by Jerome
Genealogical researchers in Britain are well
and truly spoiled for resources when compared with other countries. Civil
registration (where the State took over officially from the Church) was
introduced in 1837. Theoretically, all births, marriages and deaths (hatched,
matched and dispatched) have been centrally recorded and readily available in
Britain since 1837. As for marriages, Hardwick’s marriage act of 1753 laid down
a legal framework for marriages in England and Wales (sending some couples
scurrying to Scotland) which at least gave standardisation and a better
preservation of records.
In such a new and diverse country as the United
States, this level of record keeping was not achieved in some places until the
start of the 20th century. This can make research difficult. Once
you go back into the 19th century (and beyond) in America you are
generally at the mercy of ecclesiastical records. This presumes that scribes of
yesteryear were both literate and conscientious, that damp and mice didn’t then
destroy their handiwork, and when the churches in question disappeared that their
records didn’t just disappear with them due to incompetence or disinterest. We
have the Latter Day Saints (Mormons) and their teaching of vicarious baptism to
thank for so many records being scanned and preserved for the benefit of all
researchers. But even so, there are so many gaps. Maybe more records will be
discovered and scanned. Maybe. But the further back in history you go, if we
haven’t already got the material on sites like Family Search and Ancestry, then
the chances are that the records – assuming they even properly existed
originally – have gone for good.
This
preamble is necessary because we are going to look at three marriages involving
Charles Taze Russell’s family in the 19th century. As yet we have no
official surviving official records for any of them. So this article presents some
detective work using other resources to establish within a few months when each
event happened. However, it is acknowledged that words like “assuming” and
“assumption” occur rather a lot in what follows.
Joseph Lytel (or Lytle) Russell and
Ann Eliza Birney
CTR's parents both came from Ireland originally, and the Watchtower Society's history video Faith in Action part 1 (Out of Darkness) suggested that they came over as a couple in 1845. The commentary states "it was in 1845 that Joseph and Ann Eliza Russell emigrated from Ireland to Pennsylvania, USA."
This is likely based on Joseph Lytle’s 1897 obituary which indeed says he came to America “about 1845.” However, obituaries have one built-in problem when it comes to accurate information - the one person who can verify the details is not there to do so. Many years ago in the pre-Internet age I found Joseph L’s naturalization record in the Society of Genealogists’ library in London. It was dated 1848. Obtaining a copy of the original document from the Prothonotary’s office in Pittsburgh, it plainly showed that Joseph swore an oath to the effect that he had been in the country for at least five years. Assuming he told the truth, that pushes his immigration back to at least 1843.
This is likely based on Joseph Lytle’s 1897 obituary which indeed says he came to America “about 1845.” However, obituaries have one built-in problem when it comes to accurate information - the one person who can verify the details is not there to do so. Many years ago in the pre-Internet age I found Joseph L’s naturalization record in the Society of Genealogists’ library in London. It was dated 1848. Obtaining a copy of the original document from the Prothonotary’s office in Pittsburgh, it plainly showed that Joseph swore an oath to the effect that he had been in the country for at least five years. Assuming he told the truth, that pushes his immigration back to at least 1843.
You
may need to enlarge this graphic to read it properly. I have reproduced it
here, even though the quality is poor, because the microfilmed rolls of
naturalization records for Pennsylvania on the Ancestry website appear to omit
this document. It is not there with all the other swearings held on 26 October
1848 and neither does it show up in the Ancestry index. But it exists, because
here it is.
As
for Ann Eliza, the Birney family was in America in the 1840s, although her
brother’s obituary in 1899 is somewhat garbled, suggesting that Thomas came to
America in 1821, which is actually his birth year. It also states that he
joined the 2nd Presbyterian Church in Pittsburgh in 1845. A
naturalization record exists for a Thomas Birney in Allegheny Co., Penn. dated
8 October 1855, which might tie in with the baptism of OUR Thomas’ children
from 1857 onwards in 2nd Presbyterian. Thomas married Mary Ann Covell
and they had six children baptised between 1857 and 1872, including one named
after Ann Eliza.
The
above facts about Joseph L Russell and Ann Eliza Birney would give a wide
leeway for a marriage. However, we
can fix the date down to just a couple of months due to other records, although
even here some assumptions are made. The Pittsburgh Post carried a regular
feature listing the names of people who should visit the post office to collect
mail. A E Birney turns up in 1848. More significantly Miss A E Birney
turns up again in March 1849. The cutting below comes from the Pittsburgh Daily
Post for Wednesday, April 4, 1849, page 2.
So
Ann Eliza is in Pittsburgh and still single in March/April 1849 – although this
assumes that her correspondent wasn’t someone ignorant of a marriage that had
already taken place. But taking this at face value, Joseph L and Ann E travelled
to America as singles and were not married until after March 1849.
Let’s
now approach it from another angle. The 1850 census finds Joseph L and Ann E
married with one child, T(homas), who is aged 5/12. Here is the entry below.
The
rule for the 1850 census was that it should be a snapshot of how people were on
June 1 that year. Assuming the enumerator followed this rule, if Thomas was
five months old on June 1 then he was born either late December or early January.
So he was conceived back in April/May, 1849, which was not long after Miss A E
Birney was told to collect her mail from the post office. Maybe it related to
an impending wedding.
There
are several assumptions in the above calculations, but absent a baptism record
it is the best we have.
Because
Ann Eliza’s brother, Thomas, was a member of the 2nd Presbyterian
Church in Pittsburgh (according to his obituary) it was thought that the newly
married Russells were also members there. A check of available church records only has
one mention of Joseph L Russell – the sessions minutes have him being given a
certificate of dismission on December 1, 1849. See the image below.
This
entry suggests that he was an ex-member of 2nd Presbyterian who had
gone back for a certificate to use as an introduction to a new place of
worship. For whatever reason, JLR changed churches, so it is not surprising
that no subsequent baptisms of his children are found in the 2nd
Presbyterian records. But neither is there any record of him joining that
church or his marriage. However, although as noted above, Thomas Birney was a
member and had six children baptised there, the actual marriage of Thomas and
Mary Ann is not in the 2nd Presbyterian register either.
(Note: Subsequent research with the help of the Presbyterian Historical Society shows that the graphic above actually relates to Joseph Lytle JOINING the 2nd Presbyterian Church having previously been a member of the 3rd Presbyterian. There are still no records of his marriage or baptism of children in extant records of either church. For details see more recent article on PITTSBURGH PRESBYTERIANS)
(Note: Subsequent research with the help of the Presbyterian Historical Society shows that the graphic above actually relates to Joseph Lytle JOINING the 2nd Presbyterian Church having previously been a member of the 3rd Presbyterian. There are still no records of his marriage or baptism of children in extant records of either church. For details see more recent article on PITTSBURGH PRESBYTERIANS)
Charles Taze Russell and Maria Frances
Ackley
Our
second marriage is far easier to establish, in spite of an equal paucity of
records. There is no register available with the details of CTR’s marriage to
Maria Frances Ackley. However, on this occasion it was mentioned in the newspaper.
From the Pittsburgh Daily Post for Saturday, March 15, 1879:
That
meant the marriage took place on Thursday, March 13, 1879. The same
announcement appeared in the Pittsburgh Gazette for Friday, March 14, 1879,
which added the information that the wedding was conducted by Eld. J H Paton of
Almont, Michigan.
Joseph Lytle Russell and Emma Hammond
Ackley
CTR’s
mother died in 1861. His father was to re-marry, and what would complicate
family relations later in time, married CTR’s wife’s sister, Emma. Emma Ackley
once she became Emma Russell was both CTR’s sister-in-law and step-mother.
Although
there are a few missing issues, a careful check of Pittsburgh newspapers did
not yield any announcement of this union. And there are no known extant records
giving a date. So again we have to narrow events down by other evidence.
The
1880 census was designed to provide a snapshot of events on or of June 1 that
year. Below is the relevant entry for the Russell household, actually dated
June 14, and well over a year after CTR and Maria were married.
It
is not the clearest of writing but it shows four people living together in
Cedar Avenue.
Russel
(sic) C.T. Aged 28
Married Occupation: merchant
Maria
F Aged 29 Wife
Married Occupation: Keeps house
J
L Aged
60 Father
Widowed Occupation: merchant
Ackley
E.H. Aged 26 Sister (*)
Single Occupation: at home
*This
is difficult to read. It looks a bit like Sister (step) but the correct
relationship to the head of the household, CTR, should be Sister (in law).
Joseph
L has shaved a few years off his age. He was approaching 68 at this point, but
only admits to 60.
According
to this census return, at the beginning of June 1880 Joseph L and Emma are
living at the same address but are still not married. So their marriage would have to be after the
date of the census.
Again
let us approach it from another angle. Joseph L and Emma had one child named
Mabel. Her direct birth record has not been found, but when she married Richard
Packard on June 30, 1903, she provided a partial birth date. I say partial, if
you check the graphic below you can see what I mean.
Mabel
does not give the day – just a line and then September 1881.
A search on Ancestry gives the date September
16, 1881. But on close checking everyone
seems to be copying everyone else on this and no-one can provide a primary
source for the information. It might just be on her death certificate (from
1962), but even then who is to say this is accurate, given that she appeared not
to be sure when alive in 1903?
So
personally, I would prefer to stick with the information we know Mabel
supplied, “sometime” in September 1881. So let’s do the math again. If born in September 1881, she must have been conceived around December 1880. So we can assume her
mother, Emma, was married sometime between the census of June 1880 and November/December 1880. With Joseph and Emma living under the same roof in the
snapshot of June 1880, I would suspect that the marriage took place quite soon
after that census was taken.
It
would of course have been so much easier for researchers had they all got
married in Britain or had just waited until the 20th century in
America.
However,
that might have been a bit problematic for Joseph Lytle since he died in 1897…
6 comments:
Great article Jerome, I really enjoyed this. But just as I was lolled into a false sense of security by your title (no funeral this time) you ended the article with the statement "that might have been a bit problematic for Joseph Lytle since he died in 1897…" so there must have been a funeral, surely?
All good wishes,
Gary
P.S. Me, pedantic? Never!
Really great!! Thanks for your research.
Hi Jerome, tanks for the article. A good historian should be able to research, able to distinguish between evidence, proof, imagine, perception, fakes, able to harmonize and to summarize. How hard. In this blog we have a university.
Thanks for the great article.
Hello Jerome and another huge thank you for this most interesting article.
I visited the last known residence & grave of Maria Russell in St.Petersburg, FL in 2008 and have had questions about this since then. Thank you for filling in the gaps. Have you ever known of any photos existing of Joseph (besides his common portrait photo)? photos of Emma? or am I correct that there exists none?
I have only ever seen the one photograph of JLR. There is a photograph around of Emma as an old lady, but I would like to confirm its provenance. Emma's one daughter, Mabel, married Richard Packard and they had three children. You would need to find a modern descendant named Packard (or Speel because Mildred Packard married Robert Speel) who has a family album of photographs to be sure.
An eagle-eyed correspondent spotted an error in the original article, where I changed Mabel's birth date of September 1881 (as confirmed in her marriage certificate) to July 1881... I have no idea how that happened, and it just illustrates the pitfalls of proof reading your own stuff! The article has now been corrected. But if anyone spots anything else, then please do say.
Post a Comment