DAVID E. ROBINSON, et al, pro se______________________
Plaintiff
v.
CHRISTIAN SCIENCE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, et al______
Defendants

1. There is no statement by Mary Baker Eddy in the Manual or elsewhere designating that Board referred to on page 26 (Sec. 5) as her successor. In the Manual there are more than two dozen estoppel clauses that require Mrs. Eddy's oversight and signature of approval to be carried out. Her consent is required to elect a President of the Mother Church, the Directors, Clerk, Readers, manager of the Committee on Publication, Reading Room attendants of the Mother Church, and to carry on the lecturing and teaching work. And there can be no changes made in the bylaws without her written consent.

2. In their grasp of control of the church, the Directors simply "struck out" or ignored these estoppels since Mrs. Eddy was no longer present to give her approval or to object. However, the Manual is a legal set of rules and bylaws governing seven trustees of three legally deeded trusts that Mrs. Eddy intended to be obeyed, as it would a corporation.

3. Mrs. Eddy writes, "The time cometh when the religious element, of The Church of Christ, shall exist alone in the affections, and need no organization to express it." Again she writes, "If our church is organized it is to meet the demand, "Suffer if to be so now." And "Material organization is requisite in the beginning, but when it has done its work, the purely Christly method of teaching and preaching must be adopted." (Miscellaneous Writings 145:3-5; 91:8-10; 359:2-4).

4. The Director's power, prior to 1910, had always been limited. And the Deed of Trust for the Publishing Society is distinctly separate from the Deeds of Trust for the Mother Church. However, within 10 or so years after Mrs. Edd's passing, the Board seized control of the Publishing Society through a suit know as the Great Litigation of 1919-1921.

5. In this suit between the Trustees of the Publishing Society and the Board of the Mother Church, the court found in favor of the Trustees twice, before the Supreme Court of Massachusetts simply dismissed the suit as an ecclesiastical issue that it could not enter to decide.

6. Does the Manual provide for the "archives?" "Authorized literature?" "Benevolent Associations?" "Real estate investments?" Was it really Mrs. Eddy's desire that five people, whom she never could know, should form an ecclesiastical, hierarchical system in which every teacher, every lecturer, every writer, every practitioner, must obey prescriptions that are dispensed by five officers of law in Boston?

7. The opportunity for such personal domination has ultimately damaged Mrs. Eddy's Cause. Sometime between the 1930's and today this unchained power has become hypocritical and destructive to the Cause.

8. Headquarters appears to be working against the church rather than for it. Why in 1962 was the magnificent granite marker on Mrs. Eddy birthplace in Bow, New Hampshire, blown up . utterly destroyed by order of the Board? Why was Pleasant View, Mrs. Eddy's home in Concord, New Hampshire for almost 20 years, sold in 1975 for only 2 million dollars which appraised 2 years later for more than 10 million dollars? Why did the Center in Boston cost 10 times its original estimate?

9. Also disturbing is the sequence of events that transpired between 1970 and 1973.

10. First, the Massachusetts State Legislature was asked to change Public Statute 39, Section 1. Then the footnote in the Manual on page 130 was changed from "citizen" to "resident." The Statute containing the word "resident" instead of "citizen" now carries a new number, -- Public Statute 68, instead of the original 39. Is this footnote now legal? Why was this done without informing the Field? Why were the Directors so intent in putting a non-citizen of the United States on the Board?

11. Why did the Board purchase the Copyrights and Trademarks from the New Hampshire Trust? The Trust under the Will of Mary Baker Eddy was set up in New Hampshire, at the time of her passing. The Trustees under the Will owned all the Copyrights and Trademarks of Mrs. Eddy's writings. They also manage the money paid into this Trust each year from the sales of her books. This Trust had been supervised by the State of New Hampshire which appointed a Board of six trustees -- five of whom were the Board of Directors who had usurped the Mother Church. The sixth was a resident of New Hampshire.

12. In 1972, the Board of Directors purchased this Trust from the six Trustees of the Trust (five of whom were themselves) for five million dollars, and transferred the ownership and control of the Copyrights, Trademarks, and funds from the six Trustees under the Will of Mary Baker G. Eddy to the five alleged Directors of the Mother Church. The financial matters surrounding this transaction are not clear. (see At The Probate Court In N.H.).

13. In the November 1976 and January 1977 Journal are found some explanation for the transfer of this Trust, but no actual figures concerning the money involved. A report to the Members, made in 1920 titled, The Report of the Committee on General Welfare, states that the Board members at that time were receiving $5,000 each as trustees under the Will. Could it be that fifty-eight years later each trustee was receiving only $6,000? If information about the management of the Trust is public record, why doesn't the Board publish this record for the Field? Does the trust actually require a six-man board? If so, why was it reduced by the sale from six to five? This removed the oversight of the State of New Hampshire from the deed.

14. Why was the copyright of the textbook, Science and Health, extended at the very same time that these other changes were taking place?

15. In 1971, the Directors introduced into the Congress of the United States a private Bill to have the copyright of the textbook, which was already uncopyrighted and freely in the public domain, extended to the year 2046.

16. On December 15, 1971, just prior to the Christmas recess of Congress, President Nixon signed Senate Bill coincidently numbered No.1866 into law, extending a copyright that was in the public domain, and no longer in effect. The extent of this copyright encompassed all former editions dating from the first edition, including other editions as well that had been in public domain for years. Through this Bill, the Directors gained complete control of the textbook, Science and Health, to do with as they pleased.

17. Why was this done at the same time that the Manual was changed making it possible for citizens of foreign nations to be Directors of an organization that was established in America? Why was this done at the time that the copyrights were purchased? What if those controlling the Board decided to limit or stop publication of the textbook altogether?

18. Fortunately for the Public, this copyright extension was later found by the courts to be unconstitutional, under the Constitution of the United States.

19. And what of the finances of the church. How is the church.s money being spent? Even more importantly, how is it being raised? From whence does all this money come? The members have been told for years that many of those who have passed on support the church through legacies and trusts. But is this true?

20. The congregation lost control of its church organization in 1910.