Thomas B. Russell

Thanks to Jerome and his helper(s) for coming up with the original record of Thomas' death date. It is usually found as September 11, 1855. The original record shows that the date is really August 11.

Thomas B was C. T. Russell's older brother.

Puzzle

Several letters from or about H. B. Rice seem to come from "Leckford," California. I can't locate a Leckford, CA. Anyone solve this mystery?

Mystery solved. Its a misprint for Lockeford, California, near Stockton.

New to our research collection

American Tract Society - About 1830-40

We're trying to add a companion tract, similar to this one, to our collection too.

We need ....

We need to raise 25.00 to pay for an important tract from 1830. If you wish to donate to our research fund email me at rmdevienne @ yahoo dot com. I'll tell you how. If you read the private blog, just use the donate button.

Bruce's wife is home, but her heath is still fragile. Thanks to those who left their good wishes here or to him through his email.

R

News

Bruce's wife had a stroke today and is in the hospital. This blog may go quiet for a period.

One of our blog readers needs some help

Hi Bruce,

I am hoping you can furnish the birthdays of two individuals. They are G.H. Fisher and Menta Sturgeon. Please let me know if you have their birthdates.

Business card

(originally posted on Blog 2)

 

We're trying to date this.

Not a Watch Tower tract. But we think it's relevant. Relevance depends on the date. The tract is undated. Any ideas?

We're still working on the last chapter. Here is a "taste."

The Prophetic Conference

 

            A group of more or less prominent clergy organized a Prophetic Conference for the last two days of October and the first of November 1878. A prospectus was widely circulated stating the organizers” purpose and inviting attendance. Those promoting the conference saw the doctrine of Christ’s return as neglected, reproached:

Dear Brethren in Christ: When from any cause some vital doctrine of God”s Word has fallen into neglect or suffered contradiction and reproach, it becomes the serious duty of those who hold it, not only strongly and constantly to reaffirm it, but to seek by all means in their power to bring back the Lord’s people to its apprehension and acceptance. The precious doctrine of Christ’s second personal appearing has, we are constrained to believe, long lain under such neglect and misapprehension.

In the Word of God we find it holding a most conspicuous place. It is there strongly and constantly emphasized as a personal and imminent event, the great object of the Church’s hope, the powerful motive to holy living and watchful service, the inspiring ground of confidence amid the sorrows and sins of the present evil world, and the event that is to end the reign of Death, cast down Satan from his throne, and establish the kingdom of God on Earth. So vital, indeed, is this truth represented to be that the denial of it is pointed out as one of the conspicuous signs of apostasy of the last days. ….

Looking over the Church of God in all its branches, and listening to the clear and decisive testimony to this truth that is coming up in such volume from teachers and pastors, expositors and lay workers, evangelists and missionaries, it can but appear to us that after the long sleep of the Church, the wise are at last rising up, and trimming their lamps, in preparation for the coming of the Bridegroom.

            The conference was patterned after conferences held in the United Kingdom. Barbour commented on the conference before it took place, writing an article entitled “Prophetic Light” for the November 1878 Herald of the Morning. Few of those attending the conference read the Herald. We can safely say that almost none of them did. Of those present, we can only prove that J. A. Seiss read at least one issue. So, though he wrote it as if addressing the delegates, Barbour’s article was meant for internal consumption. He reiterated their date-based speculations:

Now, brethren, if it is truth, and facts you are after, please notice a few concerning the Jewish nation, and the time of their chastisement: facts, which if recognized, would startle the world.

The Jews have existed, as a nation, nearly four thousand years; but under two entirely distinct conditions. First, as the acknowledged favorites of Heaven, and second, as the cursed of God. The former, prior to the crucifixion; the latter, since the “veil of the temple was rent,” “and their house was left unto them desolate.”

Now we will neither lay down a premise, or make a deduction; but simply state facts which will prove that the time of Jewish dispersion is ended and that the long foretold restoration of the Jews has in fact commenced, this present year, 1878.

            The rest of the article rehearses Barbour’s “Israel’s Double” doctrine, the theory that there is a precise time correspondence between “the Jewish Dispensation” and “the Christian Dispensation.” If he intended to sway the conference, he went unheard and unheeded. The conferees” contact with Barbourite doctrine was through Russell who attended and circulated among the delegates. What should interest us is the attitude reflected in the introductory paragraphs. He presupposed that the prominent clergy who sponsored the event might not be truly interested in “the facts” and “the truth.” He had them both. They did not. They were willing to debate formally stating their premise and making deductions. He need not do that because he had the facts of scriptural fulfillment at hand. So, while the bulk of the article is rational in tone, his view of himself as the last day’s voice of God comes through clearly.

            In a later post-conference article, Barbour noted a basic agreement on the nature of the Second Advent:

The most advanced christian [sic] teachers of to-day, tell us that the coming of Christ to the “air,” where his saints are to be caught away to meet him, and his coming to the earth “with all his saints,” are not only different stages of the advent, but that these two stanges are separated by all, or, most of the time of trouble which is coming on the nations. – I believe the prophetic conference recently held in England, and also that held in N. Y. City, almost to a man, believe in more than one stage to the advent. And many of them believe the foretold “time of trouble,” is already commencing.[1]

            Russell attended the conference, engaging with delegates and promoting in a less brash way the doctrine he shared with Barbour. Evening sessions were given over to “testimony and conference on the topics of the day.”[2] The testimony period suited his purposes, and what evidence we have suggests he used it to promote his beliefs. He does not tell us the names of those with whom he discussed prophetic themes, but we know from other sources the names of two and can with high probability of success guess at several others. One of the most interesting records is found in Jenny Smith’s diary. We could not locate the original diary and it may not still exist, but Smith published key entries. We find this entry for November 1, 1878:

At Sister Clark’s. Two more interesting days have passed. This has been a special privilege. Yesterday A. M. went to Dr. Tyng’s church. Attended the convention met to discuss “The Second Coming of Christ;” was surprised to meet acquaintances from all parts of the land. Had the pleasure of meeting several with whom I have corresponded – Rev. H. L. Hastings, Dr. Charles Cullis and others. Brother Russell of Pittsburg, [sic] would have me take lunch with him. …

Afternoon. – The meeting was very interesting; Dr. Feltwell went with me to see Harriet Britton, the great missionary. Returned for evening-meeting; heard several great speakers. In the afternoon had a number of calls. Miss Stevens says she read of my restoration while in Paris, France.[3]

            Jennie Smith (1842-1924) was a railroad evangelist. Typhoid fever left her an invalid, but she felt called to evangelism. Unable to walk, she traveled in a wheeled cot, using her affliction to draw others into conversation. Her experiences led her to believe that the un-churched were often more charitable than regular attenders:

As I am compelled to travel in the baggage car on account of my cot, I have had ample opportunity to test the hearts of those men, who some think are void of feeling. I must say they are, with few exceptions, a most kindhearted and obliging set of men. Although they may resent it at first, I am satisfied they appreciate any true interest in their eternal welfare.

I have seen the time when I was so impressed I could not refrain from speaking to a man about his soul’s salvation, though I did not know but I should be cursed for it. Yet, in view of his danger, I felt fearless and lost all scruples as to my position. I looked to Jesus for strength, and before I left the car that man, with tearful eyes, thanked me as he grasped my hand, saying, “Would to God more Christians would deal with us as patiently and perseveringly.” If social and reading-rooms were established at all points where the hands who are off duty could have a pleasant lounging place of their own, scores of souls might be saved from temptation and ruin. Through conversation with such persons I have been impressed with the thought of the privations which the public demand from railroad hands, street-car drivers and conductors, livery men, firemen, policemen, and others, including domestic servants; and I fear we, as a Christian people, are not as charitable and do not feel the interest and sympathy we should for those whose occupations necessarily deprive them of Sabbath privileges.[4]

            In March 1878 she regained her ability to walk. She believed it was the result of a divine healing. In this era Russell was open to the idea that faith cures were real, and he would not have disputed this.      It is tempting to speculate on Russell’s attraction to Jennie Smith. However, we can’t go further than what she wrote in her diary. He took her to lunch. We can note, however, that there is a slight resemblance to Maria Ackley, who he married the next year.

Smith notes her association with “Dr. Feltwell.” Russell fell in with this circle and Feltwell was attracted to Barbourite theology. William Vessels Feltwell was a pastor in the Reformed Episcopal Church, a sect of that church formed in 1873 as a result of the tendency of some Episcopalians and Anglicans to move toward Catholicism.[5] Feltwell was of the organizers, leaving behind thirteen years of ministry in the Protestant Episcopal Church.[6] Russell and Feltwell discussed Barbourite doctrine, and Feltwell expressed interest. While Jennie Smith falls out of the picture, Feltwell’s interest became an incident in the Atonement controversy. Not long after the conference, he wrote to Barbour addressing the Atonement issue. Barbour extracted a paragraph, publishing it in the Herald:

I believe the original will clear up the difficulty which rests in many minds regarding this passage, [1 Peter 2:24.] and perhaps the whole subject of substitution. I am inclined to believe the popular substituting sacrifice of our dear Lord is sentimental. There certainly is no substitutionary idea in connection with the fall of the first Adam and his descendants; and I cannot discern any in the second Adam and his seed. I am much interested and instructed, in your arguments on the atonement.[7]

Russell was taken aback. It seemed that Feltwell endorsed “the new views strongly.” When he next saw Feltwell in March 1879 he raised the issue:

I was much surprised, and seeing the brother in March, I inquired; why? He informed me that the article referred to had not stated him correctly – that he had written to Bro. B. to have it corrected, and said he, “Didn't you see the correction in the March Herald?” No, I answered. Then he got me his copy. There it was – Bro. B. regrets at any error, &c, and a quotation from Bro. F's. last letter: “I am now and always have been a believer in the vicarious atonement of Christ.” This seemed all right and I know that it was possible for any one to make a mistake, when merely making an extract from another's letter, and I was rejoiced to think that the correction was so freely made.

But judge of my surprise and sorrow when upon attempting to show it to Bro. P. a few days after, I found that in my March No. a notice of Bro. Rice's paper “The Last Trump;” occupied its place – How was it in yours? We could not understand it, it seemed like double dealing – too much management for a Herald of the Millennial Morning. Alas!, I said to myself; is this the fruit of the new views of the atonement? [8]

            When Russell finally addressed this in print, Barbour politely called Feltwell a liar and admitted his complicity in furthering the lie. Barbour called Feltwell’s letter “a frank but private statement of his views.” He suggested that he should not have published it, “but as it was among the first letters which took a decided stand for the advancing truth, I did make an extract from it, without thinking of the trouble it might make between him and his church.” “Some weeks” later Feltwell wrote Barbour asking for a retraction:

He sent the second latter, informing me of the trouble in which it had involved him, and earnestly asking me to publish the second letter merely to relieve him from that difficulty. I concluded that by publishing it in the Phila. Edition, so as to reach his persecutors, would meet his supposed necessity, without doing injustice to the truth, among the general readers of the herald; and acted on that suggestion; and still believe that, under all the circumstances, I acted wisely.[9]

Barbour said he couldn’t publish the second letter in all editions without explaining all the circumstances which he was unwilling to do. Feltwell was threatened with loss of income and position, Barbour said. There seems insufficient evidence on which to form a firm conclusion. Feltwell did not present it in this light; at least Russell didn’t understand this from his conversation with Feltwell. Barbour was always the hero of his own story and never above distorting the truth to further his own ends. But we have no basis upon which to discount Barbour’s account.

Feltwell drops out of the picture here. The enduring significance of this event rests in what it reveals about how matters stood between Barbour and Russell by mid-year 1879. Russell saw Barbour as controlling and as distorting the truth. Barbour suggested that Russell made an issue out of the Feltwell incident to find “some apparent evil” in him. It was meant, Barbour wrote, to support Russell’s “boyish act in demanding the entire control of the paper, or, the alternative, another paper for the same list of subscribers.”
 

Russell left unnamed the others to whom he spoke. But after explaining where he differed from some them, he added this interesting comment:  

I knew many of these brethren and loved and honored them; but now I love and honor them more; and on points of difference, we shall doubtless come closer together, if we all remember that we are still learners; and also that we are to walk in the light, grow in grace and knowledge; and in love let such as are strong, bear the infirmities of the weak.[10] 

            Though we can say with certainty that he knew Seiss, and with strong probability that he previously met Horace Hastings, we are left to suppose on slim evidence who most of these are. But we can note that during his years with the Allegheny Bible Class he wrote to and traveled to meet many of those writing and preaching on prophecy. This extends the sphere of pre-Barbour influences, putting the lie to those who would have all of his background be Adventist.

 

 =====

Reaction to the Conference

          

            Much of the religious press was antagonistic. The New York Independent, a Congregationalist magazine, editorialized: 

Their way of considering Christ’s kingdom as visible, physical, and political is intensely Jewish and non-Christian in its character. It proves somewhere a false exegesis – that a doctrine is deduced from Scripture, which is not in harmony with the spiritual nature of the Christian system. There is no deeper truth in the Bible than this: “Flesh and blood cannot inherit the Kingdom of God.” Those who are now looking for such a glorious personal Advent with the succeeding political reign of Christ in Jerusalem, seem to us to dishonor Gospel dispensation.  

            The Independent’s opinion was echoed by others. What makes this and other comments interesting to us is that they are exactly the same arguments used against Barbour and Russell. The National Baptist suggested that Christians should ignore prophetic studies because they were not meant to be understood until fulfilled and because they diverted attention from social and political issues: 

We do not hold that we are to live each day as though we expected the Lord to come on that day, any more than we are to live each day as though that day would be our last. If we believed that the Lord was coming to-day, we should take very little trouble about next year’s elections, or about any future event. We believe we are each day to discharge the duties of that day. Practically, and so far as regards our future state, the hour of death, the hour of the Christian’s release, is the Coming of the Lord. This may come at any day, at any hour. And it becomes us to be in readiness for it.

            This represents a point of view Russell confronted and rejected.            

            The Interior editorialized:

This convention gives a new impulse and added respectability to a doctrinal affectation which is much more fashionable, just now, than godliness.

No doubt it is pleasant to one who loves the good things of the world – honor, fame, power, exalted rank – and who is not specially solicitous that others shall enjoy the same to “stand and wait,” as Dr. Tyng said in his address that they were doing, in the blessed hope that the Lord will suddenly come bringing all these glorious things to the, unearned, and damnation to fourteen hundred millions more who sit in the shadow of ignorance. 

            These criticisms represent a growing and fairly important rejection of millenarianism. Everything said against the conference would be asserted against Watch Tower belief and against Russell personally. 

Barbour’s Reaction 

            Barbour didn’t attend but read the published reports. He was disappointed that the conference didn’t echo his own views: 

After a careful perusal of the report of the “Prophetic Conference,” I feel dissatisfied. From the character of the speakers, and the nature of the subjects advertised, I had looked for some advanced light. From the paper on the “Times of the Gentile,” by Rev. J.[ohn] D. Duffield, I had supposed something definite would have forced itself into notice.[11]

            Barbour reasserted his belief that Gentile Times would end in 1914, moving from that on to other issues:

Everyone at that conference professes to believe that Christ will come with all his saints to the mount of Olives, [sic] at the end of the times of the Gentiles; and they profess to believe that it will be within the limits of this present living generation. And yet with all the present indications of the return of the Jews, the subject of the Times of the Gentiles, although advertised, does not appear in the reports. I do not know how the Dr. handles the subject, but I do know he could not have presented it in its fullness, without approximating to something like a definite conclusion; but the paper did not appear, nor was there one particle of advanced light by which we might presume that the advent was nearer than it was one thousand years ago.

The different phases of the advent, coming for his saints, or coming with his saints’ coming to gather his elect, or coming to the mount of Olives, after they are gathered, were all one and the same, so far as expressed by them. The signs of the times, so pregnant with the coming time of trouble, in which Daniel’s people are to be delivered, or any other indications of the coming crisis, were passed over unnoticed. There seems to have been a pre-arranged determination that no reason for apprehending the advent near should be presented. To say that it may come to-morrow, brings no reproach, but to offer any reason why it may come in our day, savors of “Millerism;” and so they cramped themselves into a nut-shell”

            These were Barbour’s pet issues, and he continued in this vein for several more paragraphs, quoting from the conference report. He sent a copy of the December Herald of the Morning to all the conference speakers, so it was to them directly that Barbour said:

The investigation of prophecy, and especially of the prophetic measurements, has a reproach associated with it which few have courage to face. And yet these prophetic measurements are a part of the “Holy Scriptures, which are able to make us wise unto salvation.”

I am convinced your gathering at New York will, in the providence of God, bring forth good fruit, by turning the attention of thousands, to this great impending event; but a vague and dark “expectation,” such as your words are calculated to arouse, is a mere sign of the times. And to stop there, will leave you, as to the second coming, in a parallel condition to the Jewish church at the first advent; when yet notwithstanding the universal expectation, they have suffered an age of chastisement, “because they knew not the time of their visitation.”[12]

            Barbour was scolding where Russell was not. This difference between the two persisted until Barbour’s death in 1905. Barbour saw himself as the ultimate teacher. In this period Russell saw himself as a co-laborer even with those who disagreed with him. They were all learners, Russell felt. Even after he came to see himself as God’s appointed servant, Russell seemed eternally surprised when his view of truth was rejected harshly. Barbour expected it, and his personality drew it on him. It was a self-certifying view. Christians should expect rejection. They rejected his message. He was, therefore, the God-chosen messenger.

           

Ambivalence to Rejection

 

            Russell and Paton continued to associate with and support the Herald. Paton continued to preach in the Midwest. Russell sent money to Barbour. Both events are reported in the December 1878 issue of Herald of the Morning.[13]Additional funds from Russell are note in the January and February 1879 issues. Paton continued to write for the Herald; an article by him entitled “The Kingdom” appeared in the February issue as well.

 

 

            Barbour noted declining reader interest, inserting this notice in the February 1879 issue:

 

Subscribers for six months who received the first monthly paper, the July number for 1878, have now received two numbers beyond the time of their subscriptions; and as many of these have been sent by third parties, it is quite possible some of them do not wish the paper continued, hence we must drop all such names, unless we hear from them.

 

He would send the paper free to the poor, he said, and payment in postage was acceptable. He offered to send the paper free for two months to any who wished to examine it.

Russell and others noted his tendency to print letters favorable to his new views on Atonement and Resurrection. Contrary opinion existed and shows up in the articles that addressed readers’ questions. A reader asked him how he reconciled his “latest views on the resurrection with the Elijah type.” He reiterated that he hadn’t previously examined the atonement doctrine and its ramifications: “I never had any view, only a confused idea, until I studied the subject.” He provided little explanation, but observed that “there is no room for difference of opinion.”[14]

 

 

 

---

[1]               N. H. Barbour: Time Arguments, Herald of the Morning, February 1879, page 33.

[2]               The Prophetic Conference: October 30, 31, November 1, 1878. Christ’s Second Coming, New York Tribune, Extra Number 46, page 4.

[3]               Jennie Smith: From Baca to Beulah: From a Couch of Suffering to My Feet, to Exalt His Holy Name, Garrigues Brothers, Philadelphia, 1889, pages 257-258.

[4]               Jennie Smith: Valley of Baca: A Record of Triumph and Suffering, Hitchcock and Walden, Cincinnati, 1880, page 268.

[5]               Reformed Episcopal history is not relevant here, but if our readers wish to pursue this they may consult G. D. Cummin’s Primitive Episcopacy: A Return to the "Old Paths" of Scripture and the Early Church. A Sermon, Preached in Chicago, Dec. 14, 1873. At the Consecration of the Rev. Charles Edward Cheney, D.D., as a Bishop in the Reformed Episcopal Church, Edward O. Jenkins, New York, 1874.

[6]               The Episcopal Schism, New York World, January 6, 1874. A. C. Guelzo: For the Union of Evangelical Christendom: The Irony of the Reformed Episcopalians, Pennsylvania State University, 1994, pages 158.

[7]               Feltwell to Barbour in Correspondence, Herald of the Morning¸ January 1879, page 23.

[8]               C. T. Russell: To Readers of the Herald of the Morning, Supplement to Zion’s Watch Tower, July 1879.

[9]               N. H. Barbour: Questions and Answers, Herald of the Morning, August 1879, page 27.

[10]             C. T. Russell: The Prophetic Conference, Herald of the Morning, December 1878, page 84.

[11]             John Duffield was a professor at Princeton University.

[12]             N. H. Barbour: Christ’s Second Coming, Herald of the Morning, December 1878, pages 84-86.

[13]             A letter from Mrs. D. B. Wolfe of Nevada, Ohio, reports Paton’s lectures there. The Letters Received column reports money sent from Russell. Both are on page 82 of that issue.

[14]             N. H. Barbour: Questions and Answers, Herald of the Morning¸ February 1879, page 39.

William Vessle Feltwell

W. V. Feltwell played a small but significant part in Watch Tower history in 1878-1879. We have located a very poor photo, but haven't received persmission to use it yet. If you can locate a public domaine photo, please let me know.

My take on this ...

I think we have enough to finish volume two and tell a creditable story. About half of it is finished already.

I’ve thought about what we need to proceed. We need some relief from research issues. The “rub” there is that research is at the heart of accurate, well-told history. We will need to rely on willing helpers who can find and organize documentation.  If we move on to book three, this will be especially vital.

Book three enters into really controversial events. Some of them have been overlooked. We have no plans to overlook them. Events such as the Russells marital problems are coated with myth and misunderstanding. We are interested in telling the story as accurately as possible. There were personality conflict issues between Russell and some of the most prominent workers. This takes on into murky waters. Some of our readers want to protect Russell at all costs. We won’t do that, though we will be “fair” to all parties. Most of this is un-researched and we expect a difficult time following the trail.

We will need help with it. To be truly helpful you will have to approach issues in the same spirit we do. We follow the trail no matter where it goes.

There are several collections of letters and personal papers. Almost without exception they are closed to researchers. We need help contacting the owners and prying things out of their hands. An example is a large lot of Bible Student era letters sold a few years ago through e-bay. We would like to see those. We can’t pay for photocopying or scanning. We don’t know who owns them.

Pursuing the next era in Watch Tower history will be time consuming and difficult. We can’t do it alone. We’ve received some significant help with the current project, but most of the research is our own. If we move on to project three, we will need even more help.

I’m more interested in the transitional era, the era between 1916 and 1919. I’d rather skip book three and move right on to that. I’m certain that won’t happen. But you can help us gather material. This is more difficult than you can imagine. We will need access to material in the US and Canadian and UK archives. Usually this requires travel. In the United States, the National Archives has proved very reluctant to answer requests for relevant material. When someone else requested documents from them in the early 1990s, they came inked out to almost solid black. This should be less of an issue now because of time limitations on secrets expiring. But we would need a volunteer (unpaid) to visit the archive in Washington D. C. and in Canada and in the UK to dig for papers, photocopy or photograph them at their own expense and get them to us. Is this worth the bother to anyone? We have our doubts.

We think there are World War I era documents in Germany archives too. We haven’t a clue how to find them. I don’t read German well. We’d need a copy of the original and a translation. Finding someone to do this as a labor of love seems unattainable.

Even with the small amount we know of these two eras, I can tell you that what you’ve been told is largely wrong by omission, sometimes wrong in factual presentation or point of view. The detailed story is always more interesting.

Even if we decide to proceed (I can’t see Mr. Schulz not doing so, even if he’s unwell.) we will need significantly more help than we’ve had with this project. And with this project we’ve had three really dedicated researchers adding to our work and a fair number who just send an occasional item or move us forward by a well asked question. We will need someone willing to contact libraries and other institutions for us. They’ll have to be a good negotiator with a more pleasant personality than my own. (I’m sickish and cranky at the moment.)

Organization is an increasing problem. I don’t know how to improve our archival organization. I’m reorganizing our archival notebooks to account for current needs. I really need a secretary.

We continue to find things. The latest is a letter from A. D. Jones’ father written in September1892. All of it but one sentence is irrelevant to our story. But it’s good to have the one sentence. It explains something his son did. So the issue is, can we enlist more help and can we streamline our research?

Comments?

Where we are

Because of health issues, the last chapter is languishing. We still intend to finish and publish by mid year next. We will take a break with the publication of volume one to reassess the project and to attend to other issues. There is a very real possibility that we will end this project with volume one. This may disappoint some, but I don’t think it will matter to most of those who visit this blog one or twice a month or less frequently.

There are several deeply personal reasons why we may not continue this project. I’m certainly not discussing them here, and I won’t engage with you in email if you press the issue. I think they’re good and sufficient reasons to suspend maybe drop totally, the rest of this project. During our planned break, we will consider where we stand. If we decide to end this project with “volume one,” we will close the private blog and put this one into stasis, closing comments but leaving up the posts.

Original research is increasingly expensive, and though some of our readers have contributed money to this project, it is unacceptable practice to beg money from readers. As we approach more modern times, documentation is harder to obtain. Some of it is held by private persons unwilling to share. We, on that basis alone, are faced with a nearly impossible task. However, if there were not more personal reasons, we would persist.

It is fun to live in the past. But there are pressing issues in the ‘now’ that are separating us from this project. We’ve made no firm decision. We’re in no hurry to do so. When we do, either Rachael or I will post it here.

There are more important things in life that musty history. 

The Watchtower (IBSA) recordings

The Photo Drama discs were 12" in diameter. Note that the dates on the label refer to the various patents of the recording company, and do not refer to recording dates.

The Angelophone discs were only 7" in diameter.
 

 

 

The Rutherford recordings were 12" in diameter. The transcription records were 16"

 

 

 Introduction by Jerome:

Back in September 2011, I was given permission to reprint an extract from a 1993 article on the Watchtower recordings. The selection dealt with the Angelophone recordings. Noticing that this proved quite popular in the intervening months, I have now obtained permission to reprint the whole article here on Blog 1, after it recently appeared on Blog 2.

The only stipulation made by the original author is that it should be printed as a time capsule, with no updating. So the current facts and figures given are those current in 1993, not today. Then there is certain information the writer would not have had available at that time, such as our more detailed understand of CTR’s religious background, and William Conley being the first Watch Tower president. The latter information was only published for the first time later in 1993. So there may be little inaccuracies to find; however, they have no real bearing on the subject of the article – the historic recordings.

Just one interpolation has been made in red as a result of comments made when the Angelophone extract was published, but that only serves to vindicate the original writer.

The article as it stands was first published in April 1993 in issue 27 of The Historic Record, a specialist magazine for collectors of shellac records, generally playing at 78 revolutions per minute (rpm). The magazine had an international readership, but was published in Britain; so the article comes from that angle, including British rather than American English spelling. The general readership had no interest in the Watchtower as such, but in subsequent issues several collectors from around the world came forward who had examples of its output.

The article concentrates solely on recordings in the English language. There is a vast untapped field for research out there for all the foreign language recordings that were made, both for different countries and for different language groups existing within the United States.

At the end of the original article were a number of pages detailing the various recordings that had been published:  Photodrama, Angelophone, Rutherford lectures, Watch Tower Male Voice Quartet, Organ Records, Advertising Records, etc. These lists have been omitted because this information can now be readily obtained through the internet for any who may have sufficient interest.

It was noted in the comment section on Blog 2 that shellac has proved to be a surprisingly durable storage medium, far superior to current electronic media such as CDs and DVDs. A recent sound archive discussion list commented that commercial coarse groove discs (78s) and vinyl (33s and 45s) do not immediately need to be recopied, as long as the originals are kept in good condition. Unlike recent media storage systems, they have proved to be quite stable information carriers. In practice it means that the recordings of CTR and Rutherford, going back nearly 100 years, could well be more durable than modern Watchtower DVDs.

A religious organisation that issued over 200 different titles on 78 rpm shellac, and who once produced over a hundred thousand records in a year at its peak.  A religious group that sent its workers from house to house in the 1930s with portable phonographs to play 12” recorded sermons on the doorstep. A group that had previously compiled an eight hour audio/visual experience, using dozens of specially produced records. An organisation that in over a hundred years had four presidents, all of whom made recordings – in one case, singing! An overview of historic recordings would not be complete without considering the output of the Watchtower Society – the official arm of the Jehovah’s Witnesses.

Today the Witnesses are well-known for that unexpected knock on the door, to share their views on scripture. Active in Britain since the 1880s, vigorous proselyting has been one of their distinguishing features. For thirty years (1914-1944) the gramophone or phonograph was an essential piece of their equipment.

The Watchtower magazine was founded in July 1879 by Charles Taze Russell, later known as Pastor Russell. He had been involved in one of the independent Bible study groups common in America at the time, and contributed a number of articles to small Adventist journals like George Storrs’ Bible Examiner and Nelson Barbour’s Herald of the Morning. He differed from the mainstream Adventist belief in a visible return of Christ, and also common beliefs on the end of the world. His journal promoted the second coming as an invisible presence – Christ turning his attention to the earth – and far from being burned up, the earth would one day become a paradise during a literal millennium. The first issue of ‘Zion’s Watch Tower and Herald of Christ’ Presence’ was an ambitious six thousand copies. Today the (retitled) ‘Watchtower Announcing Jehovah’s Kingdom’ – with much the same basic message – has a circulation of over fifteen million copies each issue in 112 language. It is also produced on cassette: the historic successor to the 78s. By the time of Russell’s death in 1916 there were 1,200 known congregations of Bible Students as they were then called, including nearly 200 in Britain.

In 1881 Zion’s Watch Tower carried the article ‘Wanted – One Thousand Preachers’ – setting wheels in motion that eventually lead to a worldwide organisation of evangelisers. That same year proselyting started in Britain. In 1884 ‘Zion’s Watch Tower Tract Society’ was incorporated in the State of Pennsylvania. To hold property and conduct business in the British Empire, the ‘International Bible Students Association’ was later formed. The names ‘Watchtower’ and ‘IBSA’ are the key to identifying official historic recordings today. Charles Russell became the first president of what would commonly be called ‘The Society’.

Prior to the First World War, the Bible Student movement was still numerically small. However, they were very adept in making their message heard. In America there were well-publicised debates with recognised clergy. (Note the warnings about ‘Russellism’ in the film ‘Elmer Gantry’). In Britain there were large public meetings at venues like the Royal Albert Hall and the Bible Students’ own London Tabernacle in Paddington. Hundreds of millions of free tracts were distributed. At one point ‘Pastor Russell’s Sermons’ were being carried by over three thousand newspapers. It was not surprising that recorded sound and the fledgling film industry would be utilised in the campaign.

THE PHOTODRAMA OF CREATION (1914)

In 1914 the Society premiered its own audio/visual production called The Photodrama of Creation. It contained about five hours of 4 inch lantern slides and three hours of motion pictures – both slides and films being coloured by hand. The total eight hour production was eventually shown in four parts. It took over two years to make and cost the Society over $300,000 to produce. Running costs were met by local groups.

After visiting key cities in America, the British premiere took place in July 1914 at the Princes Theatre, Shaftsbury Avenue. Russell travelled over in person to introduce it. It told the history of the Bible and the world to date, and then the Bible Students’ view of the future. The whole commentary was recorded on 12 inch records, produced by the American Gramophone Co., Bridgeport, Conn.

Russell’s voice could reportedly hold an audience for hours, but it was not suitable for the Photodrama, lacking sufficient ‘bite’ for the acoustic recordings of the day. So only two records actually featured him in person. These contained mini-lectures to introduce and conclude each part, and to cover the intermissions. They were designed to synchronise with films of Russell speaking on the screen. This early attempt at a ‘sound’ film depended on the projectionist keeping a variable speed projector in line with the records played on two large turntables at the front of the hall. It was easier said than done. In the first showings it was not uncommon for Pastor Russell to bow and walk off the screen while apparently still speaking... His brief comments welcomed the audience, gave brief summaries of the drama, and stressed the Bible Students’ slogan – ‘Seats Free – No Collection’.

The actual programme had 24 double-sided recordings containing a total of 96 short speeches at 80 rpm, made by a professional elocutionist named Harry Humphrey, who sounded quite like Pastor Russell. These accompanied the lantern slides. The films were generally accompanied by commercial recordings of classical music. However, some hymns that introduced each part and filled the intermissions must have been specially recorded; the words are taken from the Bible Students’ own hymnals. For example, the old gospel hymn ‘In the Sweet By and By’ uses the words credited to Maria, Russell’s wife, in the 1890 hymnbook. The rousing ‘Our King is Marching On’ (John Brown’s Body) has the line, “The Gentile Times are closing for their Kings have had their day” – a special reference to the Bible Students’ view of the year 1914.

After London, the British version of the Photodrama went on tour. In areas that had no electricity, a shorter version using just tinted slides was shown with a limelight lantern. As a result, a number of extra sets of records were produced. Additionally, many wanted to purchase the two records of Pastor Russell’s voice as a souvenir, particularly when he died in 1916.

THE ANGELOPHONE RECORDINGS (1916)

With the success of the Photodrama in mind, and the realisation that records were now highly popular, a few Bible Students set up the Angelico Company in 1916. Ostensibly it was to manufacture and sell phonographs, but with each purchase came a set of 50 Angelophone recordings. For some reason they were numbered 49-98, although it is certain that no 1-48 were ever issued. The records were small seven inch discs using the ‘hill and dale’ method to squeeze two minutes on a side at 85 rpm. They were advertised as ‘Old Fireside Hymns’ sung by the celebrated baritone Henry Burr. On the reverse side (also at 85 rpm) were a series of two minute sermons to explain the hymns. These were uncredited, but were Pastor Russell’s own voice. Those who had questions could write to a ‘Free Information Bureau for Angelophone Patrons’. This of course was the Watch Tower Society.

It must have sounded a good idea on paper; reaching people who might be prejudiced by the words Watch Tower. In practice, it was a disaster!

For a start, Henry Burr sounds rather the worse for wear. The hymns contain some high notes that his baritone had considerable difficulty in reaching. (When this extract was first published a blog reader quoted a modern Wikipedia article to the effect that Burr was a tenor. However, the advertising material for Angelophone at the time called him a baritone. Whatever his range, this was not Burr’s finest hour.) Limited to two minutes many hymns were abridged. The reverse side, Pastor Russell’s short sermons – and the only reason the Bible Students would purchase – was even worse! Russell was now in very poor health and died in October 1916. His voice, unsuitable for the Photodrama, was even more unsuitable now. The recordings were very poorly made, and today (without a transcript) much of what is said is indecipherable. It appears to have been the same at the time because complaints flooded in, and the Watch Tower had to announce they had been re-recorded. This time, Harry Humphrey was hired again. His voice was slightly slower, so the speed for his recordings was reduced to 80 rpm. There is some improvement, but not a lot, and the records soon ceased production. The Angelophone Hymnal disappeared from the Society’s cost list after 1919.

THE RUTHERFORD-KNORR RECORDINGS (1934-1942)

The second president of the Society was Joseph Franklin Rutherford, a Missouri lawyer, popularly known as ‘Judge Rutherford’. Under his presidency a number of changes occurred. Believing the present world order to be in its ‘last days’ since 1914, an increased sense of urgency was felt. While Russell had encouraged missionary work, this had been optional and mainly carried out by travelling colporteurs. In Rutherford’s era active proselyting became an article of faith. In 1931 the Bible Students loyal to the Society adopted the name Jehovah’s Witnesses (based on Isaiah 43 v.10) to stress their active ministry. 78s would have a key role in this.

The advent of radio saw the Society embrace this medium for witnessing: they obtained their first radio station WBBR in 1924. It was the first non-commercial station in New York City. Throughout the 20s and 30s Rutherford’s voice became well-known over the American airwaves, and was beamed to Britain from stations like Radio Normandie. At its peak, over 400 stations gave the movement airtime. They used transcription records, which were 16 inch in diameter, ran at 33 rpm and played from the centre outwards – a problem for collectors who wish to play surviving copies today. Massive leaflet drops encouraged the public to tune in, and on at least one occasion a free 78 was given away for advertising purposes. The magazine Golden Age (now called Awake) for January 15^th, 1936, page 240, asked, “Are you willing to pleasantly surprise your neighbours by giving them an advertisement in the modern manner? Have you a phonograph? If so, you may have FREE one 12 inch record...(if you) agree to play the record seven times EACH WEEK until February 23 in the hearing of guests, tradesmen...and other callers...” History does not record just how pleasantly surprised the neighbours were, or what happened if you didn’t manage the seven times a week...

Rutherford’s radio ministry hit problems in the 1930s. His style was blunt, and he refused to be censored. The Catholic Church particularly objected. He criticised certain doctrines, and more sensitive at the time, the involvement of some clerics in politics. The rise of Nazism and Fascism was supported by some as a bulwark against Communism. With hindsight one can see how misguided some were, and Rutherford’s polemics seem prophetic. But at the time strenuous efforts were made to silence him. In 1936 the Archbishop of Philadelphia, Dennis Dougherty, endorsed a campaign to boycott Gimbel Brothers stores if their radio stations honoured its contract with Rutherford, and darkly threatened “more drastic action” if the broadcasts continued. The ensuing battle involved petitions of millions of signatures, quickly organised by the Witnesses, but in 1937 they switched full throttle to an even more direct approach to the public.

Already since 1931, transcription records had been circulated for use in rented halls or public places. In the depression not everyone had a radio, and those that did could always turn it off. It was a little more difficult to silence a visiting group of Witnesses with a loudspeaker in their car!

As the use of radio declined, so mobile transcriptions machines flourished. Photos from London in the 1930s show that some enthusiasts decorated their vehicles to resemble the Watch Tower on the front of their magazine! The curiosity value would claim initial attention, and the indefatigable Witnesses would then canvass the area. These 16 inch records are rare today because the users were asked to destroy them when they became worn and the sound quality deteriorated.

The main problem with this work was the size and cost of the machinery. So in 1934 a new series of 12 inch 78 rpm records was announced, that Witnesses could play in people’s homes. By 1936 this evolved into all Witnesses taking a phonograph and records from door to door. The first Society phonograph weighed a hefty 20 lb – although some used old prams to propel them. By 1936 the Society manufactured a lightweight machine, and in 1940 designed a special machine that could be played closed in a vertical position by the touch of a button. It could replay one recording, store several others, and had compartments for the Witness’s literature, or – like as not – his sandwiches. They would knock on doors, announce they had an important message for the householder, and – straight into the recording... It was difficult to argue with a record – it just carried on regardless, and the novelty had many listening – the first time anyway.

In 1937 a follow-up work started. Those who listened first time around were encouraged to have a regular meeting with the Witnesses. 78s again played a key role. Hour long lectures, previously reserved for the transcription records, were issued on series of 78s to be used in the discussion. The old transcription machines were adapted to play 78s and the older discs were phased out.

Some recordings contain surprises. On side P-113 labelled ‘Safety’ the actual talk of the title has finished, and Rutherford presents a resolution to an enthusiastic 30,000 crowd. There follows a short radio announcement, and then the hymn ‘On the Rock of Ages Founded’ is sung by the Watch Tower Male Voice Quartet. Around this time the Society also issued seven Quartet 78s recorded by Columbia, featuring the singing voice of Fred Franz. This is of interest because Franz would become the Society’s fourth president in 1977, until his death in 1992.

Two recordings in the ‘Rutherford’ series are particularly collectable today because of their historical overtimes. P-114 ‘Enemies’ was the subject of a court case taken to the United States Supreme Court. A Witness named Newton Cantwell, with his two sons, played this record to two Catholics in New Haven, Connecticut, who objected to its message. The listeners could have shut the door on the Witnesses (or as a Middle West farmer once did, blown their phonograph apart with a shotgun!) – instead they called the police, and the Cantwells were arrested. They were charged with a breach of the peace and soliciting funds without a licence. The local court convicted them and the Society took this test case as high as it could go. In 1940 the U.S. Supreme Court reversed the conviction. This decision in favour of religious freedom was of importance to not just the Witnesses. The book ‘Reconsecrating America’ by George Goldberg, page 22, relates how the State Prosecutor lost his case by a most remarkable blunder. He argued that it was unlawful “to stir up strife and discontent.” Justice McReynolds then noted that Jesus had stirred up a “good deal of trouble in Jerusalem.” The State’s counsel shot back: “As I remember my Bible, something was done about that!" That was too much for the Judges and the Witnesses won their case!

The other recording, and probably the most interesting listening today, is the lecture ‘Government and Peace’ spread over P-205 to 218. This talk was given at Madison Square Gardens in 1939, and relayed by telephone link to Alexandra Palace and other locations in Britain. Those listening must have wondered what was happening because twenty minutes into the talk a riot broke out!

Somehow (and the how was a matter for considerable debate later) about 500 supporters of Charles Coughlin filled the seats directly behind and above the speaker’s platform. Coughlin was a radio priest whose supporters formed ‘The Christian Front’. He was to be mercilessly lampooned by the folk singer Woodie Guthrie in the anti-fascist song ‘Lindberg’. Rutherford’s lecture was anathema to the Couglinites. When he reviewed the world’s problems since the last Holy Year, including the persecution of the Jews, they started booing. For about ten minutes cries of “Viva Franco”, “Heil Hitler” and “Kill that damn Rutherford” filled the air, and missiles peppered the platform. The loyal audience of 18,000 applauded Rutherford on, as Witness ushers tried to quell the demonstration. Three ushers were later charged with assault by aggrieved demonstrators, but the case was thrown out of court. After about ten minutes the nearly 70 year old speaker left his prepared script. “Note today the Nazis and Catholics that would like to break up this meeting but by God’s grace they cannot do it,” he thundered! There was a howl of approval from the audience and huge applause. The recordings of this incident were used effectively by the Witnesses in attracting new converts for several years.

Rutherford died in early 1942. His last recording was P-292. He was replaced as president by Nathan Homer Knorr. Knorr was a very able administrator, but not a fiery orator like Rutherford. The recording sessions continued with Knorr’s talks at the 1942 conventions (P-292 to 330) but it was not the same. With the war on none of these recordings came to Britain, and shortage of materials prevented their release in America until mid-1943. Further shortages of phonographs disrupted this work, and in 1944 it was generally discontinued.

The times they were a’changing. A phonograph on a doorstep, however strange it sounds today, yielded excellent results for the Witnesses in the 1930s, but in the more sophisticated 40s it would not do. One of Knorr’s first acts on becoming president was to institute a series of new training schools. By 1944 there was an army of trained volunteers who could effectively use their own voices to spread their message. Later generations of Witnesses would still embrace all modern means of communicating their beliefs. There would be more films, vinyl recordings, tapes, videos and mountains of literature, but the age of the 78 for the Watchtower Society passed into history in 1944.

We need information

We need information about Charles Nathan, a Watch Tower evangelist active in West Africa sometime between 1914 and 1930.

Additional fact: Nathan was an American.

We now think that the account about Charles Nathan is fiction, a composit. Thanks to those who tried to help. The account is found in a recent book by E. C. Osondu.