[Editor’s note: Insofar as is possible, the letters and notes of Peoples Temple’s contacts with Forbes Burnham, Prime Minister have been arranged below in chronological order.]
A-1 (40)
Photocopy of old letter
p.r.a.a.s.
1119 Geary Blvd.
San Francisco, Ca 94109
(415) 474-3775 or 474-4344
August 31, 1977
F. F. Burnham
Prime Minister
Government Buildings
Brick Dam, Georgetown
Guyana
Dear Sir:
A perfidious campaign against Reverend Jim Jones and People’s Temple has come to our attention. Sensationalist press, immoral journalists, corrupt and decadent magazines are trying to misrepresent the work of People’s Temple and to taint the honor of Rev. Jones. Our organization, which organizes community schools at the elementary, secondary and college level, wants very much to dispel the effects of this infamous campaign and to give People’s Temple our total support.
We know of the activities of People’s Temple through our association with Ms. Yvonne Golden, a distinguished American educator who pursues an active role in the public schools of San Francisco, bringing hope and vitality to otherwise impoverished students from humble families in our city. She speaks highly of People’s Temple, and we know her to be an extremely honorable and truthful person.
So, Mr. Prime Minister, People’s Temple is not just a charitable organization. It is an active alliance of the members of our community working to bring to our society not only the most ample democracy but, at the same time, a spirit of social justice that is the very essence of Christianity. Self reliance, hard work, discipline and, above everything, a profound respect for human dignity is the essence of People’s Temple’s work. Our organization cannot let this occasion pass by without supporting this most significant movement in our country. As you know, sometimes dull and uninspired journalists find in cheap sensationalism a way to sell more papers. It is unfortunate that in this case they have chosen to attack a most noble and singular organization. We are sure that you, as head of an enlightened government, know some of the most ugly aspects of the so-called freedom of the press.
Above everything, People’s Temple will continue helping people, working with them and bringing hope to all citizens. We hope they will receive your support.
In the name of our Board of Directors.
Sincerely yours,
Fernando Gonzalez
Regional Director
—–
D-1-L-6 (3)
[Letterhead of KSFO/560, San Francisco
August 10, 1977
Prime Minister Forbes Burnham
Government Building
Brickdam Georgetown
Guyana, South America
Dear Honorable Forbes Burnham:
The Reverend Jim Jones and the Peoples Temple have recently come under what appears to be undue fire from certain quarters.
I have visited Reverend Jones’ church and was struck by the spirit of the services, the compassion and goodwill displayed, the apparent good work, the use of Afro-American culture as I have never seen it before. Outside the church in the community at large, I have seen young black men and women members of the church, once crippled by feelings of inferiority, now walk with pride and dignity and a positive bearing with a clear sense of purpose.
Reverend Jones’ baptism by the fire of reactionary wrath was of course predictable. Long before Socrates and Jesus Christ to Martin Luther King and John F. Kennedy, men and women have been persecuted and gone to their deaths whenever they show promise of organizing people and society – successfully – for human good. Today, as we now know from COINTELPRO and the confessions of the FBI, the CIA and the Watergate burglars, persecution incorporates official and scientific prosecution whose method is infiltration.
Members of the black bourgeoisie complain that his membership is predominantly black and in the black community where he should have no place. Nor would he, if the black ministers were not failing their roles. The thing that most came home to me on my visit to the church was a sense of the failure of black church leadership. Reverend Jones has provided them a model of their mission in life, God’s mandate to them, their call to preach. In terms of cries
—–
D-1-L-6 (4)
Prime Minister Forbes Bumham
Page 2
that the temple operates with the heavy hand of discipline and financial demands on members, I can testify that I have witnessed in churches throughout the country, including an Anniversary celebration of the president of a major black denomination where he stood and milked contributions by the hundreds of dollars each from elderly women pensioners and widows. And there is far more than I, could say out of my experience and observations since early childhood, variously as member, organist and minister of music, the latter for the oldest black church in the United States in Petersburg, Virginia.
The Reverend Ike openly demands high pay from his followers and flaunts it. Why is there not an investigation and witchhunt of Reverend Ike?
When people speak of politics in church, I am reminded of Hemingway’s remark in, I believe, A Farewell to Arms, that there is politics in all religion and religion in all politics.
When I interviewed Reverend Jones for my hour-long radio program, I noted the public response was overwhelming and positive. Why are those who resist freedom for Afro- Americans so bent on nailing Jim Jones to the cross?
Sincerely
/s/ Julia Hare
Julia Hare
—–
D-1-L-6 (5)
San Francisco, CA
August 9, 1977
Honorable Prime Minister L.F.S. Burnham
Co-operative Republic of Guyana
Public Buildings
Brickdam
Georgetown, Guyana
Honorable Prime Minister:
Because I care for and believe very deeply in my Pastor, Bishop Jim Jones; because I care about our people both here and in Guyana; and because I wholeheartedly believe in socialism and respect the efforts of your government to create a just, co-operative society in Guyana, I feel responsible to convey to you the nature of the persecution our church is currently facing here in the United States.
In the midst of a terribly polarized society, Bishop Jones has shown, in the most personal and in the most profound terms, that as Americans we can live together as brothers, as sisters, as comrades. Despite all our differences of race and ethnic identity, economic stratification, or philosophic point of view, we have seen by virtue of Bishop Jones’ ministry that we can indeed work together for the common good. This example has had a tremendous impact on the communities where our congregations are located, and throughout the state and nation as a whole. The more successful we become and the more people we convince of the benefits of the co-operative point of view, the more opposition from conservative elements mounts as a consequence. The criticism being leveled against Bishop Jones here is superficial, trumped-up, and tailor made by conservative and reactionary elements to try to discredit his character and work and to prejudice the public against the viable socialist alternative Peoples Temple represents.
But I feel you should know, too, that the people here are not fooled by the McCarthy-like reaction which the media have become the vehicles for. There has been an overwhelming outpouring of support and encouragement from leaders, both political and religious, and the people who know and respect Bishop Jones for his sterling reputation as a champion of economic and social justice. Floods of letters, phone calls, and eloquent public statements have been coming in attesting to the good works he has been known for over many years and through many struggles. Just in the past two weeks leaders who have stood in defense of Bishop Jones include: California State Assemblyman Willie Brown; Rev. Cecil Williams; Civil rights activist and recent participant in the World Conference Against Apartheid, Racism, and Colonialism held in Lisbon, Yvonne Golden; California State Assemblyman Art Agnos; the Lieutenant Governor of California, Hon. Mervyn Dymally; American Indian Movement leader Dennis Banks; Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett, President of the American Newspaper Publishers’ Association; and many more. People who believe in and are struggling for progressive change in American society are unified in defense of Bishop Jones. The precedents for this kind of attack range from McCarthyism in the 1950’s to campaigns against Martin Luther King, Jr. and the Civil Rights struggle in the 1960’s, to the systematic castration of
—–
D-1-L-6 (6)
the Black Panther Party in the early 1970’s. Viewed in this historical context, the present attacks on an eminent socialist leader come as no surprise.
There are no words to express the gratitude which we, as members of Peoples Temple, feel toward you and your cabinet of enlightened, progressive ministers, for the assistance you have given us. The Co-operative Republic of Guyana represents to us the chance to live life according to the . principles of sharing and equality which we have come to treasure. Whatever tactics are used to try to “de-stabilize” our efforts, we will not be swayed from our purpose. We feel a deep solidarity with you and the Guyanese people in this struggle.
Sincerely yours,
/s/ Jean F. Brown
Jean F. Brown
Peoples Temple
—–
D-1-L-6 (7)
[Letterhead of San Francisco Community College District]
August 9, 1977
Prime Minister Forbes Burnham
Government Building
Brickdam
Georgetown, Guyana South America
Dear Prime Minister Burnham;
I am writing in behalf of Rev. James Jones who I have known for a number of years, as far back as the late 1950s in Indianapolis, Indiana, when he and his wife were active in the civil rights struggle and where he also served as the Executive Director of the Human Rights Commission,
Jim Jones has always been a forthright man who has dedicated his life to the eradication of racism, discrimination, prejudice, and any form of human suffering and bondage. He has great belief in the equality of mankind and that all men and women must share in the great fruits and wealth of this nation. To this end, he has vigorously supported social programs to bring about these results, and in like fashion, he has opposed those programs and pieces of legislation that he knew would further enslave and encapsulate people. In the areas of health care, old age assistance, housing, education, etc,, Jim Jones has consistently struck a note for “the little people.” In these matters, he has been as active and concerned here in San Francisco as he was in Indianapolis, Indiana.
If I were to select a single achievement of his many accomplishments as a manifestation of his commitment to social betterment, I would point to his adoption of children who represent different races and ethnic groups. Few of us mortals have that kind of commitment. I salute the Rev. James Jones,
Sincerely,
/s/ Doris M. Ward
Doris M. Ward
Vice President, Governing Board
—–
D-1-L-6 (8)
[Letterhead of San Francisco Department of City Planning]
August 9, 1977
Prime Minister Forbes Burnham
Government Buildings
Brickham
Georgetown, Guyana
South America
Dear Mr. Burnham:
I am writing to express my admiration for the work that Rev. Jim Jones, his wife, and his congregation at Peoples’ Temple are doing in San Francisco, California.
Just recently I had the opportunity to visit the Temple, and to see the people, all ages, all colors, finding guidance and encouragement there. In the last two or three years it has been wonderful to watch Rev. Jones and his people in their quest for a better life for people. Unhappily, our city and our country are full of people in terrible physical as well as spiritual need.
Personally, I do most of my own work in the political field, and Rev. Jones has been most helpful on occasion with his moral support and encouragement. His project In your country Is an exciting one to us, and we we will await further word as to its development.
Thank you and your country for all the help you have given Rev. Jones and his people. We will try to do the same here.
Sincerely,
/s/ Susan J. Bierman
Susan J. Bierman
Member
City Planning Commission
—–
D-1-L-6 (9)
[Notations that original mailed, this is a copy]
850 Bryant Street, Room 421
San Francisco, CA 94103
August 11, 1977
Prime Minister L.F.S. Burnham
Office of the Prime Minister
Brickdam
Georgetown, Guyana
Dear Prime Minister Burnham:
This letter is in reference to Rev. Jim Jones whom I have known for about two years. Prior to that time I knew of his work in the San Francisco Community.
Rev. Jones has been very supportive of local programs designed to rehabilitate ex-offenders. As the past Director of the Police Community Relations Unit of the San Francisco Police Department, I personally know that members of his organization were instrumental in abating one of San Francisco’s most serious social problems existing in the Fillmore District of our City.
Sincerely,
/s/ Rodney E. Williams
Rodney E. Williams
—–
D-1-L-6 (10)
Ridgewood Ranch
Willits, California
Hon. Fortes Burnham:
We understand from the Rev. Jim Jones, his wife Marcie and their associates, that you are doing a very fine work for your people and that they support your government wholeheartedly.
You are indeed fortunate to have such a friend as the Rev. Jones. ‘We have known him for quite a number of years and have found him to be unfailingly loyal and fearless in the Christian pursuit of economic and racial equality, social justice and the dignity of the individual human being.
Our very best wishes to you in your efforts to make a better life for your people. In so doing, you are setting a pattern for others to follow. “What blesses one, blesses all.”
Sincerely,
[eight illegible signatures]
—–
D-1-L-6 (11)
[Letterhead of National Organization for Women]
August 11, 1977
Prime Minister, Guyana, South America
Honorable sir;
I am writing this letter in support of the Peoples Temple and Rev. Jim Jones. It is important that you hear from us who are community leaders in San Francisco. I am the President of the San Francisco National Organization For Women as well as serving two terms as a National Board Member. I have also been a school Administrator over the past twenty years. Currently I am running for the Board of Supervisors of the City of Ran Francisco.
There is no doubt in my mind when I say that the Rev. Jones is a person of integrity and commitment. I have seen the work of the Temple. Poor people are fed there, I have seen the Health Clinic of the Temple. Sick people are cared for there, I have seen drug victims being helped back to reality at the Temple. I have seen a creative and innovative school in operation at the Temple. I have seen and know personally some of the very disturbed youth that the Temple has literally saved from certain self-destruction.
Do not listen to those who wish to stop the Temple’s activities whether it be here in San Francisco or your country. Give it your continued support along with the major leaders of San Francisco. Rev. jones is a great leader with a great mission, he truly cares and shares with oppressed humans. I am ready to answer any questions you may have.
Sincerely,
/s/ Shelley Fernandez
Shelley Fernandez
President, SF NOW
—–
D-1-L-6 (12)
[Letterhead of Bancroft Avenue Baptist Church]
August 8, 1977
Prime Minister Forbes Burnham
Government Buildings
Brickdam
Georgetown, Guyana
Honorable Sir:
I have been asked to write a letter concerning the status of the People’s Temple in San Francisco and its pastor, the Rev. Jim Jones. I am glad to do this because of my deep respect for these splendid people.
For the past 5 years I served as the Executive Minister of the Northern California Ecumenical Council and the San Francisco Council of Churches before recently becoming the pastor of this parish and retaining only part of the responsibilities that are related to ecumenical work. During this time I have had many opportunities to work with and observe Jim Jones and his people. In every instance they displayed an enormous amount of integrity and commitment to the poor and the oppressed. I can only wish that all churches did as much to help those who need help.
As this letter is written, part of the media in the San Francisco area is attacking the credibility of People’s Temple and their pastor. They are quoting some disgruntled former members who were asked to leave the congregation or who chose to leave because of differences of opinion. I have seen no evidence that the accusations being made are true and I do not expect any proof to be forthcoming. At this point it would appear that a conspiracy has formed for the purpose of hurting the ministry of People’s Temple.
I have heard good things about the agricultural project that People’s Temple is associated with in your country. And I have heard Rev. Jones speak very highly of Guyana on several occasions. I hope that this relationship shall continue to flourish/and be beneficial to all.
Very sincerely yours,
/s/ Lynn E. Hodges
Lynn E. Hodges, pastor
—–
D-1-L-6 (13)
COPY
17 August, 1977
Honorable Prime Minister Forbes Burnham
Office of the Prime Minister
Public Buildings
Brickdam
Georgetown, Guyana
Dear Honorable Prime Minister
I understand one of our people has written to you recently and apprised you of the situation Rev. Jim Jones and Peoples Temple are facing in the U.S. Some of us thought we should assure you again that we will never speak publicly about U.S. governmental policy, and we will always speak supportively about Guyana and cooperative socialism.
With deep regret, we also feel we must say that, from our experiences, it is necessary to be very, very careful regarding possible contact with reactionary elements in the states. We’ve been told by people from the highest level, almost in fear and trembling, to be very concerned about what is going on. The hostility and rancor there are incense, with only the two exceptions of significance, (President Carter and Andrew Young) possibly representing change.
It distresses us immensely, not just for our own sake, to hear these people tell us that all of our problems began with our support for the government of Guyana, people who have caused the most trouble have been real provocateurs, a Trotskyite element given to anarchistic radicalism and terrorism. They have really been too much to behold.
We have many affidavits from people both inside and outside our own organization about each of the individuals involved. We don’t wish to destroy anyone’s reputation – these were taken simply as a defense against provocateurs. Our attorney said we needed them. They are available to you if you ever need then. We are terrorized that the U.S. might do something to betray Guyana, which we have grown to love immensely.
It is ironic that reactionary newspapers are using terrorist radicals! A very strange marriage, to be sure. They want to trigger outright confrontation in the public mind with people who uphold socialism as a way of life. Andrew Young was brazen enough to state his views, and you know what an attack he has come under, despite his statements supportive of the U.S. The television media has been particularly involved, and always paints Guyana in the ugliest terms.
Obviously, the attack is based on the ideals that you have established and intend to live by and that we have likewise espoused and practiced, because it never started until our support for Guyana was made public. We certainly don’t believe any of the allegations against Guyana, as referred to by Lt. Governor Dymally in his letter of 3 August.
It is good, in a way, that all this has happened. It has only made us more determined to stand in life or death with the goals of socialism. We pledge this.
We are enclosing some additional letters from our supporters which were forwarded to us by our comrades in the states. We could actually show you a suitcase full
—–
D-1-L-6 (14)
of such letters, but I‘m just sending samples from the core sensitive and influential community leaders – and nay have Biased sone of those. These samples even show support by people who do not necessarily have the same political view as ours.
I’m also enclosing for your interest an article which appeared in the Chicago Tribune. It was brought to our attention by someone who recognized its relevance to our present situation. Considering that Dr. King committed his last hours speaking out against the exploitation of the Third World, with particular reference to the Vietnam fiasco, it is not surprising that the dramatization discussed in this article misrepresented his commitment, which was played down by the play-it-safe liberals.
On the positive side, we thought you might like to know that the wife of Guyana’s Ambassador to the United Nations brought a beautiful multi-racial child to us in Jonestown. It had practically expired from physical need. She was greatly concerned for its future, and thought Jonestown would be a good place for it. We are happy to be adding this child and other Guyanese children to our beautiful rainbow family of so many adopted children, and will give then the best possible hone.
This is really our function here, not getting involved in political matters, which we leave entirely up to you. We will however, try to keep you informed as we hear things that seem important to you.
Cooperatively yours,
/s/ Joyce A. Parks
Joyce A. Parks, RN
Medical Practitioner
—–
D-1-M-8 (8)
[This page is the first page of a copy of the letter at M-8 (1) – M-8 (7), addressed to Deputy Prime Minister Ptolemy Reid, but this one is addressed to Prime Minister Forbes Burnham.]
October 26, 1977
Honorable Dr. Forbes Burnham
Camp Street
Georgetown
Dear Dr. Burnham:
I write to you today on several subjects. I have not been writing as frequently as before because I know you are very pressed of late, and also because apparently in the matter of my son, John, your hands are tied to a certain extent.
I am currently advised both by my counsel and by the Foreign Minister that I cannot come into Georgetown, because the arrest order against me has yet to be lifted. Indeed, when I discussed my upcoming meeting planned for myself, Mervin [Mervyn] Dymally, and Andrew Young with the Foreign Minister, he said he would arrange for my safe passage through the capital and out of the country, because the arrest order is still outstanding. If it were not for the fact that, as I told you on previous occasions, a distinguished member of your cabinet warned me that his word is not to be counted upon, I would go to that meeting. Mr. Codette left the clear impression that the Foreign Minister is actually against our project, when he referred to the vote taken on our coming here. So, it is hard to know what to believe.
The other day one of our comrades was speaking to a Minister in the Cabinet, and very forthright person whose word we have never found to falter and a good spokesman for your government. One thing he said, however, caused much consternation among those few who are aware of the comment, and I am sure would trigger the same unhappy reaction among all in our community if they were appraised of it. He stated unequivocally that we would just have to let the courts follow their course regarding John – there would be no intervention on our behalf. The clear indication was that there would be no intervention, even if it did not go well for us in court. I am frankly puzzled because
—–
D-1-M-8 (2)
Honorable Dr. Forbes Burnham
October 26, 1977
Page two
initially, when we spoke of the matter, you stated unequivocally that the decisions of a California court do not apply here, and that those who are trying to take my dear son would find that Guyana would not allow jurisdiction. It seems that something has happened in the intervening time to alter this opinion, or change your mind.
Later another phone call was placed to the Foreign Minister who reiterated the position that we have nothing to worry about, “we would win in the end,” but that laborious court processes must be followed. If such will [were] indeed the case, my mind would be considerably relieved. However, there is again that nagging doubt: because when one particularly close to you says that his word is not to be trusted, then no matter how warm and ingratiating the Foreign Minister is, the possibility of duplicity remains in the memory and affects whatever planning we do.
It is obvious that our local counsel is not counting on our “winning in the end” when he recommends that we send my precious John and any who might be a source of controversy out of the country – to Timbuktu, for God knows how long. I am told that the procedure involving John could drag on for years because the conspiracy behind the scenes have found encouragement. If I were to send my John, what real security would that be? A passport can be traced, and, if I must depend on the person whose good word is questioned by those loyal to you, then how can I be assured that he will ever be allowed to return?
The terrible thing about this whole issue is that once a political conspiracy is allowed to feel a certain liberty to act, then the participants in that conspiracy are encouraged to push further. For example, I have always maintained that the nature of the rebuff given in the case of John would determine whether or not other cases would be initiated. Now a family who in the past were very friendly and very recently wholeheartedly approved of their two sons (ages nineteen and seventeen) coming to the project (they signed all the proper papers) have been influenced by money to demand the return of the seventeen -year-old. This son, a strapping 6’4″ young man, who will be eighteen in a matter of weeks has no desire to return. He is presently in Georgetown to marry a young woman who he cares for who is carrying his child; some technicalities are holding up
—–
D-1-M-8 (3)
Honorable Dr. Forbes Burnham
October 26, 1977
Page three
the marriage. So, by any sane legal analysis, the young man should not have to go back to the States against his wishes. But the character of the fomenters of this conspiracy is so base that the parents’ (the Olivers) attorney, a man regarded as unscrupulous by both black and white community alike, has openly threatened that unless we send the seventeen -year-old back, he would see to it that we would get another negative barrage on the California radio station. This is despite the fact that the young man will be eighteen in just over one month.
A showing of solidarity and strength is the only demonstration it seems that reactionary circles understand. Our own intelligence has discovered that the only thing to date that has kept one arm of government from harassing us further is that show of strength combined with the popular support we have in the states from left-wing, liberal, and even moderate groups. All these many supporters say the same thing – why bow to a conspiracy? They are somewhat baffled by your position regarding John, although we have tried to explain your dilemma.
In a few days you will be receiving a letter from Lt. Gov. Dymally. It is a strong letter, and one that I would ask you to read because it expresses the sentiments of hundreds of activist readers. The nature and far-reaching extent of this conspiracy is obvious.
Last night another incident occurred that is unsettling. At about 3:30 in the morning a group of strangers came onto our property. They were obviously up to no good at that hour, and they were organized enough to signal with lights to one another. This was witnessed by many present, including myself. Although they do not shoot, the nature of their approach (from the bush) aroused the worst suspicions. Footprints indicated that some were barefoot and some wore shoes.
We have been told that kidnapping is a real possibility, because the reactionary press is speculating that the government here is not giving us clear support in the custody matter, and that kind of an interpretation acts as a red flag in front of a raging bull. These devious people even brag about it. The way the audiovisual media has treated Guyana is utterly cruel and without conscience or empathy.
—–
D-1-M-8 (4)
Honorable Dr. Forbes Burnham
October 26, 1977
Page four
The incident the other night has forced us to strengthen our night patrols. We lost $20,000 in materials in one organized theft incident a few months back. We are increasingly inclined to believe that there was an element of pure harassment behind that incident and the others, which could even be connected with the conspiracy. Certainly some of the incidents were conspiratorial – they bore all the earmarks – and we do not lend ourselves easily to conspiracy theories or conspiracy “psychology.” The patrols are necessary now, which is unfortunate because work production is seriously hampered when manpower has to be diverted to security materials and property. We did report one incident but that route does not seem fruitful; hours and hours of questioning which led to nothing, not even a thorough study of the bullet hole that went through a wall and nearly caused a death. But that was some weeks ago, and since the individual people are far more helpful and cordial. (Superintendent Brown was very, very cordial when he came here with a large group that included members of your cabinet, permanent secretary, and several local people. We were a bit sorry when one official was talking about sources of protein and we mentioned our occasional use of frog and a variety of snake. He was shocked that we would eat such things, saying that “only Amerindians would eat that kind of food.” Our dietitian explaining that they were considered a delicacy in the United States, even amongst wealthy people. Obviously this man came from a protected environment and could not understand our rare consumption of these items. We hope this didn’t cause any repercussions, because he turned somewhat pale during the discussion!!)
Currently we are seriously concerned about the pressure to send our teens to a Port Kaituma School. We are not adverse to intermingling with the surrounding community. On the contrary, we have made strong efforts to make practical contributions to our new home. Our doctor, medical practitioners, and registered nurses have extended their services to the community, we make donations to the party, we have repaired government official cars, and have offered ourselves for membership in the local party structure. (This week fourteen of our people walked all the way to the party meeting because the tractors were needed for production.) I will not bore you with the things we have done and are doing that should have helped relieve the pressure or burden that some in the government may feel from elements opposed to our presence here.
However, sending our teams to the Kaituma School will have a crippling effect on our production. Our school is formulated on the work-study concept and the secondary level students work in agriculture or other essential aspects of the farm for half of the day. To pull them out
—–
D-1-M-8 (5)
Honorable Dr. Forbes Burnham
October 26, 1977
Page five
of production would be disastrous at this time. Some of our more active seniors have had years of farm experience, but naturally there is a limit to what they can do. Just yesterday they were a tremendous help in gathering over 120 bags of planting material for eddoes, with the help of course of some strong, young hands.
Our approach to agriculture is scientific. Our agronomist has made a feasibility study and we know exactly what we need in labor and materials at this time to produce. We want to be able to produce not only for ourselves but for the community as well, but we will be hampered beyond measure if we lose the steady work force of the students.
Moreover, it has been reliably reported that malaria has broken out in the dormitories of the Kaituma School. We are not squeamish about disease – the risk was well-known when we came into this area. But I know rumors – if only one of our people got malaria, some youngster would run a friend back in the States and the next thing you would know, the press would get hold of it.
The recent visit of Mr. Charles Garry, an imminent Marxist lawyer who is helping us with our case, (fortunately for costs, or we could not stand the financial burden brought on by the harassment we have been receiving), [several words struck over] will help clear up any “mystery” surrounding our farm that lingers in the capital. He left the project regretfully and visited with Sir Lionel Luckhoo in the capital, and just told everyone he met that the farm was a “paradise.” He went back to the United States, got on the media, and said “this is a paradise.” He was overwhelmed with the beauty of Guyana and the socialist demonstration of the project and asked us if he could retire here. Here is a man who just received a $40,000 check from the sales of a book he has written and he wants to retire here. He will be on another network later this month. He left Guyana and admirer of your demonstration, after much discussion with us. (He had previously been influenced by the Opposition. Mr. [Cheddi] Jagan, whatever his intentions, is engaging in a course that could lead to the destruction of the economy. It is interesting that Mr. Jagan is so warmly welcomed in the United States, especially when the course his Party is taking can lead, even unwittingly, to economic disaster.)
I am equally sure that the visits of Guyanese government officials will also go a long way to dispel any rumors. Those who have come in recent days have had
—–
D-1-M-8 (6)
Honorable Dr. Forbes Burnham
October 26, 1977
Page six
nothing but praise, (although we welcome constructive criticism) and have deemed the project a “model” community. Mervin Dymally, will be visiting again soon. He is a man who is not political in terms of socialist ideology, yet he has made statements supportive of socialism in the Caribbean because of his regard for my character and because of my request in support of the Guyanese government.
The custody matters are of grave concern, not simply because my own son is involved, since I feel an equal loyalty to any member of the organization who has chosen to make Guyana his or her new home. I know, however, that the conspiracy has chosen this area as the one avenue by which they can bleed us dry in legal costs and emotional drain. The press has to a great deal been curbed by solid community reaction in our favor (certainly not as a result of any love for Guyana, socialism, or us). Fortunately, the media has been fairly confined and isolated. But custody matters, no matter how flimsy, can bleed us to death. Every time we will fight and raise a storm, but there is the chance again that arrest orders will come for me.
I have proven my loyalty to you in the past, at no small risk. I have stated that I willing, that we are all willing, to follow you know matter what course you may have to take to survive. So I ask you – please tell us where we stand. If the opposition to our presence is too great, or if there is a pressure to have us leave so as to enable the government to take the farm over, or if internal party pressures are such that you cannot act – please just let us know the lay of the land. We are rational beings, and will evaluate and empathize with whatever the situation is.
To be frank, since the incident with John began, my blood pressure has been running at a dangerously high level. I am training leadership as quickly as I can, but at this stage, if my health were to fail, the community, the project would be gravely, gravely endangered. I personally do not think it would survive at this stage. It is not a personality cult. Far from it. I have always been there when any of the people had a medical emergency, a problem with the law, a house about to be lost. Like yourself, I simply cannot separate loyalty from my socialist commitment. It is a loyalty to the death. I have fought hard when one of my Black members, as so often happens in a racist society, was framed and sent to jail. I have never lost one person to jail because of my determination.
—–
D-1-M-8 (7)
Honorable Dr. Forbes Burnham
October 26, 1977
Page seven
Because the people have seen this kind of loyalty to them from me, they trust me; it is the collective feeling that our organization cannot survive here, but through my trust, the people have decided to give their commitment, and have gained their own sense of trust.
(Thus, when some official contacts our office and asks such questions as “Do you grow marijuana up there?” it is utterly infuriating. Don’t these people realize that as completely committed socialists we are totally against the use of drugs? We don’t even use alcohol or tobacco, simply because they are detrimental to one’s health and because we want to set a consistent example to our children. I am sure you can appreciate how exasperating some of this has been, and I won’t take up your time with details.)
Our loyalty to you remain secure. We would give our lives, and be proud because we had the chance to make our lives and deaths have a socialist meaning.
Cooperatively yours,
Jim Jones