Rough Draft

 I'm posting this reluctantly. I need comments. This will stay up less than a week. Don't cry if you miss it. And no, I won't report it. There are legal reasons, copyright and such, that I cannot keep this up for long.

3 Albert Delmont Jones and William Conley

Albert Royal Delmont Jones played a significant though until now unexplored role in Watch Tower history. One finds brief mentions of him in the relevant books and articles, usually never giving us more that a reiteration of Russell’s 1890 biographical article. With the exception of two blogs devoted to Watch Tower history in the Russell era, no one has returned to the original documents.  A Catholic web site devoted to apologetics has a more extensive article devoted to Jones and J. H. Paton. It is built from secondary sources and contains errors of fact. It is meant to portray Russell in as poor light was possible. It is neither consistently factual nor balanced.  

Worse is a web site devoted to anti-Watchtower and anti-Russell polemics. Its anonymous author is given to speculation, especially when he is unable to find a factual basis for criticism.   Billed as the best among many internet web pages, its writer suggests that Russell’s financial history is purposely hidden by the modern Watch Tower Society. His intention is to suggest that there is a hidden financial scandal. In fact, the Watch Tower is simply disinterested. Their interest is in their doctrinal and spiritual antecedents. 

Without doubt Jones is “the bad boy” of Watch Tower history. But this writer’s attempt to connect Jones’ thefts to Russell falls into wild speculation based on haphazard research or imagination. He raises questions that lack concrete evidence or reasoning to support his implied claims, using phrases such as how do we know and we may never know which suggest that the author understands that his arguments are speculative. He shifts blame without justification, a polemicist’s argument of choice but unprincipled. He leaves the connection between Russell and others undefined. The claim that a suicide prevented the exposure of Russell’s business relationship with Jones is speculative and dramatic; it ignores the more probable. The assumptions made are overly generalized and oversimplified. He uses bolded, capitalized words and misuses explanation marks as if that alone proves a point. Now, let’s replace disreputable, unethical polemic with solid fact.

Early Years

Albert Delmont Jones was the son of Albert Delmont Jones, Sr. (born c. 1835) and Martha McCleary. His father, “a well-known riverboat engineer,” most often used his middle name in place of his first. Albert Senior was a Civil War veteran, serving as an engineer on one of the Mississippi gunboats.  After the war he returned to riverboat service, serving on the famous Boaz and on a lesser-known boat. He was a staunch Republican until near his death when doubts over tariff policy led him to question party loyalty: “I’ve been a Republican, voting that ticket, thinking it was right, and thinking by doing so it was keeping up wages for the workingman, but I … have begun to think that we are only helping the capitalists and not benefiting the public and ourselves.”  

Albert Junior’s mother was born in the East Liberty area of Pittsburgh in 1833 into a Colonial Era family. Her grandfather settled in Pittsburgh in 1812 after his ship was wrecked. Martha and A. Delmont Jones, Sr. married in July 1852. If genealogy records are correct, she gave birth to her first child, Martha Elizabeth, October 22, 1852, about two and a half months after their marriage. She was a life-long Baptist, though it seems of a more liberal disposition than her fellow Baptists. Her obituary says: 

“Aunt Martha,” as the subject of this sketch was known to a circle of relatives from Pennsylvania to Texas and California, was a woman of rare strength of mind and intellect. Her study of the Sacred Scriptures had given her a far-reaching insight into their deeper meaning such as few attain to in this life. She was broad-minded, nothing narrow contained her doctrines; she believed in being as broad as the Bible, which is saying a good deal; in being as liberal as God is, which is saying still more. The dignified, cultured personality of “Aunt Martha” will always be a sweet remembrance to the many who knew her.  

            While her obituary suggests “a good deal,” it really says nothing about her liberal beliefs. But one can surmise that she raised her children in an atmosphere of Bible reading and study. The New York, New York, Press described his family as “well-to-do and respectable.”  Birth and census records reveal several residences. Albert Jones’ younger sister Octavia was born June 1857 in what is now West Virginia.  The 1860 United States Federal Census has the family living near Bruceton Mills, Virginia. (Again now West Virginia.) Delmont and Martha Jones had real property listed at two thousand dollars and personal property valued at three hundred dollars, in today’s money about eighty thousand dollars. The census notes that Albert Junior was also born in Pennsylvania. So, we can date their immigration to Virginia to sometime between Albert’s birth in 1854 and Octavia’s birth in 1857. They were still resident there in 1863 when Birdie Evangeline was born (May 13, 1862). Their next child, James B. McCleary Jones, was born in Pennsylvania in 1865, but they were back in Bruceton, West Virginia, by 1871 when son James died (November 26, 1871).  Their frequent moves seem to have been prompted by his employment as a ship’s engineer. 

            The 1880 Census gives Albert Junior’s age as 26, making him about two years younger than Russell. He lived in Pittsburgh’s 32nd Ward, Precinct Two. He is listed as a married “store keeper” with a one year old daughter. A newspaper description printed in 1890 says: “Jones is a stylish looking man, with long black hair and peculiarly white face, who affects black sombrero hats and has the air of a crank.”  

Sometime, apparently in 1876 at the latest, Albert moved to New York City, taking a job as a clerk, probably in a clothing store.  Returning to Pittsburgh in 1877, he secured employment with J. L. Russell & Son at the Fifth Avenue Store, which was managed by C. T. Russell, his father having retired from active management. A newspaper report describes Jones as “an attaché” of Russell & Son, which may indicate management status. The 1880 United States Federal Census lists him as a “store keeper,” suggesting that, despite Russell calling him a clerk in one of his stores, he managed the store. 

Jones family members had business interests that intersected Russell’s. A relative owned the D. J. Kennedy Company, coal wholesalers, and the Bulger Block Coal Company, a mining concern.  He was also general manager of the Darlington Brick and Mining Company. Russell had an interest at various times in Black’s Run Coal Syndicate and in U. S. Coal and Coke Company and also in The Silica Brick Company of Pittsburgh. 

Marriage

Albert married Caroline “Carrie” Marie Bown January 8, 1878,  William H. McKinney, pastor of the Mount Washington Baptist Church performing the wedding. The Pittsburgh Commercial Gazette noted that Albert and Carrie were “well known in the city and highly esteemed.” The Pittsburgh Chronicle reported that the wedding drew “a large number of friends and acquaintances,” and a Wheeling, West Virginia, newspaper noted that Carrie’s brother, W. J. H. Bown, was prominent in West Virginia local politics and that Carrie was well known there, having “a large number of friends and acquaintances in Wheeling.”  Four children followed. The first was Ella Luetta Jones, born November 7, 1878.  William followed, November 27, 1880 and Albert Delmont was born in New York, February 2, 1882, sadly dying on April ninth a little past two months old. Last born was Herbert, born in 1884. 

William Tytherleigh Bown, Carrie’s father, was born c. 1822 in Malmesbury, England, immigrating to Pittsburgh in 1832 sailing on the ship Cosmo. He was a Civil War veteran. He described himself as a Merchant Broker.[7] Samuel E. Bown, Carrie’s uncle, was a well-known coffee and peanut roaster, managing the W. T. Bown & Bro. company. Jointly with Carrie’s father S. E. Bown patented a roasting process.  Their company was “among the leaders” in the period.  Carrie’s father was a partner in produce wholesale company and an active member of the Republican and Prohibition Parties.  An obituary says: 

For many years he was a baker, confectioner and mercantile broker. Mr. Brown [sic] was one of the founders of Republicanism in Allegheny county. [sic] In 1866 he organized a mission Sunday school ... which grew into the Mt. Washington Baptist church. He was instrumental in securing the erection of the Prospect public school and was one of its first directors. 

 photo

W. T. Bown, Carrie Jones Father.

Courtesy Living Family.

An extensive archive of Bown family papers exists. Included are William Bown’s letters describing his Atlantic transit and family and business matters. While interesting, it does not add appreciably to this story.  We found nothing that illuminates his view of his son-in-law, A. D. Jones. He sheltered Carrie and her three living children after the Jones separation, but his testimony during his daughter’s divorce contains the barest of details.

It was through his employment that Jones began attending the Allegheny Congregation and reading Herald of the Morning. Russell converted Jones about 1878: “I was much encouraged by the accession [sic] of Mr. A. D. Jones, then a clerk in my employ in Pittsburgh – a young man of activity and promise, who soon developed into an active and appreciated co-labourer in the harvest work”  Jones name appears as a monetary contributor in a few issues of Herald of the Morning.  When the Atonement controversy erupted in 1878, he wrote to Barbour trying to persuade him to abandon his new views. A snippet of his letter is quoted by Barbour in the June 1879 issue: “If Christ only bestows the spiritual life, then must man not have lost spiritual life by Adam? for Christ counteracts, first of all, the work of Adam’s transgression, (Rom 5, 18).”  

After Russell and Paton withdrew from the Herald, Barbour never printed in full critical questions and rebuttals. Instead picking what he saw as a weak point, or isolated words, from which he could reassert his dogma. But his printed reply to Jones is revealing: 

Our brother from Pittsburg [sic] makes the assertion, based on the old theory, the very one we are contesting, thus “begging the question,” and asks me to reconcile facts with that false theory; I cannot do it; nor is there anything in Rom 5:18, from which to draw a conclusion that Christ does a two fold work, first counteracts, and then regenerates, or imparts spiritual life.

Begging the Question or circular reasoning presumes that a premise or assertion is true but without evidence. Jones’ evidence was the verse cited. It refuted Barbour’s claim that Jesus only brought prospects of perfected spiritual life leading to heavenly life – a strange assertion given his adoption of Age-to-Come, paradise earth for the many which requires restoration of perfect fleshly life. He used the accusation to avoid the issue raised.  Instead, he reasserted his belief that Christ did not relieve men of sin by his death but by his mode of life. He misquoted Romans 5:18, then asserted:

As we lose the germ of life in the first Adam by his sin, that is, he lost it, and so could transmit only death to his posterity; so we gain the life that in the second Adam by his righteousness; that is, he won life for himself, and can therefore transmit that life to his posterity

This reads as a nearly standard view. It’s not. The only life Christ regained for man was Spiritual life. Immortal life came to men when the “come to Christ” via resurrection:  “When God raises the dead, they never see life, but remain dead, until they come to Christ.” It was, in his view, not the death of Christ that brought true life, but Christ set the pattern through his life’s course. Where in his scheme those who would live in a restored Earth we cannot tell – Strange for someone who had adopted Age-to-Come views. Few Christians would accept any of this, and this idea essentially killed the Barbourite movement. If Jones’ continued debating Barbour through the post, we have no record of it. Probably the key “take away” from this is Barbour’s admission that he could not refute Jones’ argument, only being able to restate his claims.

Jones came to brief prominence after Zion’s Watch Tower was started and contributed articles to it. His name appeared as a regular contributor. Jones contributed a few articles to Zion’s Watch Tower, and he wrote one of the Bible Student Tracts titled A Call to “The Marriage Supper of the Lamb” which caused considerable controversy among Watch Tower readers. (See the discussion in volume two of this work. Pages --) His key articles discussed prophetic fulfilments expected for 1881. Russell relied on Jones using him both as a sounding board and to carry out tasks. Albert travelled as a Watch Tower speaker, and we have reports of his lectures in Pennsylvania and New York. Someone, probably from the Pittsburgh-Allegheny congregation, suggested that Russell was ceding leadership to Jones. In the May 1881 Herald of the Morning, Barbour wrote that while he had not seen Albert as a leader of any sort because he was only “a salesman” in one of Russell’s stores, he was not surprised to hear Russell “proposed to resign in Albert’s favour.”  

Early in 1881 Russell and his closest associates saw the need for a new book, either a new edition of The Three Worlds or a totally new book to replace it. J. H. Paton agreed to write it, editing and rewriting his past sermons. Jones “offered to pay all the expenses incident to its printing” if Russell would advertise it “liberally and gratuitously” in Zion’s Watch Tower. Russell agreed, paying Paton’s “personal expenses in connection with the publishing,” and paying part of the printer’s charges. Russell noted that Jones wanted a monetary profit from the venture. 

In December 1879 Russell announced:

We lose this month one of our special contributors. Bro. A. D. Jones felt a strong desire for some time to give more of his time to preaching the glad tidings. He started out this month, going wherever the Lord may open the way. God will bless him in his endeavor to bless others. May he be used to the glory of our Lord.

Our brother has other [business] calls upon whatever spare time he may have, and asks to be excused as a regular correspondent; so what is the people’s gain is the WATCH TOWER’S loss. We hope, however, for occasional brief articles from his pen.  (Parenthesis in the original)

The “business calls” stemmed from Jones newly-formed partnership with James D. Littell. [May 1853 – February 1896] Littell was an English immigrant. His obituary described him as a “well-known dealer in gentlemen’s furnishing goods in Pittsburgh and Allegheny.”  The partnership was short-lived, leaving Littell with a store in Pittsburgh and Jones with the shop in New York City which he moved to 1159 Broadway, later one of the locations for F. A. O.  Schwartz.  A store in Wheeling, West Virginia, was sold off in March 1884 to a M. J. McFadden. 

 photo

National Labor Tribune, April 3, 1880

 photo

Accordingly, Jones moved his family east, taking rooms in a four-story boarding house at 62½ Columbia, Newark, New Jersey.  By 1885 his profession is listed as publisher. 

Jones combined his New York business venture with preaching and lecturing. One such trip was noted in the December 1880 issue of Zion’s Watch Tower. A rather long profile of Jones recalled: “He came of a well-to-do and respectable Pittsburg family, and came to New York about twelve years ago – being then about 30 years old – with a small capital. He started a men’s furnishing store at Broadway and Thirty-sixth street, and was fairly successful.”  [Note on spelling and formatting: In this era the “H” was often omitted from ‘Pittsburgh.’ It was an acceptable spelling. “Street” was left uncapitalized.]

Jones store was profitable, though in a small way. But, The New York Press reported:

He was ambitious and impatient. He grew tired of small profits and desired to become rich quickly. The sight of luxury In New York seemed to turn his head – his customers were, many of them, of the rich class – and the haberdasher, being an agreeable and companionable person, they frequently chatted with him about affairs in the city. He learned about the marvellous careers of certain Wall Street men – how some had started to speculate with a few hundred dollars and speedily become millionaires. Men were pointed out to him who had made hundreds of thousands by a lucky coup in bearing or bulling some security, and Jones asked himself why he, too, should not become a Wall Street power.

Jones was of “valuable assistance” during the distribution of Food for Thinking Christians. When noting this, Russell added that Jones was “doubtless preparing something valuable for the readers of ... his new paper.”