The Rudolf Steiner Archive

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

[ 1 ] The annual meeting was opened at approximately half past three by the First Chairman, Dr. Rudolf Steiner. After the minutes of the previous year’s annual meeting were read aloud—to which no objections were raised—Dr. Steiner took the floor again to offer a brief review of the year’s events. He summarized the events as follows:

[ 2 ] The lectures were moved from Wilhelmstr. 118 to the Architektenhaus. The rooms are more pleasant and more befitting the theosophical cause. Nevertheless, there was no increase in attendance.

[ 3 ] Monday Member Evenings: The Monday gatherings are intended to become true member evenings, during which lively discussion and open dialogue among members should take place.

[ 4 ] Visit and Lecture by Mrs. Annie Besant: “What has been said here should be understood as a kind of annual report, for the Theosophist cannot speak of success or failure, nor can he focus solely on increasing membership.” The Berlin public has reacted in various ways to this significant event. I would like to mention just one fact that will shed light, as if by a flash of lightning, on how the Theosophical Movement is viewed in many prominent circles in Berlin. The chairman of the Giordano Bruno Society, Mr. Wolfgang Kirchbach, took a stand against Theosophy in his lecture inaugurating the winter of 1904–05; this stance is characterized in the Society’s newsletter with the following words: [gap in the transcript]

[ 5 ] These words show quite clearly how little people know about Theosophy and how reluctant they are to engage with its teachings. However, one is probably not mistaken in assuming that this statement characterizes, almost without exception, the position of the leaders, but not that of the members.” Miss von Sivers then reported on membership trends. Despite a high level of activity, the branch’s membership has grown relatively little. Last year, the Berlin branch had 58 members. Today, the membership stands at 88, representing an increase of 30 members (14 women, 16 men).

[ 6 ] This was followed by the treasury report presented by Miss von Rosen. The Berlin branch’s cash balance as of [gap in the minutes] 1903 was 576.67 marks. The cash balance as of October 20, 1904, was 653 marks, an increase of 76.33 marks.

Revenue consists of:
Cash on hand in 1903: 576.67 marks
Membership dues: 626.45 marks
[Gap in the minutes]: 691.56 marks
Total: 1,894.68 marks

Expenses total 1,241.68 marks
Therefore, cash on hand as of October 20, 1904: 653 marks.

[ 7 ] Last year, the library's cash on hand totaled ... marks

Rental fees received: ... marks
Subscription fees received: ... marks
Total
[Numbers missing from the transcript]

The following expenditures were made:

1. Rent for the room: 300 marks
2. Book purchases: 218.66 marks
[Total: 518.66 marks]

[ 8 ] Consequently, there was a deficit of 124.15 marks this year.

[ 9 ] It should be noted that the rent has been paid through May 1905; if the account were settled as of October 1, the shortfall would be only 24.14 marks.

[ 10 ] Report on Mrs. Annie Besant’s lecture. When Miss von Sivers was about to present the report, the chair, Dr. Steiner, noted that this was a matter for the section, since Mrs. Annie Besant had donated the proceeds to the section’s fund.

[ 11 ] That concluded the reports.

[ 12 ] In response to Dr. Steiner’s question as to whether there were any comments on the reports or questions to be asked, Mr. Krojanker asked to speak and posed 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 sort of annex to the ‘German Theosophical Society.’ Later, a library fund was established from voluntary donations and the proceeds from a lecture by Emanuel Reicher, and at the same time, the library was made independent of the DTG. Supervision, administration, and ownership rights were entrusted to a committee. The Berlin branch neither receives any income from the library nor bears any expenses related to it. The library was handed over to us privately. I would have already put the matter in order, but I was unable to find a way to deal with an authority or agency.”

[ 13 ] Julius Engel added the following to this report: “Originally, the library belonged to the DTG; then Emanuel Reicher came along, and a large sum was donated to the library from his lecture. Since Reicher did not wish to join the Theosophical Movement and did not want to give lectures on behalf of the library under the name of a Theosophical library, the library’s name was changed to ‘Library for Comparative Religious Studies,’ and ownership and administration were transferred to a commission consisting at that time of Count and Countess Brockdorff, Krecke, Reicher, and Hübbe-Schleiden.”

[ 14 ] Miss Motzkus also noted that the room had been rented for the library so that they could 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 are in private rooms.”

[ 15 ] Finally, the assembly agreed to appoint a commission to examine the facts and documents; further steps will then be taken based on the commission’s report.

[ 16 ] The following were elected to this examination committee: Mr. Krojanker, Mr. Engel, Mr. [Quaas.

[ 17 ] Furthermore, Mr. Krojanker moved that Dr. Rudolf Steiner be awarded 300 marks for the lectures he had given in the past year (1903). After Dr. Steiner had ceded the chair to the vice-chair, Miss von Sivers—since this was a personal matter for him—he took the floor to say the following regarding this motion: “It would be more in keeping with theosophical thinking if you were to make this sum available not as a fee for lectures, but perhaps for the purpose of conducting more effective propaganda for theosophy, so that, should something need to be done at times, I would have 40 to 50 marks at my disposal without having to receive special compensation for it. Furthermore, I also have reservations of principle. It is common practice in the Theosophical Society that the principal officers—and especially those who are active in the substance of the movement (speakers, general secretaries)—are not actually remunerated by the Society or its branches. For these reasons, I cannot accept remuneration for the lectures.”

[ 18 ] Herr Werner: “Little is known about our society; we need to carry out a much more extensive publicity campaign. If you merely want to accommodate the chairman with good advice, that is petty. Dr. Steiner’s work is not to be paid for at all. [illegible] You must not clip his wings in any way, and therefore I move that the chairman be given a free hand with regard to publicity and financial matters.”

[ 19 ] Mr. Krojanker replied that this was a misconception. No one intended to shackle Dr. Steiner, but merely to relieve him as much as possible of the burden of menial work and allow him greater freedom in managing limited funds.

[ 20 ] Elections:

[ 21 ] Board of Directors: Mr. Kiem was unanimously elected to the Board of Directors to replace the previous treasurer, Miss von Rosen; Miss Schwiebs was elected as a representative to replace Baron von Reisner, who is ill.

[ 22 ] Executive Committee: Miss Frölich replaces Baron von Reisner. The chairperson and secretary are to be elected by the committee itself. Mr. Krojanker will convene the first meeting.

[ 23 ] Auditors: The following were appointed as auditors: Mr. Tessmar, Member of the Board of Auditors, and Mr. Georgi. Messrs. Kiem, Krojanker, and Seiler were elected as delegates to the General Assembly of the German Section, along with the First Chairman, Dr. Steiner, and the Second Chairman, Miss von Sivers.

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

[ 25 ] Motion for the Section's General Assembly:

[ 26 ] Since Ms. von Holten has resigned from her position as treasurer, a new treasurer must be elected. The Berlin chapter proposes: Miss von Sivers as treasurer and Mr. Seiler to keep the books.

[ 27 ] Dr. Steiner then spoke again to explain his position in greater detail: “The Theosophical Society,” he continued, “is not in the same position as any other society when it comes to such matters. Another society could accept Krojanker’s proposal. In the case of the Theosophical Society, however, it is necessary to note the following: We are dealing with two distinct matters; we must distinguish between the Theosophical Society and the occult movement to which we belong. For me, the relationship is such that, on the one hand, I belong to the Berlin branch of the Theosophical Society and speak on behalf of the members of the Berlin branch; on the other hand, however, in all my actions I am part of an occult movement and speak as an occultist. There is no way to make any prior decisions on behalf of the Society regarding what I am doing here.

[ 28 ] The Theosophical Society cannot simply be conflated with the occult movement. It could happen that the Society decides to hold a series of lectures that I, as an occultist, am unable to deliver for various reasons—reasons that often cannot even be stated. Although it is unlikely that obstacles will arise in the relationship between the Theosophical Society and the occult movement on which it is based, this possibility must nevertheless always be taken into account. On the other hand, it is also desirable that the members of the Berlin branch engage in promotional activities.”

[ 29 ] Mr. Werner requested that his motion be voted on first, as it was the more far-reaching one. It read as follows: To grant the Executive Board, or rather Dr. Steiner, complete freedom of disposition. The assembly, however, considered Krojanker’s motion to be the more far-reaching one and adopted it without further objection. The wording was: In addition to full discretion, to grant Dr. Steiner 300 marks for his free personal use.

[ 30 ] Presentations:

[ 31 ] Krojanker: “It is necessary to distinguish between the lectures given 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, this is likely due mainly to the fact that the arrangements were not handled very well. It seems to me better that the Berlin branch be granted more autonomy in this regard—that is, that the board or the executive committee be consulted regarding arrangements for lectures, and that they then handle the promotion of the lectures. Tickets could be sold well in advance of the event; the distribution of tickets could be handled in a more professional manner. Then we would no longer be so dependent on how many people happen to walk in off the street. The individual measures should be discussed and decided upon in advance by the Board or the Executive Committee, so that publicity can then be carried out with the help of all available resources. Members would then have to obtain tickets and try to distribute them.”

[ 32 ] Private study groups:

[ 33 ] Dr. Steiner fully agrees that groups and study courses should form among the members, in which more experienced theosophists can sometimes participate.

[ 34 ] Congress:

[ 35 ] Miss von Sivers points out that the General Theosophical Congress might be moved to Berlin, that this would require a great deal of money, and that it might be a good idea to start a fundraising campaign in good time.

[ 36 ] Dr. Steiner replied: “As long as we do not yet have 700 members, we cannot take over the congress. Furthermore, it must then also be a Theosophical Congress. The presentations must not leave the participants with any nagging doubts; a format must be found that does not allow for such shortcomings.”

[ 37 ] Approximately 50 people were present, including Mr. Julius Engel as a guest. The meeting adjourned at half past six.