|
CHAPTER 22
A LOOSE CHICAGO DETECTIVE |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
One day, sometime during World War I, a Chicago
policeman walked into Dr. William Sadler's psychiatric offices. That visit
set off a series of events which were to bring trouble to Sadler, and to
present the first serious threat to the Revelation.
The consultations which resulted from that
visit must have been one of the more outstanding psychiatric cases for
Sadler. Those of us who investigated this event believe the policeman was
a detective and that his name was Harry Jacob Loose. The case became so
important to Sadler he included a description of the man's illness in three
of his books. Martin Gardner identified identical descriptions in The
Mind At Mischief, page 137 (1929), in Mental Mischief and Emotional
Conflicts, page 142 (also 1929), and in the Theory and Practice
of Psychiatry, page 465 (1936).
This is what Sadler wrote:
There came to me a few years ago an ex-police officer, a big strapping fellow, who would go down a dark alley any night and shoot it out with half a dozen burglars, but who, as a result of a long emotional strain, experienced a partial nervous breakdown. He was several months recovering, but when he did get well there was one of his many fears that lingered on, behaving after the fashion of a residual fear. He simply would not go anywhere alone. He would find some excuse for getting out of any errand that required him to go anywhere by himself. He had to do considerable traveling for a year or two, and so he hired an old chum to go along with him. Finally he was cured, but it required more effort to conquer this one phobia than all his other fears, and he wasn't cured by reasoning, talking, explanation, or rationalization, as he was of his other fears. This one he had to right out and defy; he had actually to go through all the misery, and suffer all the physical manifestations, of the fear which accompanied his going any place alone.
Through a series of letters from several members
of the Forum to Harold Sherman in the 1940's, Martin Gardner believed he
was able to determine the cause of Loose's breakdown. In his book Gardner
expressed his belief that Loose became "depressed over his daughter's
romance with a man he thought unsuitable for her. He is said to have contemplated
suicide." Supposedly, this led to the partial nervous breakdown described
by Sadler, and the subsequent impact upon the unfolding of the Revelation.
(The Sherman files which contained this correspondence
were under instructions from Sherman to remain sealed until the year 2,000.
Martha Sherman, his wife, violated the proscription to make the files available
to Gardner at Gardner's request.)
Unfortunately, actual facts do not bear out
Gardner's supposition. Perhaps he came to this deduction out of his imagination.
In fact, Gardner's presentation of the Loose information is flawed and
in serious error in several ways.
Sadler must have thought highly of Loose. He
offered an unsolicited letter of recommendation to the Lyceum organizations
for Loose to go on the Chautauqua lecture circuit. The letter reads as
follows:
It may be that Sadler wrote this letter at
the request of Loose. If Loose were under psychiatric care his reliability
might otherwise be suspect to the Lyceum managers. Thus Loose had a direct
recommendation to silence those suspicions.
Since the date of this letter is early in 1917
while Loose was still on the Chicago police force, and since Sadler in
1929 refers to his unidentified policeman as an "ex-police officer" Sadler
must have followed the history of Loose. Loose left the police force in
1922.
According to U. S. Census reports for 1920
Loose was then 39 years old. His wife Emily was 33, and his three children
were a daughter Mabel, 17, and two sons, 13 and 9.
Whatever the cause of Loose's breakdown, it
is highly unlikely it was due to a love affair of his daughter. He had
to consult Sadler before the date of the letter. Therefore his psychiatric
problem predates that letter by some period of time. In February, 1917
his daughter would have been 13 or 14. At the time of his breakdown she
would have been no more than 13.
Quite probably the daughter's love affair took
place in the 1920's when Forum members would have known Loose, and hence
the references in the correspondence concerning this problem date from
that era, not World War I. Gardner had no real foundation for his open
speculation on the cause of Loose's problem. The episode with his daughter
was merely another in a series of personal problems encountered by Loose,
as I shall show.
Loose was born in Springfield, Illinois in
1880. He became a State policeman in 1901. He left to become a private
detective with the famous Pinkerton agency for a year or two, then was
hired by the Chicago police force as a detective. He was attached to Hull
House for six years before returning to the streets. Photographs of Loose
show him to be a "big strapping fellow." He lectured on the Chautauqua
and Lyceum circuits about his experiences dealing with crime and criminals,
and the causes of those social blights.
The Chautauqua records indicate that Loose
did not really get started on his lecture circuit until about 1919.
A search of the Chicago City Directory on Harry
J. Loose provided the following information:
I obtained copies of the records on Loose which the University of Iowa library retains in its special Chautauqua collections in Iowa City, Iowa. They reveal that Loose was a detective when he first went on the lecture circuit, and that he negotiated with the Lyceum Bureau to make trips to regions around Chicago which he could reach in week-end travel. A contract dated December 11, 1918 offered him $16.66 per engagement. In September 1919 he wrote to L. B. Crotty
of the Lyceum Bureau of his deep regrets that he was refused a Furlough
or Leave of Absence from the Chicago Police Department. He then stated
that he was applying for early Pension on the grounds of his length of
service and injuries received in the course of duty. He continued to struggle
with this conflict until he was granted pension.
A schedule for October and November of 1919
showed him on week-end tours through Culver, Indiana, towns in Michigan
and one on Sunday, November 2 in Delafield, Wisconsin.
A letter from W. V. Harrison, the Chautauqua
Redpath manager, to W. A. Colledge on December 19, 1919 shows that they
would give him $125.00 per week and would provide transportation for his
wife to be with him for one week. Harrison reminded Colledge that Loose
was obligated to deliver seven lectures per week, although Loose had adamantly
stated the previous summer that he would not lecture on Sundays.
By 1920 he was lecturing full time. A contract
dated October 1, 1920 guaranteed him $150.00 per week with a specification
of six lectures per week. An addendum paragraph on the latter shows that
Loose would "furnish helper who will appear in full police uniform during
Lyceum work, of which 1st party will pay $50.00 per week and helper's railroad
from and return to Chicago." A second addendum specifies that "1st
party will pay expense of railroads for one week for 2nd party's wife to
visit him on the road during Lyceum work."
Several reports show Loose as "very good" on
the circuit, but "somewhat below average" in attraction of audience. Several
unsolicited letters brought high praise for his informative talk.
In a letter of March 31, 1920 Loose offers
to resign from the Chicago Police Department if the Lyceum Bureau would
guarantee a three-year contract of 40 weeks per year.
Meanwhile Loose had written a book entitled
The
Shamus which was published by the Christopher Publishing House in Boston,
Massachusetts in 1920. The advertisement claims that Loose had lectured
in over 200 cities the previous two seasons, and that he had worked at
the Juvenile Protective Association of Hull House. The advertisement also
states that during his six and one-half years of connection with Hull House
he had been commissioned a Special Probation Officer of the Juvenile Court
of Cook County. He was later assigned to the Chicago Council Crime Committee,
and placed in charge of investigations into the cause of crime. He certainly
was a rounded individual, whose views went beyond the common policeman's
beat.
In cooperation with the U. S. Department of
Justice, Mr. Loose made the investigation, arrest and prosecution of Samuel
J. Rosenthal, "The Fake Bankruptcy King," recently sentenced to Fort Leavenworth.
In cooperation with U. S. Post Office Inspectors, he made the investigation,
arrest and prosecution of Dr. Ottoman Zar Adusht Hanish of Sun Cult fame . . . A letter dated May 27, 1920 addressed to local
managers on the Chautauqua circuit shows that Loose "has taken a year's
leave of absence and will be available for any engagements this winter."
The managers were concerned: "If we do not get him the Mutual will.
They have made him a rather flattering offer, which I saw myself."
Not until August 3, 1920 does Loose suggest
that a police officer named Gray would accompany him, "in full police
uniform." On August 7 he was offered a winter program at $165.00 per
week, "not to exceed $175.00" A letter from W. A. Colledge dated
August 31 confirms that "He filled a very successful engagement with
Vernon Harrison this summer." "He has taken a year's leave of absence and
at the end of the year he gets his pension so that there is no danger of
his being called back." Colledge goes on to say, "He is a mighty
fine fellow and I think would give you excellent satisfaction." A letter
to Colledge from H. H. Kennedy in Kansas City states that "Indeed, I
trust that it will be possible for the Bureau to secure him for next season,
as I believe he has a type of lecture that is very greatly needed and that
will take readily with the (Chautauqua) committees."
A letter of September 2, 1920 from J. A. Bumstead
of the Chautauqua Redpath circuit to W. A. Colledge is highly informative
about the practical character and nature of Loose.
Loose: From the committee reports that are
in so far, he is ranking eighth place among the seven-day talent. He is
just a trifle below the average for all the talent.
It is our opinion that Loose is a mighty good
afternoon man, nothing sensational but a good novel lecturer. However,
it takes about four good men and a nurse to keep him going and keep him
sweet. He is almost as bad as Gusaulus in this respect, for every day he
tells someone that he is going home, and finally did leave ten days before
the circuit closed without any prior arrangements made for getting someone
in his place, except his sister, who did not fill the bill at all. He said
that he was sick, but confessed in a letter that it was homesickness more
than anything else. Would like to talk with you about this sometime. A handwritten footnote to the letter says:
He says he lacked companionship but anyone
who "companioned" with him would soon get the same way he is. A fine fellow
but a most peculiar disposition. In a letter addressed to J. C. Youdan of the
Lions Clubs Lecture Service Bureau on October 27, 1920 Loose says:
In reference to the offer of a contract to
begin at the conclusion of my Redpath contract -- which does not expire
until the fall of 1924 -- I can but say I feel highly complimented. Then, on November 22, 1920 an event took place
which misled Martin Gardner into serious error, and a pitiful assumption
about William Sadler. In a letter dated November 24 Loose states to (Uncle)
L. B. Crotty(1):
I know Sadler. Knew him when he was on the
Municipal court Bench years ago. Have had cases before him. Knew he was
lecturing but did not know for whom.
According to what is stated in the clipping,
(from the Moline Dispatch) he is following the outline of my talk so closely
that the possibility of it being accidental or mere change is exceedingly
small.
A man must be in great need, be kind of short on brains himself and not be bothered with an oversupply of conscience to deliberately "lift" another man's effort and make off with it like this.
Imitation is the sincerest flattery but, from the outline given in the clipping, Sadler can hardly be called "imitating" in this. A shorter, uglier, name would be more appropriate and probably describe his efforts more truthfully.
In a reply to Loose with the same date the
Manager of the Lyceum Department says that he is "returning the newspaper
comment on Dr. Sadler at Moline." Loose is reassured not to worry because
Sadler is not going to have enough (lecture) dates to bother about.
When Martin Gardner read these letters he immediately
jumped to the conclusion that "Sadler" was William Sadler. The Chautauqua
manager had referred to "Dr. Sadler." How many Dr. Sadlers were around?
Gardner then speculated that was the trigger event which led Loose to despise
Sadler. Unfortunately, Gardner was in great error.
You may note that Loose had a copy of the newspaper
clipping. There was no confusion on the part of Loose. Richard Preiss,
who now works for the Moline Dispatch newspaper, obtained a copy of the
clipping, which reads partially as follows:
It is one of those ironies of fate that two men were on the Chautauqua
lecture circuit by the name of Sadler, that both came out of Chicago, that
Harry Loose knew them both, and that the Chautauqua manager referred to
Frank Sadler as Dr. Sadler. How easy it was for Martin Gardner to deduce
ill feeling on the part of Loose toward William Sadler when it was nothing
but a figment of Gardner's imagination. Gardner quickly leapt into this
assumption because he was emotionally disturbed by the possibility of divine
revelation. He should have done the homework for which he is unjustly famous.
On this incident Gardner brought a major indictment against William
Sadler -- and it was all a puff of smoke.
A Book of Chicagoans for 1911 shows this Sadler to be Frank Prather Sadler, a judge in the Chicago Municipal Court from 1907 to 1909. He was born in Springfield, Illinois on June 10, 1872, received a Bachelor of Arts degree from the University of Michigan in 1896, a Bachelor of Law in 1898 and was admitted to the Illinois State Bar the same year. He was a Republican and a Methodist, a member of the law firm of Taylor, Ingraham & Sadler, and gave lectures on subjects related to his profession, including The Criminal in the Making, The Criminal in the Saving, Twentieth Century Unrest -- Its Portent, and so on. He also contributed to numerous publications. |
I have copies of correspondence between Frank Sadler and the Chautauqua
managers which date to 1914 and 1915. According to this correspondence
he was lecturing in 1914. A Chautauqua advertising brochure for Frank Sadler
is dated 1908, during his tenure on the Municipal Court. They show him
as Judge on the Harrison Street and Des Plaines Street Benches, two of
the most notorious districts in Chicago. The themes of his subjects about
criminals, how they enter crime, and moral and social issues to reduce
crime, show a remarkable similarity to the material by Loose, but predating
Loose by ten years. If anything, Loose borrowed from Frank Sadler, not
vice versa.
But to continue with Harry Loose.
A newspaper article in Elkhart, Indiana on October 16, 1920 noted that
"Mr.
Loose was accompanied to Elkhart by Examiner Lewis of the Bertillion bureau
of the Chicago police department, an intimate friend, who assisted the
speaker in displaying his interesting exhibits."
As William Sadler indicated, Loose was afraid to travel alone, and usually
had someone with him. He called upon his friends on the police force for
that assistance, incorporating them into his lecture program. He would
display a dramatic assortment of knives, guns, burglar tools, and so on
which he had collected over the years. A police officer standing by in
full uniform made this even more appealing. This living display was an
important adjunct to his lecture, bringing the reality of crime closer
to his audience.
An account in the LaRue County Herald of Hodgkinsville County,
Kentucky states that "Mr. Loose has been on the Chicago detective force
for twenty years and before this he was connected with the famous Pinkerton
Agency. He was accompanied by Bill Grey, also a Chicago police man for
thirty-one years, and who holds both a Harris Medal and a Carnegie Medal."
A photograph of Gray shows him to be an older man, probably someone the
Chicago police department could afford to give to Loose.
But something further was happening emotionally to Loose. He not only
felt a need for a traveling companion, he got involved in situations which
demonstrated other weakness in character. In a lecture at Holden, Missouri
early in 1921 he got carried away with a fervor for the cause of right.
As the local newspaper reported:
Of course he gave an interesting talk of an hour and a half about crime in Chicago, illustrating it with weapons, etc., in his "manicure set," but all that was merely introduction to the last 20 minutes when he delivered the most stunning, sledge hammer, solar plexus wallops on supervised recreation ever handed a Holden audience. Taking all in all, it was the most wonderful lecture ever given in this city.
. . . But really, the cause is found in a departure from the old-fashioned faith in God, the real virile religion of the Nazarene . . .
. . . Not many congratulated Loose for his lecture. (It was not that kind of a lecture.)
On March 3, 1921 W. A. Colledge wrote a letter
to several ministers in Tipton, Indiana. He had received a report that
Loose was seen with a woman in compromising circumstances.
But, first of all, in the interest of fair play, we want to know if what is being said is correct and will consider it a great favor if you will help us to get at the truth. I have met Mrs. Loose, but only slightly and the description given by Mr. Chambers of the woman in the hotel, if my recollection is correct, is an exact description of Mrs. Loose. Will you kindly send me the letter you received from the party in regard to Detective Loose, or if you do not wish to part with it a copy with the name and address of the writer will do, and I will investigate the matter. I am very much surprised at the report. We
have known Detective Loose for five years. He has been lecturing for us
for three years and there has never been a shadow of a suspicion even cast
upon his moral character and in justice to him he should have an opportunity
to clear himself. Aubrey Harrell Moore, Minister of the Tipton
west Street Christian Church replied in writing to Colledge. He stated
that he had seen letters from a party in Chicago, but felt he could not
reveal the letters at that time. He further stated that if Mrs. Loose could
verify that she was in Tipton on the date involved that would settle the
matter. If she was not there Colledge should then proceed in his investigation.
Unfortunately, we have no other record of this
event. We do not know its ultimate outcome, but we do know that Loose continued
to lecture for the Lyceum into 1923. It may be that the accusations were
an unfounded suspicion about the moral character of Loose. The Lyceum made
arrangement for his wife to visit with him "for one week." It is likely
this was the cause of the rumors.
However, another problem is recorded in the
Chautauqua files. The Wever, Iowa Lyceum Committee wrote a letter to the
Redpath Vawter Management in Cedar Rapids dated January 26, 1922.
We have your letter of the 26th instant stating that Mr. Loose will make affidavit that he paid H. W. Patterson $5.00. I would suggest that you get this affidavit.
. . . We also want to say that we can get every
man and woman within a radius of five miles of our village to vouch for
the honesty and truthfulness of H. W. Patterson. It would require a great
deal more than the affidavit of a man of the calibre of Mr. Loose has shown
himself to be to impeach Mr. Patterson in the minds of the people of this
community, where he was raised and is known by everyone. W. A. Colledge thereupon wrote a letter to
Loose requesting some explanation. But Loose's problems were not that simple.
Colledge quotes from another letter from Iowa:
In the first place, Loose was booked to give a matinee talk to the High School children at Muscatine, Iowa, where we have a $2,400.00 course. We sent him notice of this, he accepted on his regular itinerary and railroad schedule -- also wrote a note accepting -- then he got in town and told the Committee he did not have a talk fit to be given children, and refused to give it, causing us a great deal of embarrassment with one of the finest courses we have in Iowa.
The same thing practically occurred at Marshalltown, Iowa, on another large course, except I got him by telephone and told him to either give the Matinee talk or go home at once.
When we got up into South Dakota he got in touch with some pal of his up there and voluntarily went and gave a matinee talk, showing that he could to it when he wanted to.
He was booked for Wever, Iowa, and routed to take a 5:00 a.m. train out of there to Burlington, Iowa. Instead of doing this he got a taxicab man to drive him the 12 miles -- then, instead of paying the fellow, he gave him 50¢ and thanked him and told him to go and get some cigars. However, he charged us in his expense account $5.00 for this drive. Our agent went back to Wever to attempt a booking, and the whole town was up in arms the way he cheated this man out of his fare, and I wrote the fellow, asking him to send us the bill, which he did -- charging us but $3.50 for the drive, instead of $5.00 which Loose charged us with. I have a sworn affidavit from this man, who is reported by the leading bank of that town to be thoroughly reliable, swearing under oath that Loose did not pay him a cent for the drive.
Loose made sworn affidavits that he did. Last week he was booked at Richland, Iowa, routed to leave on a 9:53 train after the lecture. Instead, he cut his lecture short and at 9:15, refused to show his curiosities and to answer any questions, as he had been advertised to. This Committee is demanding a rebate.
Colledge then went into several demands upon
Loose to express clearly his loyalties to his contract and his bookings,
and to consider the impact he has upon the Lyceum reputation. Colledge
then states that he "is now with-holding my future judgment until I
hear from you in regard to the policy you intend to pursue in the future.
Loose responded with a lengthy four-page reply,
denying the allegations one by one, and showing reasons why the accusations
were false. William Gray was with him and could confirm every point. The
letter is sincere in tone, and demonstrates either a great deception on
the part of Loose, or high feelings of dissatisfaction in Iowa, with causes
unknown.
In a letter dated February 25, 1922 Fred B.
Wolf of the local Lyceum Committee states to Colledge that he will determine
all the facts in the case and report to the Chicago office. Whatever the
cause, they lost a $2,000 contract together with much bad feelings toward
the Chautauqua circuit, all developing out of Loose's conduct.
In further dispute with a deteriorating relationship
Loose insisted in several letters that he was contracted until April, 1924,
but the Lyceum minutes of meetings show that they considered cancelling
his contract on May 1 and 2, 1922, because "of certain things which
had happened." Following correspondence shows that they reverted to
individual contract dates, rather than a long-term contract, and that Loose,
probably upset with his treatment, left a schedule in Kansas for ten days.
The Lyceum management felt that was sufficient grounds to discharge him
from further contractual obligations. The last letter on record is dated
May 11, 1923 to Loose from H. V. Harrison to stop by; Harrison had one
or two personal matters to discuss with him, but that "he should stop
by at any time."
Loose then obtained employment with the Chicago
Daily News, where he directed their security staff.
As I described in Chapter 14 Loose gave a lecture
in Marion, Indiana in 1921 which was attended by Harold Sherman as a reporter
for the Marion Chronicle. This led to Sherman becoming a member of the
Forum in 1942, and a consequent "rebellion" among their ranks. This was
Sadler's first real challenge for preservation of the Revelation. Other
challenges were to come, but not in Sadler's lifetime.
In a letter to Sherman dated February 4, 1941
Loose tells Sherman "to watch for a tremendous book which will be published
in about two years. It has been 35 years in the building. It is not mine
but I had something to do with it."
Loose, of course, is referring to The Urantia
Papers. Although I have been unable to locate a record, he apparently
became a member of the Forum. By having "something to do with it" he probably
meant he was active during the period when questions were being posed and
answers received. His attitude is typical of the Forumites who were members
during that process. The statement could not mean more than that, although
Sherman may have concluded that Loose played a larger role. This statement
also led Martin Gardner to assume unreal conditions for changes in the
Revelation and of Sadler "editing" the Papers. The Papers were not subject
to change by any human mortal; Sadler was exceedingly careful that no human
alterations creep in. This strict rule led to Sherman's later deep disappointment.
I also have been unable to determine the dates
of Loose's attendance in the Forum, or how long he was active. We do know
from letters to Sherman that he continued to maintain contact through other
Forumites into the 1940's. In an undated letter, certainly after Sherman's
contact with Loose in 1941, he mentions "Wanderman, Ronayne, Potter
and the other four," apparently individuals who attended meetings and
kept him informed of events. He tells Sherman to stay in touch with them.
This raises the question of the reasons for his departure from the Forum
while he continued to have such an intense interest. Gardner reports that
he retired to California in 1934. This would be just before the actual
revelation, but at the end of the question and answer episodes. At that
time he was a mere 54 years of age. His retirement may have been due to
failing health. Gardner reports that Loose in 1941 "was then in his
seventies, with a severe heart condition." Once again, Gardner, with
a great cloud over his mind, shows how his emotions conditioned his thinking.
In 1941 Loose was only 61 years of age, not in his seventies. However,
it may be that he had a severe heart condition which led to an early death
on November 21, 1943.
Loose went deep into psychic phenomena. Again,
the path by which he entered those pursuits is unknown, but he may have
been impelled in that direction from limited understanding of the content
of The Urantia Papers.
In his letters to Sherman he tells a strange
story of "hybrids." In a letter dated June 14, 1942 he mentions the "hybrids"
and states that they are not midwayers. They were an exception approved
on petition of the Ancients of Days. In another undated letter he again
speaks of the "missing hybrid story," but states, "...be assured, it
was for a good purpose." He does not explain this remark to Sherman.
Sherman picked up on this "esoteric" notion
and made it an important part of his attack on Sadler in his book "How
to Know What to Believe." I shall discuss this problem in greater depth
in the following chapter. Here I note that the discussion on "hybrids"
was due to a confusion in the mind of Loose. Since he had no hard copy
of The Urantia Papers available he had to depend on his memory.
His memory of the role of the Prince's Staff was faulty. The Staff had
been instructed to not mate with the primitive human mortals of those days,
but later did reproduce among themselves, after the planetary rebellion,
to create the Nodites. Reference to these planetary transactions is in
the Bible in Genesis 6, which identifies the Nodites as Nephilim, or Giants.
In his many letters to Sherman Loose repeatedly
expresses anger and frustration with Sadler. In a June 9, 1942 letter he
attacks Sadler's personal vanity. He complains that Sadler won't separate
himself from the Revelation. "Sadler should make contact and ask the
intelligences an authoritative explanation of our truly evidenced psychic
phenomena..." But he cautions Sherman that "The Receiver of this
Revelation should be forever shielded."
This last remark shows that Loose was unaware
of the miraculous nature of the actual revelation, which did not come "through"
SS, although he respects the reasons for not identifying him. This fact,
the use of SS, may have been the reason he pursued psychic phenomena so
relentlessly.
In another undated letter he complains about
Sadler not relinquishing control over the Revelation. He wants greater
democracy over it. He states, "It is so sad that Sadler is so blind.
He was so well chosen for the part he has had. And he has performed so
wonderfully up to the present."
This, too, was part of the psychology developing
within the ranks of the Forum, and was eloquently expressed by Clyde Bedell
and Robert Burton, other outstanding Forum members, who later brought attacks
against the policies of the Urantia Foundation, Sadler's autocratic creation.
Again, I shall discuss these events in a later chapter. I mention it here
merely because Loose had sentiments similar to many other members of the
Forum about Sadler's methods of management of the Revelation. Their views
later proved correct.
The manner in which Loose may have pushed Sherman
into an unfriendly attitude toward Sadler is demonstrated in other letters.
In a letter dated August 14, 1942 he urges Sherman to fight Sadler. "He
is vulnerable." He reminds Sherman of Sadler's remark, "I am only
the custodian of the papers. I do not own them." In September Loose
suggests a law suit against Sadler. Sadler would be greatly fearful. In
a later September letter he states his belief that "Something snapped
with Dr. S before the death of his wife." He further expresses the
hope that Sherman someday will meet SS face to face but first contact will
probably be with the wife of the subject. Here Loose shows his first-hand
knowledge of the routine for messages to be received from SS. His wife
had to notify Sadler before Sadler could be present to receive the messages.
In an October letter he further rails against
Sadler for claiming he hypnotized the "instrument." He writes that Sadler
should not have done so, because it would have been against the will of
the "subject," and Sadler wasn't skilled in this area. He states that "It
was Dr. Lena that kept Sadler balanced."
Once again Loose touches on a subject which
is crucial to understanding of the mechanisms within the mind. A person
under deep hypnotic trance can be induced to perform acts which he could
not do consciously. Thus the act of hypnotism may be a violation of the
conscious will. But Loose was not expert in this area, and did not account
for the degrees of hypnotism which may be used by medical professionals.
Sadler was thoroughly competent in this area, after many years of experience.
He did not subject SS to hypnotic trance to cause him to perform acts against
his will, but rather to probe his subconscious or marginal conscious. This
was part of Sadler's investigation into the origins of the revealed material.
These examples illustrate how Loose had an
impact on unfolding events, and conditioned Sherman to unfavorable attitudes
toward Sadler.
Loose may also have feared his social position
among the Forumites. In several letters he enters into tirades against
G. Willard Hales and his wife. He refers to her as "a long standing
nuro." He did not trust the Hales, perhaps because they "saw through
him."
Loose was an emotional, somewhat unstable,
personality who had contact with the process of a divine revelation, and
desired within his heart for the good of the revelation, but was deeply
disturbed by the elements of human behavior which any group of human mortals
will display. He also got carried away with the mystical appearances of
celestial activities he interpreted as psychic phenomena. Many Urantians
after him followed the same route into eternal jeopardy. The full cost
to human kind has not yet been accounted.
In spite of his concerns the Revelation eventually was given to the world, intact, through the invested trust of William S. Sadler. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| THE CHICAGO JUVENILE PROTECTION AGENCY | |
|
Harry J. Loose, Frank P. Sadler, and William
S. Sadler were contemporaries. Frank Sadler was three years older than
William Sadler, Harry Loose was five years younger. They all appeared on
the Chicago secular scene around the same time.
Reform was in the air. Chicago had established
a Crime Commission under Professor Charles E. Merriam as chairman. His
report laid stress upon two elements: a) "that professional criminals
escape the penalties of the law and prey at will upon society," and
b) that the jails and prison houses of Chicago, designed for the persons
who elude or escape the police, are filled with "poor and petty criminals"
or persons who are not guilty of any crime at all. The result was high
cost to Chicago citizens; a poor use of tax dollars.
An article in The New Republic laid
stress on the inequities of social justice. The article reviewed the history
of imprisonment for the lack of bond by many poor people. In England in
1678, more than two hundred years previously, Thomas Firmin had described
how one man who "within little more than two years with the charity
of some worthy persons hath delivered out of Prison about five hundred
poor people who lay there either for their fees or for very small debts."
The same blight was noted for Chicago. "Many thousands of men and boys
suffer the penalties of unjust arrest and imprisonment every year." "Out
of 109,764 persons arrested in a single year less than ten per cent were
arrested on felony charges. The great mass of persons arrested -- 90 out
of every 100 -- were arrested for trivial offenses or for no offense at
all, as evidence by their discharge in court." Of those numbers only
2,182 (2%) were held for grand jury. Only 141 (1/10 of 1%) were sentenced
to county jail, only 1,935 (1.8%) were sentenced to the House of Correction,
only 40% were fined, and the others, more than half of all the persons
arrested, were discharged in the municipal court.
"And it must be emphasized that the hardships
involved in needless arrests are hardships that fall almost exclusively
upon the poor. The well-to-do are not arrested for trivial offenses."
In the Illinois House of Corrections "82 per cent of the whole number were
there only because they were too poor to pay the small fines imposed upon
them." A similar ratio was true for the Cook County jail.
In 1910, when the International Prison Congress
met in Washington, the foreign delegates were taken to various cities in
the country to examine jails and prisons. Everywhere the delegates expressed
horror and surprise at the spectacle of hundreds of thousands of presumably
innocent persons locked up in cells merely awaiting trial.
In an attempt to protect the young people who were brought before the courts the Illinois Juvenile Court Law went into effect July 1, 1899. The law provided for the organization of the Court and for a probation system to keep so many young persons out of the jails and prisons, but failed to provide salaries for probation officers, the men and women who would do the work to accomplish that goal. At the first session of the court, Mrs. Lucy L. Flower offered to raise a fund to pay the salaries. Mrs. Alzina P. Stevens offered her services as the first probation officer. This was the origin of the Juvenile Court Committee. |
The law forbade the detention of young children in jails and police stations, but provided no other place for their detention. In 1901 the Juvenile Court Committee took over operations of the earlier Illinois Industrial Association and for six years provided a Detention Home, with appropriations from the city and county. Through this home about 2,600 children passed yearly. As a result of the efforts of the Juvenile Court Committee the city and county erected and opened a Detention Home on October 17, 1907.
However, the payment of probation officers
had not yet been formally solved. Over the first seven years the Court
Committee raised more than $100,000 in voluntary contributions to pay the
salaries. At the initiative of the Committee a law was passed which placed
the probation officers upon the county payroll. At the time of the report
in 1908 the probation staff consisted of 119 persons paid by Cook County
and 30 police probation officers paid by the city.
According to the report,
It was into this scene of social reform that Frank
Sadler worked as a judge on the Municipal Court, in one of the most notorious
sections of Chicago. It was here that Harry Loose was assigned as a juvenile
probation officer and where he brought men he arrested on the city streets.
And it was here that William Sadler appeared as a psychiatrist a few years
later.
These public reports make it obvious that Frank Sadler and Harry Loose both expressed the same words and the same sentiments when they later went on to the Chautauqua lecture circuit. The irate statements of Harry Loose about Frank Sadler show how misplaced his accusations truly were. |