|
Part of a public library containing court papers related to lawsuits involving Scientology in some way. Collected to help lawyers and critics of Scientology in future lawsuits from or against this cult. Please report back if this has been of help, or send new contributions to the collection. Thanks. Andreas Heldal-Lund (heldal@online.no) |
UNITED STATES of America, Libelant,
v.
An ARTICLE OR DEVICE "HUBBARD ELECTROMETER" or "Hubbard E-Meter," etc.,
Founding Church of Scientology et al., Claimants.
No. D.C. 1-63.
United States District Court,
District of Columbia.
July 30, 1971.
Action on libel of information by the United States seeking condemnation of
gadget and related writings. The District Court, Gesell, J., held that
writings which were distributed by religious institution to accompany auditing
device, which were intended to promote use of the device by the public, and
which contained false unqualified scientific claims without a religious overlay
or suggestion were "labeling," within the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act;
thus, the device was misbranded as a result of misrepresentation in failure of
the labeling to bear adequate directions for its use, and its secular use,
along with secular use of the writings, had to be condemned. The Court further
held that where auditing device, which was harmless in itself, was used
by legitimate church to aid its ministers in communicating with adherents, the
church could continue its use of the device, which was condemned for
misbranding, provided it was used only in religious setting subject to explicit
warning disclaimers on the device itself and on all labeling.
Order accordingly.
[1] DRUGS AND NARCOTICS
Auditing instrument held out as apparatus intended for use in the diagnosis,
cure, medication and treatment of mental and physical illnesses was a
"device" within meaning of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, s 201(h), 21 U.S.C.A. s 321(h).
See publication Words and Phrases for other judicial constructions and
definitions.
[2] DRUGS AND NARCOTICS
Books and other documents containing false scientific and nonreligious claims
as to auditing device held out as apparatus intended for use in the diagnosis,
cure, medication or treatment of disease, and used in various direct and
indirect ways to promote the device, "accompanied" the device in meaning of
the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, and had all the necessary elements of
labeling specified in the Act. Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, ss
201(m), 304, 502, 21 U.S.C.A. ss 321(m), 334, 352.
See publication Words and Phrases for other judicial constructions and
definitions.
[3] DRUGS AND NARCOTICS
Single false scientific nonreligious libel claim is sufficient to support
condemnation of a device under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, s 1 et seq., 21 U.S.C.A. s 301 et
seq.
[4] DRUGS AND NARCOTICS
Writings which were distributed by religious institution to accompany auditing
device, which were intended to promote use of the device by the public, and
which contained false, unqualified scientific claims without a religious
overlay or suggestion were "labeling," within the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act; thus, the device was misbranded as a result of misrepresentation
in failure of the labeling to bear adequate directions for its use, and its
secular use, along with secular use of the writings, had to be condemned.
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, s 502(a), (f) (1), 21 U.S.C.A. s
352(a), (f) (1).
See publication Words and Phrases for other judicial constructions and
definitions.
[5] RELIGIOUS SOCIETIES
Law designed to afford protection to the public against genuine evils must be
used to regulate the activities of religion only if the regulation involved is
the narrowest possible remedy to achieve the legitimate nonreligious end.
[6] DRUGS AND NARCOTICS
Where auditing device, which was harmless in itself, was used by legitimate
church to aid its ministers in communicating with adherents, the church could
continue its use of the device, which was condemned for misbranding, provided
it was used only in religious setting subject to explicit warning disclaimers
on the device itself and on all labeling. Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act, s 304(d), 21 U.S.C.A. s 334(d); U.S.C.A.Const. Amend. 1.
*358 John Joseph Matonis, Washington, D. C., for Founding Church of
Scientology.
Nathan Dodell, Asst. U. S. Atty., Washington, D. C., for the United States.
GESELL, District Judge.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This is an action by the United States seeking nationwide condemnation of a
gadget known as an E-meter and related writings, by libel of information under
the Food, Drug & Cosmetic Act, 21 U.S.C. s 301 et seq. The E-meter is
claimed to be a device within the meaning of the *359 Act. Misbranding and
lack of adequate directions for use are alleged. Claimants are the Founding
Church of Scientology and various individuals.
This suit was originally tried to a jury before another Judge of this Court
and the conviction there obtained was reversed on appeal after a long trial
because of certain First Amendment problems suggested by the instructions and
evidentiary rulings. Founding Church of Scientology v. United States, 133
U.S.App.D.C. 229, 409 F.2d 1146 (1969). The present trial was conducted to the
Court without a jury after a series of pretrials which narrowed the issues.
The record consists of the transcript and exhibits taken at the prior trial
with some additions and deletions, plus the testimony of one additional witness
who testified further on religious aspects of the case. Many of the background
facts are set forth in the opinion of the Court of Appeals and since they were
in the main not contested at the second trial they need not all be repeated
here.
The E-meter is essentially a simple galvanometer using two tin cans as
electrodes. It is crude, battery-powered, and designed to measure electrical
skin resistance. It is completely harmless and ineffective in itself. A
person using the meter for treatment holds the tin cans in his hands during an
interview with the operator who is known as an auditor and who purports to read
indicators from the galvanometer needle as it notes reactions to questions.
Scientology is a so-called exact science which promotes auditing. When
practiced by trained or untrained persons, Scientology auditing is claimed to
improve the health, intelligence, ability, behavior, skill and appearance of
the individual treated.
L. Ron Hubbard, writing in a science fiction magazine in the 1940's, first
advanced the extravagant false claims that various physical and mental
illnesses could be cured by auditing. He played a major part in developing
Scientology. Thereafter, commencing in the early 1950's numerous Scientology
books and pamphlets were written explaining how various illnesses can be and
had been cured through auditing. These materials were widely distributed.
Hubbard, who wrote much of the material, is a facile, prolific author and his
quackery flourished throughout the United States and in various parts of the
world. He was supported by other pamphleteers and adherents who also promoted
the practice of Scientology and touted its alleged benefits.
Hubbard and his fellow Scientologists developed the notion of using an E-meter
to aid auditing. Substantial fees were charged for the meter and for auditing
sessions using the meter. They repeatedly and explicitly represented that such
auditing effectuated cures of many physical and mental illnesses. An
individual processed with the aid of the E-meter was said to reach the intended
goal of "clear" and was led to believe there was reliable scientific proof that
once cleared many, indeed most illnesses would automatically be cured.
Auditing was guaranteed to be successful. All this was and is false-in short, a
fraud. Contrary to representations made, there is absolutely no scientific or
medical basis in fact for the claimed cures attributed to E-meter auditing.
Unfortunately the Government did not move to stop the practice of Scientology
and a related "science" known as Dianetics when these activities first appeared
and were gaining public acceptance. Had it done so, this tedious litigation
would not have been necessary. The Government did not sue to condemn the E-
meter until the early 1960's, by which time a religious cult known as the
Founding Church of Scientology had appeared. This religion, formally organized
in 1955, existed side-by-side with the secular practice of Scientology. Its
adherents embrace many of Hubbard's teachings and widely disseminate his
writings. The Church purports to believe that many illnesses may be cured
through E-meter auditing by its trained ministers through an appeal to the
spirit or soul of a man. As a matter of formal doctrine, the Church professes
to have *360 abandoned any contention that there is a scientific basis for
claiming cures resulting from E-meter use. The Church, however, continued
widely to circulate Scientology literature such as Government's exhibits 16 and
31, which hold out false scientific and medical promises of certain cure for
many types of illnesses. [FN1]
FN1. The issues have been tried as of January, 1963, the date of the
libel. Thus the findings as to Scientology literature and positions of the
claimants do not necessarily reflect current conditions.
In 1962, when the Government seized the E-meters involved in the present
controversy, it took them from the premises of the Church, confiscating some E-
meters which were actually then being used primarily by ministers of the Church
to audit adherents or to train auditors for subsequent church activity. Thus
the Government put itself in the delicate position of moving against not only
secular uses of the E-meter but other uses purporting to be religious, and the
Court accordingly confronts the necessity of reconciling the requirements of
the Food, Drug & Cosmetic Act prohibiting misbranding and the requirements of
the First Amendment protecting religious institutions and religious beliefs
from governmental interference under the First Amendment.
The Court of Appeals has ruled that the evidence at the prior trial and
reintroduced at this trial established prima facie that the Founding Church of
Scientology, the principal claimant here, is a bona fide religion and that the
auditing practice of Scientology and accounts of it are religious doctrine. No
evidence to the contrary was offered by the Government on the second trial.
Accordingly, for purposes of this particular case only, claimant must be deemed
to have met its burden of establishing First Amendment standing for whatever
significance the religious practice of Scientology may have on the outcome of
this particular litigation.
The Government considers the First Amendment issue wholly irrelevant and
extraneous. Claimant, on the other hand, relies heavily on the religious
claim. The positions of the parties are so completely different that neither
even deigns to recognize any merit in the other. The briefs and findings
proposed by each side pass like two ships at night with not even a port or
starboard light showing. Yet the truth is not as absolute as either party
contends. Religious aspects of this controversy, once tactically conceded,
cannot be ignored. On the other hand, it is a gross exaggeration to insist
that the energetic, persistent solicitation of E-meter-audited cures for a fee
has all occurred in a spiritual setting without use of secular appeals and
false scientific promises made in a wholly non-religious context.
[1] Turning to the precise issues presented, it must first be determined
whether the E-meter is a device within the meaning of the Act (21 U.S.C. s
321(h)). It obviously meets the statutory definition of an apparatus or
contrivance intended for use in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation or treatment of
disease. Moreover, it is held out as such in the constant promotion of E-meter
auditing, a process designed to effectuate cures of mental and physical
illnesses. Claimants contend that the E-meter is harmless in itself, cures
nothing by itself, and therefore cannot be a device since those who use it
appreciate its ineffectiveness and cannot therefore have the requisite intent.
This begs the question. The device plays a key part in both the secular and
religious auditing process which is used and intended to be used in the cure,
mitigation or treatment of disease. It need not be the only agent in an
allegedly curative process to be a device within the definition. The E-meter
is a device within the meaning of the Act.
Over 100 E-meters were seized. At the same time the Government seized some
200 separate pieces of literature containing approximately 20,000 pages, much
of which it now contends demonstrates misbranding of the device by
misrepresentation *361 and lack of adequate directions for use under 21
U.S.C. ss 334 and 352.
The writings seized were located in a bookstore, or "Distribution Center,"
separately incorporated but owned by the Church, with offices in the basement
of the Church premises. [FN2] The Center advertised and sold for profit a long
list of Scientology, Dianetics and other writings concerned with auditing in
book, pamphlet, newsletter and other forms.
FN2. Claimants urge that this search and seizure was overly broad and
contravenes the Fourth Amendment but this issue was resolved against this
position by the Court of Appeals and need not be again considered.
A few of these writings are primarily religious in nature. Others contain
medical or scientific claims in a partially religious context. Most of the
material, however, explains aspects of Scientology and Dianetics in purely
matter-of-fact medical and scientific terms without any apparent religious
reference. While the Court of Appeals concluded that literature setting forth
the theory of auditing, including the claims for curative efficacy contained
therein, is religious doctrine and hence as a matter of law not labeling, it
recognized this was so only if the person charged with misrepresentation
explicitly held himself out as making religious as opposed to medical,
scientific or otherwise secular claims. The bulk of the material is replete
with false medical and scientific claims devoid of any religious overlay or
reference. Two books which the Church especially recommended to interested
participants, "Scientology: The Fundamentals of Thought" (Government Ex. 31),
and "The Problems of Work" (Government Ex. 103), are typical examples of books
containing false scientific non-religious claims. Examples of such claims
found in these and a few other representative documents used in various direct
and indirect ways to promote E-meter auditing are listed in Appendix A.
[2] Thus the literature has all the necessary elements of labeling
specified in 21 U.S.C. s 321(m) since it "accompanied" the device within the
meaning of the Act. See Kordel v. United States, 335 U.S. 345, 351, 69
S.Ct. 106, 93 L.Ed. 52 (1948).
[3] Having in mind a jury trial, the Court of Appeals contemplated an item-
by-item analysis of the writings alleged to be labeling in order to remove from
jury inspection purely religious appeals, reserving a presentation of the other
literature for determination under instructions differentiating the secular
from the religious. This exercise is, of course, unnecessary on a trial to the
Court. A single false scientific non-religious label claim is sufficient to
support condemnation, and in fact there are many. Moreover, differentiation of
individual documents as a practical matter is of little value when it comes to
an overall resolution of the controversy. Realistically, the writings cannot
only be viewed separately. They are available and distributed in infinite
combinations. Whole books are involved which often ramble, contradict and are
constructed to make diversified appeals that are basically secular and directed
to varying temperaments, ages and attitudes of potential readers. Much of the
material is skillful propaganda designed to make Scientology and E-meter
auditing attractive in many varied, often inconsistent wrappings.
The Food and Drug laws are designed to protect the public. The literature
disseminated by various Scientology groups is written for popular lay
consumption. The words and thrust of the writings must accordingly be so
considered. Claims as to the efficacy of the E-meter must be read to mean what
they clearly purport to say to ordinary lay readers. The Court notes that the
task of determining whether a claim or representation is religious or non-
religious, or whether a religious claim is genuine or merely "tacked on" to
basically pseudo-scientific claims, is hardly less troublesome *362 than the
task of determining whether a religious claim is true or false. The Court has
attempted to resolve the difficulty thus presented by the Court of Appeals by
refusing to consider the truth or falsity of any claim which, in the
understanding of the average reader, could be construed as resting on religious
faith. All doubts on this issue have been resolved in favor of the Claimants.
But the overall effect of the many separate writings and the writings as a
whole cannot be seriously questioned. Whether the documents are viewed singly
or as a whole, the proof showed that many false scientific claims permeate the
writings and that these are not even inferentially held out as religious,
either in their sponsorship or context.
It should be kept in mind at all times that the Church is but one of several
groups engaged in the promotion of Scientology; others include the Hubbard
Guidance Center, that offers non-religious processing and auditing to the
public for a fee; Hubbard Association of Scientologists International (HASI), a
world-wide organization promoting Scientology among members of the organization
who receive a monthly magazine ("Ability") and other benefits; and the
Distribution Center, Inc., already mentioned. The combined effort of all these
activities is to persuade the public to come forward for auditing with an E-
meter for a fee, and while some may be motivated or attracted by religious
considerations, others who audit or are audited are not. [FN3]
FN3. Ability, issue 14 (Ex. 9L, p. 14) states: Scientology is going all
out as a religion. The religious aspect is highly functional, very true
and is very-much-more successful *** The public expects to have ministers
around. That's us folks.
*****
*** If you don't like religion for heaven's sakes call yourself a
Dianeticist.
[4] An individual was not required to be either a Church member or a
Scientologist to be audited at cost of $500 for 25 hours, with state of "clear"
guaranteed for $5,000. The E-meter was available for sale to the public for a
fee of $125. The benefits of auditing were extravagantly advertised. At the
time this action was commenced, E-meters-perhaps as many as one-third the total
supply-were being used by members of the public without any religious control
or supervision. [FN4] The writings were distributed to accompany the E-meter
and intended to promote its use by members of the public; they were used by
laymen for secular purposes; individually a great many contain false
unqualified scientific claims without even a religious overlay or suggestion.
Viewed as a whole the thrust of the writings is secular, not religious. The
writings are labeling within the meaning of the Act. Thus, the E-meter is
misbranded and its secular use must be condemned along with secular use of the
offensive literature as labeling. The misbranding results not only from
misrepresentation by reason of 21 U.S.C. s 352(a) but because the labeling
failed to bear adequate directions for use required by 21 U.S.C. s
352(f) (1). [FN5]
FN4. At the time of this action at least half the E-meters in use in the
United States were being used by non-ordained lay personnel. Operators
franchised by the Church who may or may not subscribe to its doctrines,
provide secular auditing, retaining for themselves ninety percent of the
fees collected and purport to send only ten percent to the Church.
Claimants were unable to show that these franchised services were in any
real sense religious missionary work in the sense that auditing was done by
members of this group on a religious basis.
FN5. Accompanying labeling must specify the conditions for which the
device is intended and sufficient information under which the device can be
used safely and effectively for the purposes for which it is intended to be
used. United States v. Shock, 379 F.2d 29 (8th Cir. 1967). Adequate
directions are literally lacking here. It is impossible to write adequate
directions for use of the E-meter by laymen. Cf. United States v. Ellis
Research Laboratories, 300 F.2d 550 (7th Cir. 1962). The Church of
Scientology of California v. Richardson, 437 F.2d 214 (9th Cir. 1971).
*363 On the basis of these findings, the Government is entitled to some
relief. It is only when the Court confronts the question of appropriate remedy
that serious difficulties arise.
[5] An initial issue presented is whether the normal Food and Drug
remedies, 21 U.S.C. s 334, may under any circumstances be applied to the
device when used by some as an "artifact" of a church. A law designed to
afford protection to the public against genuine evils may be used to regulate
the activities of religion only if the regulation involved is the narrowest
possible remedy to achieve the legitimate non-religious end, which in this case
is only to protect the public against misrepresentation since the E-meter is
harmless in itself. See Sherbert v. Verner, 374 U.S. 398, 83 S.Ct. 1790, 10
L.Ed.2d 965 (1963); Barnett v. Rodgers, 133 U.S.App.D.C. 296, 410 F.2d 995
(1969).
The Government argues that once a violation of the Act is established, the
devices seized may be treated the same as any other misbranded device. Since
the bona fides of the religion remains unquestioned on this record, the
Government's position is an oversimplification. Here is a pseudo-science that
has been adopted and adapted for religious purposes. The literature held to
make false representations, while in itself non-religious, nevertheless
comprises for some, part of the writings, teachings, and history of a
religion. Those who belong to the Church and accept its beliefs assert that
many illnesses may be alleviated by religious counseling designed to free the
spirit of encumbrances. They find in the rationale and procedures of
Scientology satisfactory early explanations and techniques to implement what is
essentially faith healing by use of the E-meter. Thus they purport to read the
purely secular writings of Scientology with semantic interpretations fostered
by their evolving religious doctrine. Purely scientific statements are given a
theological slant by the initiated and the occasional theological indications
in the writings are given enthusiastic exaggeration. What the layman reads as
straight science fiction becomes to the believer a bit of early imperfect
scripture. The result of all this is that what may appear to the layman as a
factual scientific representation (clearly false) is not necessarily this at
all when read by one who has embraced the doctrine of the Church.
Accordingly, the Government's protestations that it is not interfering with
religious practice when it seeks to condemn the E-meter and related literature
must be qualified. The Church is a religious institution protected by the
First Amendment. The E-meter is used by its ministers as part of the ritual
and practice of the Church. Serious interference indeed results if the Church
is entirely prohibited from using the E-meter by condemnation or if the Court
orders the Food and Drug Administration to oversee a general rewriting of all
the writings the Church purveys. Where there is a belief in a scientific fraud
there is nonetheless an interference with the religion that entertains that
belief if its writings are censored or suppressed. Similarly, if a church uses
a machine harmless in itself to aid its ministers in communicating with
adherents, the destruction of that machine intrudes on religion. The dilemma
cannot be resolved by attempting to isolate purely false scientific claims from
claims that have sufficient religious content to be outside the Food and Drug
laws. There is a religious substance to everything when seen with the eyes of
the believer.
For these reasons, the Church may not be wholly prevented from practicing its
faith or from seeking new adherents. A decree of condemnation which ordered
destruction of the device, with its necessary res judicata effect as to all E-
meters in the country, would achieve this effect. On the other hand, a
condemnation decree which allowed the FDA to reform the writings as is done in
the usual commercial drug misbranding case would give a Government agency
excessive *364 power to interfere with the exercise of religion, fostering
that Government "entanglement" with religion which has been recently condemned
by the Supreme Court. See, e. g., Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602, 91 S.Ct.
2105, 29 L.Ed.2d 745 (1971). Neither of these possible remedies is acceptable
to the Court.
Had the Government proceeded in equity to enjoin specific non-religious
practices or representations which it believed to violate the Act, the Court
could have curtailed the purely commercial use of the E-meter while leaving the
Church free to practice its belief under limited circumstances. An action in
rem, however, acts only upon the device, and the Court cannot fashion a remedy
in libel which distinguishes with particularity between religious and non-
religious uses. An equity proceeding is clearly the most satisfactory remedy
in this and any similar future cases, and may in some instances be the only
remedy which the Government may seek consistent with the First Amendment.
[6] Dismissal of this libel after eight years of legal proceedings is not
justified on the grounds that the Government has not used the most appropriate
remedy. A decree of condemnation will therefore be entered, but the Church and
others who base their use upon religious belief will be allowed to continue
auditing practices upon specified conditions which allow the Food and Drug
Administration as little discretion as possible to interfere in future
activities of the religion. Pursuant to 21 U.S.C. s 334 (d), upon the
findings and conclusions contained in this Memorandum Opinion, relief in the
following form shall be set out in an implementing order:
All E-meters are condemned together with all writings seized. The Government
shall have its costs.
The device and writings condemned shall be returned to the owners, upon
execution of an appropriate bond, to be destroyed or brought into compliance
with the Food, Drug & Cosmetic Act. An E-meter shall be deemed to comply with
the Act if and only if it is used, sold or distributed upon specified
conditions.
The device may be used or sold or distributed only for use in bona fide
religious counseling. No user, purchaser or distributee (other than the
Founding Church of Scientology or an ordained practicing minister of the
Church) shall be considered engaged in bona fide religious counseling unless
and until such user, purchaser or distributee has filed an affidavit with the
Secretary of the Food and Drug Administration stating the basis on which a
claim of bona fide religious counseling is made, together with an undertaking
to comply with all conditions of the judgment so long as the E-meter is used.
The device should bear a prominent, clearly visible notice warning that any
person using it for auditing or counseling of any kind is forbidden by law to
represent that there is any medical or scientific basis for believing or
asserting that the device is useful in the diagnosis, treatment or prevention
of any disease. It should be noted in the warning that the device has been
condemned by a United States District Court for misrepresentation and
misbranding under the Food and Drug laws, that use is permitted only as part of
religious activity, and that the E-meter is not medically or scientifically
capable of improving the health or bodily functions of anyone.
Each user, purchaser, and distributee of the E-meter shall sign a written
statement that he has read such warning and understands its contents and such
statements shall be preserved.
Any and all literature which refers to the E-meter or to auditing, including
advertisements, distributed directly or indirectly by the seller or distributor
of the E-meter or by anyone utilizing or promoting the use of the E-meter,
should bear a prominent notice printed in or permanently affixed to each item
or such literature, stating that the device known as a Hubbard Electrometer, or
E-meter, used in auditing, has been condemned by *365 a United States
District Court on the grounds that the literature of Dianetics and Scientology
contains false and misleading claims of a medical or scientific nature and that
the E-meter has no proven usefulness in the diagnosis, treatment or prevention
of any disease, nor is it medically or scientifically capable of improving any
bodily function. Where the notice is printed in or affixed to literature, it
should appear either on the outside front cover or on the title page in letters
no smaller than 11-point type.
The E-meter should not be sold to any person or used in any counseling of any
person except pursuant to a written contract, signed by the purchaser or
counselee, which includes, among other things, a prominent notification as
specified immediately above.
The effect of this judgment will be to eliminate the E-meter as far as further
secular use by Scientologists or others is concerned. E-meter auditing will be
permitted only in a religious setting subject to placing explicit warning
disclaimers on the meter itself and on all labeling. The Government has
requested an opportunity to show that complete forfeiture and destruction of
the E-meter is required, but the Court has concluded that however desirable
this may be in the public interest, the Court is without power to so order in
view of the protections afforded claimant and others similarly situated under
the First Amendment.
The foregoing shall constitute the Court's findings of fact and conclusions of
law. The parties are directed to submit an appropriate form of order providing
the relief indicated on or before September 1, 1971.
APPENDIX A
Representative Documents Found to be Non-Religious, and Samples of False or
Misleading Claims Found Therein
1. Eight-page pamphlet, entitled "What is Scientology?"
(Government Exhibit No. 16)
"Scientology is today the only successfully validated psychotherapy in the
world. Tens of thousands of completely documented cases exist in the files of
the Hubbard Association of Scientologists International.
"The first science to put the cost of psycho-therapy within the range of any
person's pocketbook. A complete Freudian analysis costs $8000 to $15,000.
Better results can be achieved in Scientology for $25 and, on a group basis
for a few dollars."
"The first science to make whole classes of backward children averagely bright
using only drills the teacher can do a few minutes each day.
"The first science to determine the basic cause of disease.
"The first science to contain exact technology to routinely alleviate physical
illnesses with complete predictable success.
"The first science of mind to prove conclusively that physical illness can
stem from mental disturbance, a fact which Freud held only as a theory, and
only seldom demonstrated.
2. Twenty-four page pamphlet, entitled "Ability Issue 71: Being Clear and
How to Get There," by L. Ron Hubbard
(Government Exhibit No. 9BA)
"Scientologically, the optimum individual is called the clear. One will hear
much of that word, both as a noun and a verb, so it is well to spend time here
at the outset setting forth exactly what can be called a clear, the goal of
Scientology processing.
"A clear can be tested for any and all psychoses, neuroses, compulsions and
repressions (all aberrations) and can be examined for any autogenic (self-
generated) diseases referred to as psychosomatic ills. These tests confirm the
clear to be entirely without such ills or aberrations. Additional tests of his
intelligence indicate it to be high above the current norm. Observation of
*366 his activity demonstrates that he pursues existence with vigor and
satisfaction.
"Further, these results can be obtained on a comparative basis. A neurotic
individual, possessed also of psychosomatic ills, can be tested for those
aberrations and illnesses demonstrating that they exist. He can then be given
Scientology processing to the end of clearing these neuroses and ills.
Finally, he can be examined, with the above results. This, in passing, is an
experiment which has been performed many times with invariable results. It is
a matter of laboratory test that all individuals who have organically complete
nervous systems respond in this fashion to Scientology clearing."
(3) Hard back book, 452 pages, entitled "Dianetics: The Modern Science of
Mental Health," by L. Ron Hubbard.
"Simple though it is, dianetics does and is these things:
1. It is an organized science of thought built on definite axioms:
statements of natural laws on the order of those of the physical sciences.
2. It contains a therapeutic technique with which can be treated all
inorganic mental ills and all organic psycho-somatic ills, with assurance of
complete cure in unselected cases.
3. It produces a condition of ability and rationality for Man well in
advance of the current norm, enhancing rather than destroying his vigor and
personality.
4. Dianetics gives a complete insight into the full potentialities of the
mind, discovering them to be well in excess of past supposition.
5. The basic nature of man is discovered in dianetics rather than hazarded
or postulated, since that basic nature can be brought into action in any
individual completely. And that basic nature is discovered to be good.
6. The single source of mental derangement is discovered and demonstrated,
on a clinical or laboratory basis, by dianetics.
7. The extent, storage capacity and recallability of the human memory is
finally established by dianetics.
8. The full recording abilities of the mind are discovered by dianetics with
the conclusion that they are quite dissimilar to former suppositions.
9. Dianetics brings forth the non-germ theory of disease, complementing bio-
chemistry and Pasteur's work on the germ theory to embrace the field.
10. With dianetics ends the "necessity" of destroying the brain by shock or
surgery to effect "tractability" in mental patients and "adjust" them.
11. A workable explanation of the physiological effects of drugs and
endocrine substances exists in dianetics and many problems posed by
endocrinology are answered."
"Chapter V
PSYCHO-SOMATIC ILLNESS"
"Psycho-somatic illnesses are those which have a mental origin but which are
nevertheless organic. Despite the fact that there existed no precise
scientific proof of this before dianetics, an opinion as to their existence has
been strong since the days of Greece, and in recent times various drug
preparations have been concocted and sold which were supposed to overcome these
sicknesses. Some success was experienced, sufficient to warrant a great deal
of work on the part of researchers. Peptic ulcers, for instance, have yielded
to persuasion and environmental change. A recent drug called ACTH has had
astonishing but wildly unpredictable results. Allergies have been found to
yield more or less to things which depressed histamine in the body.
"The problem of psycho-somatic illness is entirely embraced by dianetics, and
by dianetic technique such illness has been eradicated entirely in every case."
"On the physical therapy level anything as violent as surgery or exodontistry
in the psycho-somatic plane is utter barbarism in the light of dianetics.
"Toothache" is normally psycho-somatic. *367 Organic illnesses enough to
fill several catalogues are psycho-somatic. No recourse to surgery of any kind
should be had until it is certain that the ailment is not psycho-somatic or
that the illness will not diminish by itself if the potency of the reactive
mind is reduced. **"
(4) Twelve-page pamphlet, entitled "Ability Issue 72"
(Government Exhibit No. 114)