From Zion's Glad Songs

Much Improved. Thanks.

A response ...

My comments about another's research drew an email response. In fairness to the author, I reproduce it here:

Dear Rachel,

Your recent attack on my research is not to your credit. I have researched this subject since the 1970´s and I don´t bring any preconcieved ideas into my writing. I started trying to figure out what happened and why and I now know the answers. One has to stick to a high level of ethics, that´s for sure. That Is why I will not claim that  Rutherford had extra-marital affairs as so many others have done.

In the nature of things the brief response to Chryssides new book that I made public couldn´t give justice to my thorough research. I stated that Macmillan  was not reliable and said his old age was the reason. Since he made so many astonishing mistakes in his presentation my verdict was a charitable one. The alternative is that he lied knowingly. I can demonstrate over and over and over again how unreliable his testomony was. His testimony is condtradicted by all the contemporary sources, even Rutherford´s writings, and that is the real reason why I don´t accept much of what he stated. However,  I accept one  interesting piece of information that he brought forward, and that in spite of the fact that there is no corroboration from the contemporary material.  But generally his long life in an ever changing organization has affected his memory.

I believe you were wrong when you stated that the corporate law under which the Society was incorporated was formulated in 1876. It was formulated in 1874. [He's right.] Also, the legal arguments used by Rutherford did not date only from 1906, as you seem to suggest. They were part of the Pennsylvania Corporate law much earlier as an earlier Pennsylvania law book that I have shows. But that does not mean that the issues of of 1916-1918 are given a new color. It is still true, moreover, that Rutherford NEVER tried to explain how the charter could contain illegal clauses. It would be most useful for him to do so. If new laws had the effect that the charter was superseded , why not say so? Why not give the dates and details of such new laws? Even the Philadelphia lawyer he mustered did not say a word about this and so the ousted board members remained convinced that they were the legal directors of the Society.

It is clear that you don´t have any real knowledge about this, and if the thoughts you presented came from your father, he is ignorant, too. That you stated that you are Schultz´s daughter was good. It explains a lot. [I'm not Bruce Schulz' daughter. He misread what I wrote.]

English Version is Song 9 in 1928 Songbook

Pay attention to the words ...

            There are, I think, things you do not understand. Let me clarify issues for you.

            Some of you believe this project depends on me. You think that because I am principal blog editor. What is posted here appears under my rather silly post-it name. From the beginning this project has depended on B. W. Schulz – not on me. He conceptualized it. He was and remains the principal author and guiding light of this work.

            We often write in tandem, writing the same chapter or parts of the same chapters. We mold our separate writing into a unified presentation which we hope (and I believe) our readers cannot easily assign to either of us. So when you praise me for this work, your adulation is misplaced.

            Some of you misread my comments. I usually write exactly what I mean. I expect that my words have meaning; injecting contrary understanding into them is at least irritating and at its worst it abuses the gift of language, occasionally an unforgivable sin. I did not say I was withdrawing from the current project. I said that after it is finished, I will not remain to complete book three. So all the distress expressed in private emails is misplaced. And one of you said that you would not support Mr. Schulz if he moves on to book three, tentatively called On the Cusp of Fame.

            I am lead on this blog to relieve Mr. Schulz of some burdens. He is aged, infirm, and stubborn as a mule. He also continues to research, write, and guide this project. Some of you act as if he has turned vegetable. Stop it.

            Without being offensive, I cannot clearly tell you how upsetting it is when you attribute Bruce’s work to me. I take credit for my own work; I do not take credit for the genius of others.

            Another issue must be addressed. One of the friends of this research, a retired history professor, lives across the Columbia River from me. He pointed me to comments on a controversialist chat board. Nice things were said about our work. I appreciate the kind comments. However, there was other nonsense there that exemplifies the ethical and procedural issues attendant on historiography. Another writer, I think not a trained historian, is writing about the post-Russell controversies. Someone should write about that, but the approach noted there is faulty.

            He rejects A. H. MacMillan’s testimony as given in Faith on the March because MacMillan was ‘old’ and his memory faulty. MacMillan wrote exactly 40 years ante. He was not particularly old. And if he was, age is not reason to question memory. Mr. Schulz, my father, and others of my acquaintance are far older than MacMillan was in 1957. No-one can fairly describe them as mentally challenged. If you read hardcore science, you’ve probably read one or more of my father’s books, many of them written when he was well-past MacMillan’s age.

            Discounting evidence because it does not support your point of view is unethical. Don’t do it.

            The same writer fell into the trap that lures many. He hasn’t followed the trail to the end. He separates some issues that cannot be separated. He comments on the nature of the Watch Tower board of directors and the election process. The Society was incorporated in 1884 under the laws of Pennsylvania as formulated in 1876. Corporate law changed in 1906. The new laws changed Watch Tower Society legal obligations. This gives the issues of 1916-1918 a new color.

            If we write to our pre-conceived ideas, our history will be flawed. Seriously flawed. Go where honest research takes you. Do not write to an agenda.

            Now ... do you all feel scolded?

            I see that I’ve omitted a thought. Most of you know that I am not a Witnesses. I’m a professional historian and educator. I write to be read. I do not write to further a religion, not even my own. I do not write out of ‘principle.’ I’m a storyteller at heart. That’s what I do. Storytellers want to be read and appreciated.

1896

J F Rutherford's First Book

(revised)

I didn’t realize, until I did a search, but I have actually posted something on this several years ago - J F Rutherford’s very first book. But having lost an hour of my life actually reading it earlier today, I decided to post again.

In 1895 the Boonville Advertiser, the official paper of Cooper County, gave away a free 128 page book entitled Laws of Missouri - Business Manual. The author and compiler was one J F Rutherford of the law firm of Wright and Rutherford.

The book is not dated as such, but one of the advertisements for the Cooper Institute announced that its 26^th year of operation would begin on Tuesday, September 3, 1895, so we can reasonably assume that the volume came out earlier that year.

In the main, only the right hand pages contained text, the left hand pages contained full page advertisements for the various services available in a rural area. There are thirteen law firms in the area for example, but top of the list is Wright and Rutherford, with offices in the Windsor Block. There is a glowing endorsement of Rutherford in the Publisher’s Preface:

“THE ADVERTISER has had Mr J F Rutherford, one of the leading members of the Boonville bar, to compile and arrange the laws herein. His fitness for such work is a guarantee of its usefulness to the farmers and businessmen.”

The table of contents shows the scope of legal matters that Rutherford covered.

One might note such subjects as Conveyance of Real Estate, Divorce and Alimony, Mortgages and Deeds of Trust, and Wills are covered. Knowledge in some of these areas would make J F Rutherford very useful to CTR when he became the Watch Tower’s legal counsel.

Of course, there is nothing whatsoever theological in this volume; Rutherford’s first foray into scriptural interpretation would not come until 1907 with the publication of Man’s Salvation, from a Lawyer’s Viewpoint. But still, for completionists, this is a volume to obtain. As you can tell from the grainy opening picture, alas, I do not have an original.

Don't expect

Don't expect much from us for a few weeks. It's end of term and we're both busy with that.

This blog's readership is declining, and the blog appears to be irrelevant. We may not continue it. Few read it and fewer comment in a meaningful way. As I assess it, all our work since we started our book on Barbour has been a waste of time best spent on other, more important things.

If it continues past the finish of Separate Identity, vol 2, it will be without me.

R. M. de Vienne

First few paragraphs new chapter. Rough Draft only

Approach to Eighteen Eighty-One

Worldwide people expected key events, prophetic fulfillments for 1881. An Australian newspaper reported that peasants in Russia were convinced that the world would end November 11, 1881.[1] The craze wasn’t confined to Russian peasants, but found believers elsewhere. An Australian columnist who wrote as “Wandering Minstrel” poked fun at the prediction, writing that he heard “a great deal of the millennium just now, and prophets are predicting the end of the world.”[2] The press always found a place for the odd, and “an old gentleman” from Lincolnshire, England, drew press attention. Convinced that end would come in 1881, he had a balloon made that would carry him aloft and out of harm’s way, furnishing it with three years of supplies, or so the press said. He planned on taking tinned provisions, brandy, soda-water, claret and other creature comforts.” Versions of this story were widely printed in the United States, Australia and the United Kingdom.[3]

Russell and his fellow believers’ views of the approaching year are almost always misstated. Brown, Bell, and Carson’s Marketing Apocalypse says: “Jehovah’s Witnesses ... have rescheduled the end of the world on nine separate occasions,” and cites the 1881 date.[4] None of the dates they cite were the focus of end of the world predictions. That they claimed such indicates a profound misunderstanding of Watch Tower theology. Neither Watch Tower adherent believers nor descendent groups believe the world will end. They expected other things for 1881.

The development of Watch Tower time-related belief is an outgrowth of Present Truth doctrine. The phrase is taken from 2 Peter 1:12 according to the Authorized Version: “I will not be negligent to put you always in remembrance of these things, though ye know them, and be established in the present truth.” Greek scholars suggest that the phrase “present truth” means an indwelling of truth, a personal commitment to and understanding of revealed truth.[5] And the New World Translation, produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses, adopts that understanding, reading: “For this reason I intend always to remind you of these things, although you know them and are well-established in the truth that is present in you.” Peter’s comments addressed the need for reminders to reinforce already understood doctrine, the essential doctrines of Salvation.

However, in Russell’s lifetime and for years before, religious writers, even fairly-well educated authors, saw it differently. The Christian Intelligencer of 1829 extracted an article from another religious magazine, publishing it with approval. Instead of defining Present Truth as cherished, previously-learned ‘truth,’ it suggested that it was newly understood doctrine arrived at through crisis:

Let it also be observed, that particular truths are not at all times and in all places of the same importance. Whether men will attend to it or not, there is such a thing as the present truth. A gospel truth may derive a kind of adventitious importance from the very circumstance of its being assailed, despised, or over looked; just as a particular fact in the testimony of a witness may derive a great importance from its being opposed or denied by other witnesses. The present truth, then, (that is, those parts of the truth which claim the principal attention of Gods people,) is not always and in all places the same; but varies with the state of the Church. Nor is it always to be determined by its own native magnitude in the scale; but by its being overlooked, neglected, or opposed. Accordingly, it is promised that when Zion’s glory shall shine in the latter days, particular regard shall be paid by her sons to matters which have formerly been despised or overlooked.[6]

            As early as 1674, commentators suggested that ‘present truth’ was connected to predictive prophecy. William Bates published his Harmony of the Divine Attributes that year, connecting the concept of ‘present truth’ with the prophetic figures found in the Old Testament. Bates suggested that “no created understanding could frame so various representations of Christ, all exactly agreeing with him at such a distance.” He meant that Old Testament figures foreshadowed Christ exactly, giving irrefutable evidence to Gospel Truth. “We have,” he wrote, “an irrefragable argument of the truth and divinity of the gospel: for it is evident .by comparing the ancient figures with the present truth.”[7] Bates did not extend this view to as yet unfulfilled prophecies.

            Bates’ conservative approach did not stop others from connecting the ‘present truth’ concept with unfulfilled prophecy. At the front door of the 19^th Century we find Christian writers referring it to future events. William Moseley Holland, a fellow worker with Henry Grew in the Peace Society movement, wrote:

There may be those among the present audience, to whom these predictions do not come home with the force of present truth. Others may, also, so far postpone the period of their fulfillment, as to feel themselves exonerated from instant exertion. To these, I would remark, that if universal peace be clearly for the interest and happiness of our race, the individual duty of every member of the community, plainly requires his assistance in its diffusion, however remote may be the period when his labors bid fair to become effectual.[8]

Holland spoke (this was first a speech) of the Bible’s predictions of future peace and paradise, especially those found in Isaiah. Understanding future fulfillments was part of Present Truth. Holland believed that Christians should assist God in such fulfillments. His theology took maters beyond mere obedience to political action, as if God lacked both the will and power to fulfill his prophecies.

---

[1]               News and Notes, The Goulburn, New South Wales, Southern Argus, October 1, 1881.

[2]               Round About Notes, The Cootamundra, New South Wales, Herald, October 19, 1881.

[3]               See for example: The Toowomba, Queensland, Western Star and Roma Advertiser, September 21, 1881, and Refuge in a Balloon, The Hawaiian Gazette, September 28, 1881.

[4]               Stephen Brown, Jim Bell, David Carson (editors): Marketing Apocalypse¸ Rutledge, New York, 1998 edition, page 1.

[5]               A. T. Robertson: Word Pictures in the New Testament: “‘In the present truth’ (the truth present in you), Parousei ... to be inside one.” See his comments on 2 Pet. 1:12.

[6]               The article, entitled False Maxims, was extracted from The Religious Monitor and published in the January 1829 issue of The Christian Intelligencer. There is another similarly named periodical published in New York. This magazine was published in Ohio for the Dutch Reformed Church.

[7]               W. Bates: The Harmony of the Divine Attributes, London edition of 1815, page 365.

[8]               W. M. Holland: An Address Before the Hartford County Peace Society, Hartford, Connecticut, 1831, page 8.

Restatement of the Rules

This is a history blog. There is no room here for poorly-done, polemically based research. I will not give a voice to agenda driven, faulty research. Don't submit it to us. I will disallow your comments.

Most people know when their research distorts the linguistic and historical facts. Being willing to push past accurate, verifiable facts is not uncommon among agenda driven researchers. That happened here. It wont happen again.

I have deleted the post that once filled this spot. - B. W. Schulz

Bruce is selling this on ebay. We scanned it so you can see one.

Washington, DC

We've acquired a fairly regular reader from Washington D.C. Would you like to help us with a project requiring a visit to the Library of Congress? Let me know ... if you want to help.

We need help from our International Readers

Much was expected for the year 1881 both inside and outside Watch Tower congregations. We have a huge amount of material from the US and Australia. We need newspaper and magazine articles from European papers and periodicals that comment on "the end of the world" theme as expected in 1881.

Can you help?

Recent Visits

To answer Roberto's question

Rough Draft extracted from a chapter entitled "Out of Babylon":

Called by His Name

Two issues attached to the earliest congregations and small fellowships: Their self- identity, and how outsiders identified them. Russell and many of his earliest associates came from traditions that rejected any name but Christian or some version of a Bible-based name.[1] They saw sectarianism as of the Devil. That left them nameless. Augustus Bergner told The New York Sun that he belonged “to a company of Christians who have no common name. We are not Second Adventists, and we are not the ‘Holiness’ or ‘Higher Life’ sect.”[2]

Maria Russell said that most if not all early fellowships met in homes. She spoke of the true church as “scattered all over the world, many of them standing alone, and some in little companies, often numbering only two or three, and meeting from house to house.”[3]  When Frank Draper, an early-days evangelist spoke at Glens Falls, New York, it was in the home of W. H. Gildersleeve, who was willing to invite the public into his home.[4] Somewhat later the Glens Falls meetings moved to the home of Mrs. C. W. Long, but within two years they returned to the Gildersleve home on Birch Avenue.[5] H. Samson, for a while a Watch Tower evangelist, seldom spoke in a public facility. A newspaper noted that “most of his meetings … have been held in the parlor of some member of the church.”[6] There are many other examples of home-churches, but most of that history is more suitable for the third book in this series.

Individual congregations experimented with names. Most of the congregational names that have come down to us are from outside the period we cover in these two volumes, but we should note some examples. The congregation in St. Louis, Missouri, styled itself “Seekers After Truth.”[7] The newly-formed congregation at Salem, Oregon, called itself “The Church of the Living God,” a Biblical phrase. They met in the Women’s Christian Temperance Hall.[8] Believers in Akron, Ohio, organized regular meetings in late 1902. A representative told a reporter that they “may be called Dawn Students, or members of the Church of the Living God.” Their meetings were held in the homes of members.[9] The Watch Tower congregation in Grants Pass, Oregon, also used the name.[10] The Cedar Rapids congregation used it too, as did the congregation in Saratoga, New York. W. Hope Hay, a Watch Tower representative, used it as well.[11] In Cortland, New York, they called themselves the “Church of the Living God and Church of the Little Flock.” Occasionally, gatherings were described as “a meeting of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society.”[12] Though Church of the Living God was appealing because it is derived from scripture, it was also used by a politically radical Black church, and Watch Tower congregations distanced themselves from the name.

Illustration

Advertisement: Scranton Tribune¸ July 26, 1902.

           

Church of the Little Flock designated the congregation in Cortland, New York. When R. E. Streeter spoke there in December 1902, it was on the well used topics of “The Coming Kingdom,” and “Restitution of all Things.” An advertisement for his sermons used the Little Flock designator. He spoke in the Women’s Christian Temperance Union hall, and the congregation was still meeting there in 1904 and still using the name. Work of the North Carolina evangelists, many of whom were former clergy, bore fruit, and a small congregation formed in Nicolas County near Elizabeth City. The local paper reported: A new religious sect has been started in the wilds of Nicholas county. [sic] The New sect is called the “New Lights.” The sect is said to have arisen from the influence of Rev. Russell, of Allegheny City, where he conducts a newspaper called Zion’s Watch Tower. The members of the New Light sect profess to believe there is no hell.”[13] The New Light name was reused in West Virginia.

Illustration here

As noted, when the Scranton, Pennsylvania, congregation was formed they used the name The Watch Tower Bible Class.[14] When Russell spoke there, the press release used adjective laden phrasing: “Readers and students of the ‘Millennial Dawn’ series and all others who are interest in the subject of the pre-millennial advent.” When the Richmond, Indiana, congregation was organized by J. G. Wright, a Watch Tower “pilgrim,” it was called The Millennial Dawn Society.[15] A meeting-time announcement for the Richmond, Virginia, congregation called them Believers in the Dawning Millennium. They met Sundays in Marshal Hall on East Broad Street.[16] The announcement did not capitalize as we have, and the name seems more of a description of belief than a title. Using some form of “Millennial Dawn” in advertisements resulted in some calling them “Millennial Dawners.”[17] In Elmira, New York, they were the Millennial Dawn Bible Class.[18] In Flushing, New York, they were “the Millennial Dawn Society.”[19] In December 1900, Russell spoke to the congregation in Washington, D. C. The newspaper ad described them as “Millennial Dawn and Zion’s Watch Tower friends.”

Illustration

The Washington, D.C., Evening Times, December 1, 1900.

When a Watch Tower convention was held in Philadelphia in June 1900, they described themselves as Believers in the Atonement through the Blood of Christ.[20] A convention held in Denver, Colorado, in 1903 was of “Believers in the Second Coming.”[21] When Russell addressed a convention in Omaha, Nebraska, in 1898, they were simply called the “Believers.” The abbreviation “Believers” was used again the next year in Boston.[22] Watch Tower conventions continued to use the “Believers” designation until about 1908. A convention held at Manchester, England, the last two days of 1906 and the first two days of 1907 billed itself as “the Convention of Believers in the Ransom for all.” A convention held in St. Paul, Minnesota, in 1906 was for “Believers in the Atonement Sacrifice of Christ.” This was used again at Indianapolis, Indiana; Niagara Falls, New York; and Norfolk, Virginia, in 1907. It was used in Cincinnati, Ohio, in 1908. A convention held at Put-in-Bay, Ohio, in 1908 was designated a “Bible Student’s Convention,” but the invitation was to “all believers in the ransom for all.” Afterwards most conventions were “Bible Student’s Conventions.”[23]

Illustration here

The Courtland, New York, Standard

November 29, 1902.

            In Albany, New York, Believers in the Restitution met in Fredrick J. Clapham’s home at 288 First Street. Earlier, at least one meeting was held in a “Bro. Fletcher’s home.”[24] Elsewhere the name Millennial Dawn Readers was used.[25] In Omaha, Nebraska, a newspaper called them Believers, without saying what they believed.[26] When a one-day convention featuring C. T. Russell and C. A. Owen, “the local minister,” was announced for Indianapolis, Indiana, they use a long descriptor instead of a pithy name, calling themselves “believers on the lines of Millennial dawn [sic], and of the ransom of the whole human race by the blood of Jesus Christ.”[27]

            The Cincinnati, Ohio, congregation advertised meetings as The Church of Believers. In 1891 they met at 170 Walnut Street, Room 8, for “instruction and fellowship.”[28] In late 1891, J. B. Adamson held weekly meetings there. Russell reported that Adamson had circulated “about 4000 Millennial Dawns,” adding that Adamson and wife “have done and are doing a good work –gathering ripe wheat and witnessing to others. Sunday Meetings held by Brother A. help to water the good word of present truth which he scatters during the week by circulating MILLENNIAL DAWN.”[29] By May 1892 the Cincinnati Believers were meeting at 227 Main Street, and inviting people to “free lectures on present truths, in accord with the Bible, explained by Millennial Dawn.” The Believer’s advertisement said that “these lectures show the grand harmony of our Creator’s plan of the ages, the high calling and the restitution of all.”[30]

            Adamson found interest in a “Dr. A _____.”[31] While we can’t identify him more specifically, he testified to others in the Cincinnati medical community. An advertisement in the December 27, 1894, Enquirer placed by a W. Val Stark read: “I should like to meet a young man familiar with the ‘Millennial Dawns’ who desires to actively further their notice on the churches.”[32] Stark gave his address as 44 West 9th Street, the address of the Cincinnati Sanitarium, a private hospital treating insanity and addiction. Despite a fairly large circulation of Millennial Dawn volumes, the congregation remained small. In 1902, thirty-seven were present for the annual communion celebration; eleven of these were newly interested.[33]

            At Los Angeles, California, in 1899 they advertised themselves as The Gospel Church (Millennial Dawn). By 1902 they were using Millennial Dawn Readers, and in 1903 they were Millennial Dawn Friends. There are several examples of Russell suggesting that they were The Christians. For instance, when he spoke for an extended period on Boston Commons in 1897, The Cato, New York, Citizen described him as “the leader of a new sect called simply ‘The Christians.’”[34] An invitation for a Watch Tower meeting late in 1901, described it as “a convention of believers in the great redemption sacrifice of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.”[35] When the Flint, Michigan, congregation listed itself in the newspaper church directory it was as “Zion’s Watchtower People.”[36] In Warfdale, England, they called themselves The Church of Christ. The London Daily News said they were more commonly known as “Millennial Dawn.”[37]

Illustrations

The Los Angeles Herald, December 31, 1899.

The Los Angeles Herald, July 4, 1902.

The Los Angeles Herald, May 10, 1903

The Los Angeles Herald, November 8, 1903

            Outsiders were pressed to find descriptors. When Sam Williams, one of the organizers of the Huston, Texas, congregation preached there in 1903, The Huston Daily Post described the movement as “those of Mr. Williams’ faith,” attaching no other name. Earlier The Post described it as Millennial Dawn faith.[38] The 1912 Morrison and Fourmy Directory of Houston listed them as Millennial Dawn Church. This difficulty continued for some years.

---

[1]               This is true of Russell for the decade he associated with Age-to-Come believers.

[2]               Churchgoers Astonished: The New York Sun, August 15, 1881.

[3]               M. F. Russell: Discipline in the Church, Zion’s Watch Tower, July 1887, page 4.

[4]               Extracts from the Bible, The Glens Falls, New York, Morning Star¸ November 11, 1897. According to the 1870 Census, William H. Gildersleeve was born in New York about 1842, or according to the 1892 New York State Census he was born near 1837. [Census record birth dates often conflict.] He seems to have been related to H. H. Gildersleeve, a cigar manufacturer in Glens Falls. In April 1884, a devastating fire broke out in rental space in a building he owned. [New York Times, April 29, 1884.] A newspaper article [Glens Falls Morning Star¸ January 22, 1895] notes him as prominent in the Methodist Episcopal Church.

[5]               Untitled notices, The Glens Falls, New York, Morning Star, June 26, 1899 and October 21, 1901.

[6]               Untitled notice, The Washington, D. C., Evening Star, August 18, 1900.

[7]               Hypnotism Thinks Boy’s Father, The Cincinnati Enquirer, May 17, 1907.

[8]               All Are Welcome to Attend, Salem, Oregon, Daily Capital Journal, November 2, 1900.

[9]               Dawn Students, a New Religious Sect, In Akron, The Akron, Ohio, Daily Democrat, January 17, 1902.

[10]             Free Lecture, The Grants Pass, Oregon, Rogue River Courier, March 17, 1904. The announcement was inserted by J. O. Sandberg. His first name may have been John. We are uncertain at this time.

[11]             Untitled notice: Cedar Rapids, Iowa, Evening Gazette, March 20, 1901. Untitled notice: The Ithaca, New York, Saratogan¸ January 18, 1902.

[12]             Untitled announcements, The Utica, New York, Press, March 21 and 28, 1902.

[13]             The Elizabeth City, North Carolina, Falcon, Oct. 12, 1888.

[14]             Hessler was born about 1848. The 1880 Census tells us that he was widowed. He subsequently remarried. He was a cabinet maker, and later a contractor. Advertisements for his remodeling and cabinet and flooring business appear in the Scranton Tribune [eg. October 7, 1898, and June 5, 1899 issues].

[15]             End of the World in 1914, The Brazil, Indiana, Weekly Democrat, October 17, 1912.

[16]             The Millennium, The Richmond, Virginia, Times, June 7, 1902.

[17]             Sermon by Pastor Russell, The Bolivar, New York, Breeze, March 11, 1915.

[18]             Millennial Dawn Bible Class, The Elmira, New York, Evening Telegram¸ April 14, 1906.

[19]             Consigned to a Private Hospital, The Cincinnati, Ohio, Enquirer, June 13, 1904.

[20]             Believers in Atonement Services, The Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Inquirer¸ June 18, 1900. This name was used for several conventions. Another example is, also from Philadelphia, is mentioned in The Fort Wayne, Indiana, Sentinel, December 30, 1902.

[21]             Millennium in Sight, The Brooklyn, New York, Daily Eagle, July 12, 1903.

[22]             “Believer in Session,” The Omaha, Nebraska, Daily Bee, October 3, 1898; National Believers’ Convention, The Duluth, Minnesota, Labor World, December 23, 1899.

[23]             See the convention reports for those locations and years.

[24]             His Second Coming, The Albany, New York, Evening Journal, May 28, 1900. Various New York State Census records tell us Clapham was born in England between 1833 and 1834. He was a shoemaker. We do not know to what degree Clapham was interested in the Watch Tower message. A newspaper report from 1906 noted that he faithfully attended the Tabernacle Baptist Church “every Sunday but one in seven years.” [Albany Evening Journal, June 11, 1906.] We cannot identify Fletcher.

[25]             Notice, The Minneapolis, Minnesota, Journal, February 18, 1905.

[26]             Untitled notice, The Omaha, Nebraska, Daily Bee, August 23, 1899.

[27]             Millennial Dawn, The Indianapolis, Indiana, Journal, July 13, 1902.

[28]             Advertisement, The Cincinnati, Ohio, Enquirer, November 1, 1891.

[29]             C. T. Russell: Harvest Laborers: Pray for Them, Zion’s Watch Tower, February 15, 1892, page 50.

[30]             See announcement in the May 4, 1892, Cincinnati Enquirer.

[31]             See Adamson’s letter to Russell in Extracts from Interesting Letters, Zion’s Watch Tower, February 1891, page 30. [Not in Reprints.]

[32]             Advertisement, The Cincinnati, Ohio, Enquirer, December 27, 1894.

[33]             Letter from E. F. R. to Russell appended to: The Memorial Supper Celebrated, Zion’s Watch Tower, May 15, 1902, page 157. [Omitted from Reprints.]

[34]             Continuous Sermon, The Cato Citizen, August 28, 1897.

[35]             Not Known by Name, Rochester, New York, Democrat and Chronicle¸ September 30, 1901.

[36]             Among the Churches, The Flint, Michigan, Daily Journal¸ March 28, 1903

[37]             See the March 7, 1906, issue.

[38]             Untitled notice, The Huston, Texas, Daily Post, May 29, 1901; Evangelist Sam Williams, February 22, 1903.