The History of the German Section of the Theosophical Society 1902-1913

GA 250 — 23 October 1904, Berlin

14. Protocol of the Annual Meeting of the German Theosophical Society (DTG)

The annual meeting was opened at around half past three by the First Chairman, Dr. Rudolf Steiner. After reading the minutes of the previous year's annual meeting, to which no objections were raised, Dr. Steiner took the floor again to give a brief review of the year's events. He gave a brief summary of the following:

Relocation of lectures from Wilhelmstr. 118 to the architects' house. The rooms are more pleasant and more worthy of the Theosophical cause. Nevertheless, there has been no increase in attendance.

Monday members' evenings: the Monday meetings would like to develop into real members' evenings, at which there should be lively discussion and real interaction between members.

Visit and lecture by Mrs. Annie Besant: “What has been said here is to be understood as a kind of business report, because the Theosophist cannot speak of success or non-success, cannot merely focus on the increase in membership. The Berlin audience has responded in various ways to this significant rally. I would like to report on just one fact that will show, in a flash, how the Theosophical movement is viewed in many significant places in Berlin. The chairman of the Giordano Bruno League, Mr. Wolfgang Kirchbach, took a stand against Theosophy in his lecture introducing the winter of 1904/5, which is characterized in the League's communications with the following words: [gap in the transcript]

These words show very clearly how little one knows about Theosophy and how reluctant one is to deal with its teachings. However, one would not be mistaken in assuming that this statement characterizes the position of the leaders almost without exception, but not that of the members.

Ms. von Sivers then reported on membership trends. Despite a great deal of activity, the number of members in the branch has grown relatively little. Last year, the Berlin branch had 58 members. Today, the number of members is 88, so there has been an increase of 30 members (14 women, 16 men).

This was followed by the cash report by Fräulein von Rosen. On [gap in transcript] 1903, the Berlin branch had a balance of 576.67 marks. The cash balance on October 20, 1904, was 653 marks, which is 76.33 marks more.

The income consists of:
Cash balance 1903: 576.67 Marks
Membership fees: 626.45 Marks
[Gap in the transcript): 691.56 Marks
Total: 1894.68 Marks Expenses amounted to 1241.68 Marks,
therefore cash balance as of October 20, 1904: 653 Marks.

Last year, the library's cash balance was...

received in lending fees: Mark...
received in subscriptions: Mark...
together
[numbers missing from transcript] Spent: 1. for renting the room: 300 Marks
2. book purchases: 218.66 Marks
[so together 518.66 marks]

Therefore, this year a shortfall of 124.15 marks.

It should be noted that the rent is paid until May 1905, when the shortfall would be only 24.14 marks as of October 1.

Account of the lecture by Mrs. Annie Besant. When Miss von Sivers wanted to hand in the account, the chairman Dr. Steiner noted that this was a matter for the Section, because Mrs. Annie Besant had donated the proceeds to the Section treasury.

This concluded the reports.

In response to Dr. Steiner's question as to whether there were any comments or questions to be made about the reports, Mr. Krojanker requested the floor and asked the following question regarding the library: “Who owns the library? The Berlin branch, the German Section or someone else?” To which Dr. Steiner replied: “The library is a separate entity and was originally founded as a kind of annex to the ‘German Theosophical Society’. Then a library fund was formed from voluntary donations and from the proceeds of a lecture by Emanuel Reicher, and at the same time the library was emancipated from the DTG. Supervision, administration and ownership were transferred to a committee. The Berlin branch has neither income nor expenses related to the library. The library was given to us privately. I would have put things in order, but I was unable to find a way and an authority or agency to deal with."

Julius Engel added the following to this report: ”Originally, the library belonged to the DTG; then came Emanuel Reicher, from whose lecture the library received a large sum of money. Since Reicher did not want to join the Theosophical Society and did not want to give lectures in favor of the library under the name of a Theosophical library, the name of the library was changed to: “Library for Comparative Religious Studies” and the ownership and administration was transferred to a commission that at that time consisted of Count and Countess Brockdorff, Krecke, Reicher, Hübbe-Schleiden."

Miss Motzkus also noted that the room for the library had been rented in order to have a home of their own. Miss von Sivers replied, “Yes, if we had our own headquarters, that would be possible, but not if we were in private rooms.”

Finally, the assembly agreed to appoint a commission to examine the facts and documents, after whose report further steps would be taken.

The following were elected to the examination commission: Mr. Krojanker, Mr. Engel, Mr. [Quaas.

Furthermore, Mr. Krojanker proposed: to award Dr. Rudolf Steiner 300 marks for the lectures he gave in the past year (1903). After Dr. Steiner had handed over the chair to the second chair, Miss von Sivers, because it was a personal matter for him, he took the floor to speak about this request as follows: “It would be more in line with the theosophical way of thinking if you did not provide the amount as a fee for lectures, but perhaps for the purpose of being able to do more effective propaganda for Theosophy, so that if something should be done sometimes, I would have 40 to 50 marks at my disposal without having to be given special compensation for it. Besides, I also have concerns of principle. It is common practice in the Theosophical Society that the most important officials, but especially those who work for the content of the movement (speakers, general secretaries), are not actually remunerated by the Society or the branches. For these reasons, I cannot accept a fee for the lectures.

Hlerr] Werner: “Little is known about our society; much more extensive propaganda should be carried out. If you want to accommodate the chairman with good advice, then that is small-minded. Dr. Steiner's work should not be paid for at all. [illegible] You must not curtail his wings in any way, and therefore I request that the chairman be given a free hand with regard to propaganda and financial matters.

Mr. Krojanker replied that there was a misunderstanding here. Nobody wanted to tie Dr. Steiner down, but rather to free him from the burden of subordinate work and to enable him to dispose of limited amounts of money more freely.

Elections:

Board: Mr. Kiem is unanimously elected to the board in place of the previous treasurer, Miss von Rosen; Miss Schwiebs is elected as a trusted representative in place of Baron von Reisner, who is ill.

Executive Committee: Baron von Reisner is replaced by Miss Frölich. The committee itself elects its chair and secretary. Mr. Krojanker will convene the first meeting.

Auditors: The following were appointed as auditors: Mr. Tessmar, auditor, and Mr. Georgi. The following were elected as delegates to the General Assembly of the German Section: Mr. Kiem, Mr. Krojanker and Mr. Seiler, in addition to the First Chairman, Dr. Steiner, and the Second Chairman, Miss von Sivers.

Book sale: The ladies Frölich, Mücke, [Voigt] agreed to help out.

Proposal for the section's general assembly:

Since Mrs. von Holten has resigned from her post as treasurer, a new treasurer must be elected. The Berlin branch proposes: Miss von Sivers as cashier, Mr. Seiler to keep the books.

Dr. Steiner then took the floor again to explain his position in more detail: “The Theosophical Society,” he continued, “is not in the same position as any other society with regard to such matters. Another society would be able to accept Krojanker's proposal. But with the Theosophical Society it is necessary to note the following: we are dealing with two different things; we have to distinguish between the Theosophical Society and the occult movement to which we belong. For me, the situation is that on the one hand I belong to the Berlin branch of the Theosophical Society and speak for members of the Berlin branch, but on the other hand I am part of an occult movement and speak as an occultist in all matters. There is no way to make any advance arrangements through the association for what I do at this point.

The Theosophical Society cannot easily be associated with the occult movement. It may be the case that the Society decides on a lecture cycle that I, as an occultist, cannot give for some reasons that often cannot even be explained. Although it is not likely that obstacles will arise in the relations between the Theosophical Society and the occult movement on which it is based, this circumstance must always be taken into account. On the other hand, it is also desirable for the members of the Berlin branch to be active in propaganda.

Mr. Werner requests that his motion be voted on first, as it is the more extensive one. It reads: To grant the board of directors, or rather Dr. Steiner, complete freedom of disposal. The meeting, however, considers Krojanker's motion to be the more extensive one and adopts it without further objection. The wording was: In addition to the freedom of disposal, Dr. Steiner is also to be given 300 marks for his personal disposal.

Lectures:

Krojanker: “It is necessary to distinguish between lectures held for the Berlin branch and those organized by Dr. Steiner himself. Only the former can be considered here. If the results were not very favorable, it is mainly because the arrangement was not handled very well. It seems better to me that the Berlin branch be given more autonomy in this regard, that is, that the board or the executive committee be consulted when arranging lectures, and that they then carry out the propaganda for the lectures. Tickets could be sold long before the event begins; the distribution of tickets could be handled in a more business-like manner. Then one would no longer be so dependent on how many happen to come up from the street. The individual measures should be discussed and decided in advance by the Executive Council or Executive Committee, and then the propaganda should be carried out with the help of all available resources. The members would then have to get tickets and try to find accommodation for them.

Private study groups:

Dr. Steiner is quite in agreement that groups and study courses should be formed among the members, in which more experienced Theosophists can sometimes participate.

Congress:

Miss von Sivers pointed out that the possibility existed of the General Theosophical Congress being transferred to Berlin, that a great deal of money would then be needed and that it might be a good idea to start collecting in good time.

Dr. Steiner replied: “As long as we don't have 700 members, we can't take on the congress. Besides, it has to be a theosophical congress. The presentations must not cause the participants' heads to turn in circles; a form must be found that does not contain such an abuse.

There were around 50 people in attendance, including Mr. Julius Engel as a guest. The meeting ended at half past six.