“At this meeting we introduced the case of Sister Hannah More, now sojourning in northwestern Michigan with friends who do not observe the Bible Sabbath. We stated that this servant of Christ embraced the Sabbath while performing missionary labor in Central Africa. When this was known, her services in that direction were no longer wanted, and she returned to America to seek a home and employment with those of like faith. We judge, from her present location, that in this she has been disappointed. No one in particular may be worthy of blame in her case; but it appears to us that there is either a lack of suitable provisions connected with our system of organization, for the encouragement of such persons and to assist them to a field of useful labor, or that those brethren and sisters who have had the pleasure of seeing Sister More have not done their duty. A unanimous vote was then given to invite her to find a home with the brethren in this vicinity until General Conference, when her case should be presented to our people. Brother Andrews, being present, fully endorsed the action of the brethren.” (1T 669.1) MC VC

From what we have since learned of the cold, indifferent treatment which Sister More met with at Battle Creek, it is evident that in stating that no one in particular was worthy of censure in her case, my husband took altogether a too charitable view of the matter. When all the facts are known, no Christian could but blame all members of that church who knew her circumstances and did not individually interest themselves in her behalf. It certainly was the duty of the officers to do this and report to the church, if others did not take up the matter before them. But individual members of that or any other church should not feel excused from taking an interest in such persons. After what has been said in the Review of this self-sacrificing servant of Christ, every reader of the Review in Battle Creek, on learning that she had come to the city, would have been excused for giving her a personal call and inquiring into her wants. (1T 669.2) MC VC

Sister Strong, the wife of Elder P. Strong, Jr., was in Battle Creek at the same time as Sister More. They both reached that city the same day, and left at the same time. Sister Strong, who is by my side, says that Sister More wished her to intercede for her, that she might get employment, so as to remain with Sabbathkeepers. Sister More said she was willing to do anything, but teaching was her choice. She also requested Elder A. S. Hutchins to introduce her case to leading brethren at the Review office and try to get a school for her. This, Brother Hutchins cheerfully did. But no encouragement was given, as there appeared to be no opening. She also stated to Sister Strong that she was destitute of means and must go to Leelenaw County unless she could get employment at Battle Creek. She frequently spoke in words of touching lamentation that she was obliged to leave the brethren. (1T 670.1) MC VC

Sister More wrote to Mr. Thompson relative to accepting his offer to make it her home with his family, and she wished to wait until she should hear from him. Sister Strong went with her to find a place for her to stay until she should hear from Mr. T. At one place she was told that she could stay from Wednesday until Friday morning, when they were to leave home. This sister made Sister More’s case known to her natural sister, living near, who was also a Sabbathkeeper. When she returned she told Sister More that she could stay with her until Friday morning; that her sister said it was not convenient to take her. Sister Strong has since learned that the real excuse was that she was not acquainted with Sister More. She could have taken her, but did not want her. (1T 670.2) MC VC

Sister More then asked Sister Strong what she should do. Sister Strong was almost a stranger in Battle Creek, but thought she could get her in with the family of a poor brother of her acquaintance who had recently moved from Montcalm County. Here she succeeded. Sister More remained until Tuesday, when she left for Leelenaw County by the way of Chicago. There she borrowed money to complete her journey. Her wants were known to some, at least, in Battle Creek, for as the result of their being made known, she was charged nothing for her brief stay at the Institute. (1T 670.3) MC VC