der Leiche; wollte er in San Diego begraben sein? Covington: Er wollte eigentlich nirgendwo beerdigt werden, aber nun mußte es sein. Er wußte, daß er im Sterben lag und begraben werden mußte. Er war vernünftig genug, zu wissen, daß er nicht seine Knochen den ganzen Weg zurück nach Brooklyn zurückbefördert haben wollte. So schlug er uns vor, wenn die Zeit für sein Begräbnis käme, daß er dort draußen begraben werden wollte. Wir versuchten, ihn draußen auf dem Grundstück von Beth Sarim zu beerdigen. Das war ein großes Grundstück hinter dem Haus, es ging hinunter bis zur Montezuma Road, und dann hatte auch Bruder Heath das große Haus auf der anderen Straßenseite, für dessen Erbauung ihm seine Mutter Geld gegeben hatte. Es würde eine halbe Million oder noch mehr Dollar kosten, das heute noch einmal wieder genauso aufzubauen. Wir versuchten, ihn auf dem Grundstück zu beerdigen, aber der Rat in San Diego wies uns ab. Sie wollten nicht, daß er irgendwo dort draußen begraben würde; da draußen gab es so viel Feindseligkeit und Haß gegen den Richter. Die Behörden wiesen uns bei jedem erneuten Antrag ab. Dann erhob ich vor Gericht in San Diego Klage, um sie zu zwingen, uns ihn auf dem Grundstück begraben zu lassen. Richter Mundo, Richter am Superior Court, hörte davon und schob uns den Schwarzen Peter zu, er sprang von einer Sache zur anderen, von einer Spitzfindigkeit zu einer anderen. Schließlich sahen wir, Bill, Bonnie und Nathan und alle anderen, die Sache vernünftig an und beschlossen, wir hätten genug darum gekämpft und es sehe so aus, als wolle der Herr, daß wir die Leiche zurück nach Brooklyn brachten und ihn auf Staten Island beerdigten, was wir dann auch taten. So waren Bill und Bonnie mit seiner Leiche im Zug. Und Fred, Nathan und ich waren bereits zurückgekommen und arbeiteten. Ich versuchte, ihn durch ein rechtliches Mandat unter die Erde zu bekommen, und das konnten wir nicht erreichen, und wir konnten nichts anderes tun. Und dann taten wir es, und das war das Ende der Sache. Er lachte wohl vom Himmel herunter, wie wir herumhuschten und versuchten, ihn begraben zu bekommen. J.M.: Er war wahrscheinlich zufrieden damit, daß ihr euch schließlich entschlossen habt, der Sache ihren Lauf zu lassen! "Habe ich den Leuten denn nichts beigebracht?" Er konnte wahrscheinlich nicht sehen, wie das eine Verbindung zu irgend etwas hatte. Weil ihr den Mann liebtet, war es so wichtig für euch. Covington: Wir wollten seinen Willen so gut erfüllen, wie wir es konnten; nicht seinen Willen, sondern Jehovas Willen, und er mußte ja irgendwo begraben werden. Es war nicht vernünftig, ihn durch das ganze Land zu transportieren, doch schließlich mußten wir es tun. Murray's wife: Und wie lange dauerte das mit dem Zug? Covington: Etwa zweieinhalb bis drei Tage. Zweieinhalb Tage von San Diego, und ich unternahm diese Reise sehr oft. Von New York bis San Diego braucht man im Luxuszug zweieinhalb Tage. Natürlich fuhren wir in einem solchen Zug. Wir fuhren 1. Klasse; Bruder Rutherford sagte einmal zu mir: "Ich möchte, daß ihr immer, wenn ihr verreist, die 1. Klasse nehmt." Und das tat ich, Bruder Heath tat es, Nathan Knorr tat es und Freddy Franz auch, unsere ganze Gruppe tat es. Murray's wife: Naja, ihr brauchtet eure Ruhe, und es war komfortabler. Covington: Es ging nicht um Komfort, aber wir hatten das Recht dazu: ein Arbeiter ist seines Lohnes wert. J.M.: In all den Jahren brachtet ihr Fälle vor Gericht, bei denen ihr Jehovas Hand sehen konntet und wie Jehova eine Mauer um sein Volk herum errichtete. Und die Mauer ist immer noch da, solange wir sie nicht mißbrauchen, und das Gesetz wird uns beschützen. Covington: Ja, richtig! Solange wir nicht unseren Fuß zwischen die Tür setzen. So kann ich das gut ausdrücken. Das wäre ein Mißbrauch, und ich denke nicht, daß die meisten von uns das jemals tun werden. Und ich bin sicher, daß Jehova auf all unseren Wegen mit uns ist. Das ist keine Frage; dies ist Jehovas Organisation. Wie Petrus sagte: Wenn wir dahin gehen, wo der Herr ist, gibt es kein Problem. J.M.: Es ist gut, daß du wirklich in diesem Krieg tätig gewesen bist. Paulus spricht über diese geistige Kriegsführung. Dieser geistige Krieg geht schon lange so, und manchmal ist es schwierig gewesen, sich daran zu erinnern, daß wir nicht gegen Menschen und ihre Statuten kämpfen, so sehr haben wir gegen die unsichtbaren Geister hinter den Menschen gekämpft. Covington: Ja, das ist richtig; das war auch immer meine Überzeugung. Wie Paulus das in einer Bibelstelle sagt. Wo steht das, wo er sagt, er sei überzeugt, daß uns nichts von seiner Liebe zu trennen vermag? Murray's wife: Ich glaube, das steht im Römerbrief, am Ende des siebten Kapitels. Ich glaube, es war das siebte oder achte Kapitel des Römerbriefes. J.M.: In Epheser 6: 10 spricht er über den Kampf gegen die bösen Mächte. Murray's wife: Kapitel acht, am Ende von Kapitel acht. Covington: Ja, hier ist es, ich habe es unterstrichen. J.M.: "Denn ich bin überzeugt, daß weder Tod noch Leben, noch Engel, noch Regierungen, noch Gegenwärtiges, noch Zukünftiges, noch Mächte, noch Höhe, noch Tiefe, noch irgendeine andere Schöpfung imstande sein wird, uns von Gottes Liebe zu trennen, die in Christus Jesus ist, unserem Herrn." Wenn man daher nicht von Jehova unterstützt würde, wäre man nicht in der Lage, dämonische Mächte zu überlisten. Covington: O nein; und wir wissen, daß wir nicht gegen Fleisch und Blut kämpfen, sondern gegen die Dämonen, und das ist das, was man allzeit im Sinn behalten muß. Wenn man das nicht tut, geht man sicher verloren. Und man muß anerkennen, daß wir bei den Mächten gegen uns ohne die Hilfe, die Jehova uns gewährt, so gut wie tot sind. Murray's wife: Das hilft uns so sehr, uns davon abzuhalten, Menschen zu hassen, weil wir wissen, daß es nun mal Menschen sind. Covington: Ja, das stimmt, sie sind bloß Schachfiguren in der Hand des Teufels. J.M.: Selbst jemand, der Jehovas Zeugen so sehr ablehnte wie der alte Frankfurter. Covington: Er war eine Schachfigur in der Hand des Teufels. Und schließlich nimmt es Jehova ihnen nicht übel. Die Hauptsache ist, daß wir weitermachen und nie das Handtuch werfen. Das ist meine Philosophie. Murray's wife: Es hat mir Mut gemacht, einfach einmal deinen Erfahrungen zuzuhören, und dich reden zu hören, hat mich inspiriert. Ich bin die sehr dankbar dafür.