For slander lives upon succession;
Forever housed, where it gets possession.
The so-called “investigation of charges” against Clara Barton in 1904 was before the Red Cross Proctor Committee. The “Remonstrants” demanded an investigation, and suggested that Honorable Richard Olney name the committee. The Red Cross unanimously approved the selection. The great Ex-Secretary of State named as that committee: U. S. Senator Redfield Proctor of Vermont; William Alden Smith of Michigan, then a member of the House and later a member of the Senate; General Fred C. Ainsworth, of the United States Army, of Washington, D. C. This in fact was a Red Cross Committee and not, as so-called, a Congressional Committee. “Congressional Committee to investigate” was a threat to frighten a timid woman.
In the so-called “remonstrance” (of record) there is by the “remonstrants,” of whom the “post-mortem accuser” was one, a disclaimer of
(a) “Any dishonesty on the part of Miss Barton in the administration of the affairs of the Red Cross.
(b) “Any charge of misappropriation of any property or any money by Miss Barton; or
(c) “Any improper act or conduct of any kind which involved in the slightest degree any element of moral turpitude.”
Had there been an official charge at that time of “misappropriation of any property or any money,” or any other charge involving “in the slightest degree any element of moral turpitude,” on the part of the Red Cross Founder, charities would have thenceforward ceased to flow into Red Cross coffers, the Red Cross would have collapsed, and the “remonstrants” making such accusation haled into court, on a charge of criminal libel. The “remonstrants” foresaw that the good name of the Founder was the one hope of the Red Cross. The disclaimer was prerequisite to the attainment of the “remonstrant’s” ultimate object, namely: the coming into possession of a popular organization that carried political and social prestige.
Mrs. Logan, the Vice-President, threatened court proceedings unless her name was removed from Red Cross literature, and in consequence it was removed. Not so, Miss Barton. She at all times wished it removed, at one time threatened court action, but she dared not risk the possibly fatal consequences to the Red Cross. She suffered, in heart-aches, because of such conscienceless fraud on the American people, as she often said, that the Red Cross might survive. Thus to the very day of her death, through silent acquiescence in the fraudulent use of her name to secure legislation and the people’s confidence for the new management, she was being terrorized, lest by her own word or act her Red Cross child might come to grief. The post mortem charges are camouflage, a shield to protect the actors in the “tragedy of 1904;” the game as of the cuttle-fish in making the waters murky, when being chased by a superior force;—in this case, that of Truth.
The charges made were: