HISTORY and TIMES of THE KINGDOM

Home
Day
Eliza Leger
Overcomer
John's Fast
Cecil Stanmore
Victor Barton
Adamson
Roland Whittom
The Alienist
F Murray
Rome Sentinel
Northern Voyage

The Papers
    The Lewiston Journal

During the 1890's and early 1900's,  the newspaper The Lewiston Journal, published many articles about Frank Sandford's movement at Shiloh, some favorable, and some critical.  As I grew up in the movement, we were repeatedly told that the newspaper articles printed at or near the turn of the century were grossly infair and if ever encountered never to be believed.  Of course, no one ever offered a sample of the "unfair" reporting for us to scrutinize.  This section of the website will try to demonstrate an accurate cross-section of the reporting done at that time.

The first article displayed is by the noted Maine author, poet and humorist Holman Day. At that time Day worked as a reporter for the Journal.  Upon their first meeting in 1897, Day and Sandford found a "positive chemistry" between them.  Day wrote a series of articles about the movement, originally carried by the Journal, but reprinted in 1905 in Leslies magazine with national distribution, entitled, "The Saints at Shiloh" .

More notorious in Kingdom circles than Day's articles, however, were those of Nathan Harriman, second in the list above.  Harriman was a higher lines evangelist who, with most of the members of his Ecclesia Mission from Tacoma, Washington, chose to come to Shiloh and become affiliated with Sandford's school and mission in 1900.  Unlike Day, however, the Sandford/Harriman chemistry showed almost immediate signs of volatility.   Harriman testified during the Leander Bartlett court case of being dis-fellowshipped several times during his almost three year association with Sandford.   Accordingly, we have included some of his interviews with the paper as well. 

It is important for the reader not familiar with the Kingdom to understand that those of us who were reared in the fellowship were taught that the newspaper articles printed at those times were filled with lies and half-truths and never to be trusted. We were told the paper's editors hounded and berated Sandford constantly, perniciously zeroing in on the prophet with their petty persecutions for their small, carnal minded reasons. 

I believe that the samples we have chosen here indicate if not an even-handed attempt at the Journal's  reporting, then at the very least, a perspective that changed with the evolution of the movement and its founder.

Back to the Top