1937: Dr. Leonard V.
Strong [near right], brother-in-law
of Bill W. [middle right], married to
Bill’s sister Dorothy, wrote him a letter introducing Bill to Rev. Willard S.
Richardson [far right]:
Dear Mr. Richardson,This will serve to introduce my brother-in-law, Mr. William W—–, of whom I spoke in our telephone conversation yesterday.
His work with alcoholics appears very effective and I think merits your interest and possibly that of the Rockefeller Foundation.
Your courtesy in seeing him is greatly appreciated by me, and I regret my inability to be present.
Bill would meet Richardson
shortly afterward in his 56th-floor office in the RCA building [left, 1937]. Richardson was
warmly cordial; Bill described him as “an elderly gentleman who had twinkling
eyes set in one of the finest faces I have ever seen.” He showed deep interest
as Bill shared his own story and that of the struggling Fellowship.
1939: The
Cleveland Plain Dealer (Ohio) published the final article
[right] in Elrick B. Davis’s five-part series titled “Alcoholics Anonymous Makes Its
Stand Here.” It read, in part:
It is hard for the skeptical to believe that no one yet has found a way to muscle into Alcoholics Anonymous, the informal society of ex-drunks that exists only to cure each other, and make a money-making scheme of it. Or that someone will not. The complete informality of the society seems to be what has saved it from that. Members pay no dues. The society has no paid staff. Parties are “Dutch.” Meetings are held at the homes of members who have houses large enough for such gatherings, or in homes of persons who may not be alcoholics but are sympathetic with the movement.
1939: The Alcoholic Foundation
in New York City, presumably Ruth Hock
[far left], wrote a letter to John “Fitz” M.
[middle left], a “loner” living in Washington, DC. The letter referred another Washington
“loner,” Hardin C. [near left?], to
Fitz. Within days, the Washington Group of A.A., the first in that city, will
be established out of the contact between these two men.
1955: The A.A. Grapevine [left: cover] published an article
by Rev. Samuel Moore Shoemaker
[near right] titled “The Spiritual Angle of AA”
[far right] which addressed a challenge faced by the founders of A.A.: “…how to translate
the spiritual experience into universal terms without allowing it to evaporate
into mere ideals and generalities.” He began his discussion of this issue by
saying,The basis of this belief was not theoretical, it was evidential. Before us were people in whose lives the beginnings of a transformation had taken place. You could question the interpretation of the experience, but you could not question the transformation itself.… AA has been supremely wise to emphasize the reality of the experience and to acknowledge the experience, and to acknowledge that it came from a Higher Power than human, and then leave it at that.
1956: The A.A. Grapevine [left: cover] published an article
titled “Tranquilizers…!?” [right].
The teaser read:THEY CALL THEM “A SAFE NEW DRUG” – Voice-of-experience report…
The author, B.R. from New York City, began his article:
PERHAPS THEY ARE for the “civilians” but for us, they may spell trouble. They did for me, anyway. Going under various names—thorazine, mebaral, sedamyl, butiserpine, nembu-serpin, equanil, dimethylane, butibel, miltown, sparine, reserpine, to name a few—these medical discoveries are also known as “mood pills”, “don’t-give-a-damn pills” (Time, Feb 24) and are supposed to help those with an anxiety, nervousness, tensions, etc.
We can speak only for ourselves and I say: “Don’t!” Even though these pills must be prescribed by a doctor, “Don’t!”
The author then describes his or her experience taking two such
drugs, prescribed by “alcoholic-specializing psychiatrists,” who said “they
are non-habit-forming, and harmless.” This led to “eight weeks of pure mental
hell” until someone “Twelfth-Stepped me back to sanity.”
An
editorial note at the end states, “… we take no official ‘stand’ on
tranquilizers (or any other form of medical therapy). We do plan to publish,
from time to time, personal experiences such as this one.”
The
October 1956 issue of the AA Exchange Bulletin referred readers
[right] to this Grapevine article and noted,
Should A.A. members use the new so-called “tranquilizer” drugs? That’s the big question in the featured article in the October A.A. Grapevine. The report describes what happened to a “typical alcoholic” when he sought tranquility through pills.





































