Henry M. Baker, Archibald McLellan, and Josiah E. Fernald, Trustees under trust deed executed by Mary Baker G. Eddy, March 6, 1907, say that, in making and filing this answer, they do not waive but do hereby reserve all their rights to object to the maintenance of these proceeding by said "next friends," to the form and sufficiency of the pleadings, and, among other things, their rights—

1. To a speedy hearing and decision of their motion (filed April 2, 1907) for leave to intervene and be substituted as plaintiffs in place of said "next friends."

2. To apply to the Court at any stage of the proceedings to investigate and determine the following among other questions:

(1) Whether these proceedings were brought in good faith by the so-called "next friends" for the personal benefit of Mrs. Eddy and are now being carried on for her benefit.

(2) Whether those proceedings (a) were brought and (b) are now being maintained by said "next friends" to protect the property interests of Mrs. Eddy.

(3) Whether these proceedings were initiated by said "next friends" of their own motion or by other undisclosed persons, not friends but enemies of Mrs. Eddy and her religious teachings, and not for the purpose of benefiting Mrs. Eddy or protecting her property, but to harass and harry her personally and to bring reproach, if possible, upon the religion of which she is the Founder.

(4) Whether these proceedings are illusory.

(5) Also any other question that may be raised as to the true status of such "next friends" before this Court, in these proceedings, as volunteers purporting to act for Mrs. Eddy and for her benefit.

With the foregoing reservation of their rights, the said Trustees, Baker, McLellan, and Fernald, answering said so-called supplemental bill, say:

1. With reference to the allegations in article I of said supplemental bill, they are informed and believe that the plaintiffs, on March 1, 1907, brought an original bill against the ten defendants named therein and that the same was thereafter served on said original defendants, but aver that the same has never been served upon the said Trustees or any of them.

2. With reference to the allegations in article II, the Trustees, upon information and belief, deny that, immediately after the filing of said original bill March 1, 1907, the original defendants or any of them procured and induced Mrs. Eddy to execute the deed referred to; but the Trustees admit that, upon the execution and delivery of the trust deed March 6, 1907, they proceeded, at the request of Mrs. Eddy, to take possession of all the real ad personal estate conveyed thereby.

3. With reference to the allegations in article III, the Trustees deny that they or any of them now are or ever have been the agents and attorneys of the original defendants, or that they now are or ever have been subject to the control of said original defendants, or that they now are or ever have been a part of any combination with the original defendants or anybody else to surround and seclude the person of Mrs. Eddy or, in connection with the original defendants or anybody else, to take charge, possession, and control of her property and business and manage the same according to their own will and pleasure. They also deny any knowledge that such combination now exists or ever has existed, and that the Trustees (or anybody else to their knowledge) have either completely or partially succeeded in effecting the alleged purpose of such alleged combination. They further deny that the said "next friends" ever had or now have "abundant reason" or any reasonable reason whatever to believe that the Trustees or any of them have ever acted or been associated with the original defendants in any combination whatever, as alleged by the "next friends," or that the Trustees, in connection with their alleged associates or any of them, or otherwise, have wrongfully misappropriated or unlawfully diverted either large or small or any sums of money and large or small or any amounts of property of Mrs. Eddy.

4. With reference to the allegations in article IV, the said Trustees deny that said Mary Baker G. Eddy was not competent for any reason to execute the deed of March 6, 1907, or to contract with the Trustees as set forth in said deed. The Trustees also deny that the said trust deed is a device either of themselves or of the original defendants, contrived and carried out for the purpose of enabling any one to accomplish the wrongful purpose of any alleged combination or for any wrongful purpose whatever; but, on the contrary, they aver that said trust deed was executed and the property delivered to the Trustees by Mrs. Eddy, without the knowledge of any of the original defendants except Mr. Frye, her private secretary.

The Trustees further aver, upon information and belief, that, except said Frye, no one of the ten original defendants knew of the making of said deed until several weeks after its execution; and that, with one other exception, none of the ten defendants had any knowledge or information whatever about the execution of said trust deed and delivery of property to the Trustees until March 30 or March 31, 1907.

5. The Trustees further aver that they in good faith severally contracted on March 6, 1907, with Mrs. Eddy, to accept the trust then created by her and agreed with her in writing to perform the duties of the trust according to the terms and conditions of the deed; and that, in addition to their personal written contract, they have executed and delivered to Mrs. Eddy a bond of one-half a million dollars, with sufficient sureties, conditioned on their proper performance of their said contract. They further aver that the execution of said trust deed and contract was a reasonable and proper act of the grantor and for her personal benefit and protection and for the benefit and protection of her property and estate, and that the allegations by said "next friends" of the grantor's incompetency to make such deed and contract are immaterial.

6. The Trustees further aver that it is their duty under said trust deed and their contract with Mrs. Eddy to protect and preserve her entire estate, and their further duty, if the allegations of the bill are true, to prosecute said ten defendants in behalf of the trust estate for the recovery of all money and property, if any, misappropriated or diverted as alleged; and they aver that they hold no relation to the ten defendants or any one else which will prevent or impair their prosecution, according to its merits, for the benefit of the trust estate and in accordance with their contract with Mrs. Eddy, this or any other action now existing or hereafter arising, and always under the supervision of the Court.

The Trustees respectfully ask the Court to order a speedy hearing upon their motion filed April 2, 1907, for leave to intervene and be substituted as plaintiffs in place of said "next friends," and that a decision of the question raised by the prayer of the "next friends" in the supplemental bill be postponed until the hearing and determination of said motion to intervene.

Streeter & Hollis, Solicitors.
Henry M. Baker,
Archibald McLellan,
Josiah E. Fernald.

Merrimack, ss. April 15, 1907.

Personally appearing, said Henry M. Baker, Archibald McLellan, and Josiah E. Fernald made oath that the facts above set forth upon their own knowledge are true and the facts set forth on information and belief are in their belief true. Before me:

Fred C. Demond, Justice of the Peace.