The
Church in Mariah’s House
There
are several points in our narrative where this history would be appropriate. It
appears here because it illustrates the nature of fledgling congregations and
the path taken by some newly interested. We are without a real start to this
account and do not know the end. It is brought to us through an article in The
New York Sun. The article, written without a byline, alternates between
simple reporting and snide, nearly vulgar, insulting comments. The article
focuses on Maria Jourdan Washington – better known to history as Maria[h]
Elizabeth Jourdan Westmoreland – describing religious meetings held in her
home.
Mariah
Jourdan was born in Georgia, October 10, 1838, to Warren Jourdan and Mary
Johnson-Thornton. The Thorntons and Jourdans were prominent politically,
espousing ‘states rights’ in the pre-war years, and they were wealthy. Both
Mariah and her sister Madeline were educated at Baptist-sponsored Southern
Female College at La Grange, Georgia, and both were accomplished writers.
Mariah was an expert musician as well. In 1856 she married Willis Furman
Westmoreland [June 1, 1828 – June 26, 1890], a surgeon of note. He was ten
years her senior, not uncommon in this era.[1] A
biography says:
Loveliness of person and precocity of mind were her
gifts from nature. It was a rare thing for one to pass the thoughtful little
beauty without prophesying a brilliant future for her. Even in tender childhood
she gave unmistakable evidences of that genius which has given to the literati
those essays which have appeared from time to time in the columns of “Scott’s
Monthly,” and the “Ladies’ Home Gazette,” both periodicals published in the City
of Atlanta, the home of Mrs. Westmoreland.
With Maria Jourdan, music was a passion. Having been
so fortunate as to have always enjoyed the tuition of skilful masters, she
early became a proficient in the art, and, unlike most married ladies, she has
never thrown aside her favorite amusement, but devotes much time to
familiarizing herself with 'the various operas, etc., her rendition of some of
which is worthy a Strakosch or a Verdi. Her touch is exquisite and thrilling,
her manipulation wonderful. Nor should we fail to speak of her beautiful
improvisations, which so often charm and delight the home circle. Hour after
hour have we seen her under the inspiration, as it were, of Orpheus, while
strain after strain of the most Witching music would be borne upon the air,
ravishing the ear, melting the heart, and causing the eye to grow liquid, and
the lip to quiver with emotion. On such occasions Mrs. Westmoreland is
transcendently charming. The rapt look she wears; the deeply sad expression of
her large, dark, and lustrous eyes; the heightening color, the classic brow,
where “thought sits enthroned” – all, all combine to form a picture over which
artists would delight to linger. Her manners are fascinating – not indeed free
from that hauteur peculiar to high-bred Southern women; but she commands
without repulsing. She is a brilliant colloquist, her conversations abounding
in wit, repartee, and pleasantry.
Mrs. Westmoreland is endowed with a high order of
intellect, excelling, when at college, in mathematics and the languages. She
also early evinced a preference for the study of the classics, and her mind is
richly stored with stories and legends – of those real and mythical personages
whose marvelous deeds and glorious achievements have been sung from time
immemorial.[2]
Maria’s
married life was as lively as it was in her youth. She fostered a “literary
club.” The biography quoted above says:
She was also the founder of a “literary club,” whose
members convened once a week at her residence on Marietta Street. On these
occasions, private theatricals were performed, and poems read or delivered,
each member being compelled to contribute something for the amusement and
edification of the “club.” These weekly reunions were replete with interest and
information, and happy they, indeed, who formed one of this charmed circle.
This
seems effusive, but given her known history, it appears accurate. We can trace
some of her travels and know something of her subsequent history. The American
Civil War interrupted her home life. She gave birth to her first child, a
daughter, on December 20, 1860, the day South Carolina seceded, and in honor of
that they named her Carolina. Her husband joined the Confederate medical corps,
eventually being promoted to the rank of general by Jefferson Davis.
Maria
“was devoted to the cause of the South, and toiled unremittingly, through heat
and cold, rain and sunshine, during those terrible years of blood and carnage
from which we have but emerged,” wrote her biographer. She wrote two plays, A
Soldier’s Wife and The Soldier’s Trials, both performed in the
Atlanta Athenaeum. “The proceeds, which were munificent, were donated to the
destitute wives and children of those brave Atlantians who were battling so
manfully for our cause on the historic soil of the ‘Old Dominion.’” [The Old
Dominion is Virginia.] Her biographer wrote that:
The first evening the play of ‘The Soldier’s Wife’ was
presented, the Athenaeum was crowded almost to suffocation: the order and
decorum observed on that occasion was wonderful, and bespoke at once the high
regard and appreciation which the Atlanta public felt for the dramatic
neophyte. The emotion evinced by that vast audience was deep and unfeigned; and
every eye shed a tear and every bosom heaved a sigh over the stricken wife who
had abandoned herself to sorrow, in the hourly expectation of the news of the
condemnation of her husband, who had deserted the army, and fled to his home
and little ones to preserve them from starvation. The play was a decided success,
and the youthful follower of Aeschylus left the Athenaeum amid the
congratulations of many sincere and loving friends.
The
war challenged, as it did for many women, Maria’s view of women’s rights and
responsibilities. In Southern culture as in most of the United States,
“respectable women” did not become actors. The Civil War changed that, and
Maria with other ‘respectable’ women acted in her plays. Her view of women’s
responsibilities and rights would evolve, and we will consider that in not many
paragraphs.
Writing
plays to fund relief work was not her only act in support of the Southern
cause. She and a Madeline V. Bryan, crafted “the first public symbol of
Confederate authority in Atlanta,” a flag for the Customs House.[3] Maria
called together prominent women, her social peers, on April 17, 1861, five days
after the first shots were fired at Fort Sumter. They organized into a
soldiers’ aid society, their first task being to scrape lint for bandages.
Since the Confederate government did not furnish uniforms, they turned to
making shirts, pants and socks for soldiers. They named themselves The Ladies’
Soldier’s Relief Society, drawing “many young women of high social standing”
including Mary Clayton whom some of our American readers will remember form
their history reading.[4]
Contributions in money and “in kind” came to “the Ladies,” and Maria duly
reported them in detail.[5]
When General Sherman approached Atlanta, Maria, in late term pregnancy, fled.
Post-War: 1866-1879
In
addition to novel writing, Maria wrote a series of articles for The Atlanta
Constitution using the fictional persona of Aunt Tabitha, “dispensing
advice to a younger female relative.” Her articles often dealt with women’s
issues. She condemned fornication, rampant in post-war Georgia. She advocated
educating women. She advocated the admission of women to the University of
Georgia, though to no avail. Women were not admitted until 1918. Maria said
that “women’s economic advancement would occur when they gained access to
education.” The Southern press saw her as a radical ‘women’s rights’ advocate,
but she was not. She suggested that “women were not yet ready to become voters,”
but she saw the day when suffrage would come as near.[6] In
July 1872 she addressed the graduating class of the Southern Female College at
LaGrange, her alma mater. The Christian Index, a religious paper
published in Atlanta, reported: “Mrs. Maria J. Westmoreland ... read a splendid
essay. Subject, ‘What shall our Women
do?’ It was filled with good sense,
sound reasoning, and practical advice.”[7]
Maria
turned to novel writing producing Hear-Hungry, published by G. W. Carleton
& Co. of New York. Maria traveled to New York to consult with her
publishers. Wendy Venet, in her stellar book, says she was accompanied by her
husband.[8] Her stay was short, but she returned to New
York in the fall of 1873, planning to stay the winter. She brought her two
children with her, but her husband remained in Atlanta.
Her
original intention, a bow to Southern prejudice, was to publish anonymously.[9] Maria’s
first novel, Heart Hungry, tells us much about her views of religious
practice. The heroin is Maud Livingstone, an oppressed orphan. Her foster
parents mistreat her out of guilt. Her foster mother, wrote Maria, “was a
living representative of a certain class, who are saints in public, and vipers
in private life, and with much external religion, her woman’s unwomanly heart
entertained no spark of sympathy for this motherless girl.” Oppressed Maud
dealt with dark thoughts, vanquishing them “by the consciousness of the sin of
indulging them, and taking up her cross again.” Toward the novel’s conclusion
Maria wrote: “should it not be the duty of every good and true citizen to put
down all such attempts, since religion is the foundation of virtue and the
strongest support of society; the friend of the helpless; the sacred guardian
of the marriage rite; the faithful sentinel upon the light-house, that,
descrying danger, gives the alarm, and then throws its protecting arms around
the weary and the doubtful?” In time, Maria would question the efficacy of
religion as usually practiced, but in 1872, this was her firm belief. A second
novel followed in short order, and the first was dramatized.
When
in New York City, Maria lectured at the Union League Club. The New York Home
Journal reported: “Mrs. Maria Jourdan Westmoreland, the Southern authoress,
made a successful debut as a lecturer before a cultivated and
fashionable audience.” Her subject was “Shots at Social Myths.” She was,
reported the Home Journal, “equally severe upon both sexes, firing whole
broadsides of satire and sarcasm at the ‘moral’ of men and the insincerity and
gossiping tendencies of women.” Her lecture was “well received ... its keen
hits and brilliant points being warmly applauded.” The Home Journal
described Maria as a woman of culture and extensive reading, adding: “In
presence, manner and personal appearance she possesses all the elements of
popularity. When so many plain-looking lecturers appear in public, it is
refreshing to see one who is endowed with beauty and wit.”[10]
The lecture was also reported in The New York Post which
described her audience as “eminently intellectual” and in obvious sympathy with
Maria. It reported that she made pointed comments on the Cuban situation: “The
lecture included several sharp and timely hits ... at indisputable realities
... especially to Burriel and the problem of the ever-faithful isle.”[11]
The “isle” was Cuba and Burriel a devious, rather stupid Spanish General. On
October 31, 1873, the United States flagged Virginius was captured by
the Spanish warship Tornado and brought to Santiago de Cuba. Included
among its crew were Cuban revolutionaries, but there were also Americans,
Europeans, Africans and British citizens. Some of the prisoners were only
thirteen. The crew were tried before a Spanish naval court and sentenced to
death as “pirate prisoners.” On November 4th, General Juan N.
Burriel ordered the execution of the four insurgent generals captured on board
the Virginius. Three days later, thirty-seven more members of the crew,
including Joseph Fry, the American captain were killed. General Burriel stopped
the executions when the H. M. S. Niobe arrived, sent to stop the
execution of British citizens.
image
Advertisement for Maria’s
Lecture.
New York Herald, November 23, 1873 – Triple
Sheet Edition.
Late in 1873, Maria addressed a
Women’s Conference held in New York City. The Southern press reproduced an
extract from the New York Herald:
Mrs.
Maria Jourdan Westmoreland came to the platform, and looking like Titian’s
high-born dames, said, in a sweet and low, but distinct voice, that there was a
great necessity for close union between the women of the North and the South.
She hoped that lecturers would be sent through the South in order to awaken the
ladies of that section to immediate action. Mrs. Westmoreland further stated
that she would gladly give any lecturers letters of introduction to the first
people of the South in order to further the common object. Mrs. Westmoreland
spoke on the condition of the Southern women; she said she knew them well
enough to know that if the papers of this Congress had been read in the South,
it would so rouse them that they would not be quiet until they had the ballot
Reaction from the Southern press was immediate and
negative. The Nashville, Tennessee, Union and American said in response
that “Southern people will readily encourage ladies in their efforts to achieve
fame in the genial walks of literature, but they have no patience with ‘crowing
hens.’” The Union and American writer – the report lacks a byline –
quoted The Augusta Chronicle and Sentinel as saying:
It need hardly be said that Mrs. Westmoreland, in
expressing the views with which she is credited above, does not represent the
women of the South. In one section of the Union, at least, women are contented
to be women – they have no desire to drag their dainty skirts through the
filthy mire of politics; no ambition to figure among roughs and rowdies at the
polls. They have a higher and more noble mission to perform. They run not after
strange goads, but worship at the altars of the fireside and the family circle.
We would advise the Women’s Rights women to stay at home and not undertake
missionary work in the South. Even Mrs. Westmoreland’s letters will not open to
them the doors of Southern people – and their lectures will not pay the gas
bills and hall rent.[12]
The Lynchburg, Virginia,
Republican commented:
In assuming the breeches, [the writer means men’s
pants] we are sure Mrs. Westmoreland speaks only for herself, for we think she
greatly mistakes the sentiment of the Southern woman if she supposes that they
are “heart hungry” as herself for the ballot, and that they are ready to rush
into a revolution to secure it in order that they may exhibit their prowess in
a scuffles at the polls on election day with their dusky fellow citizens, Mrs.
Dinah Johnson and Mrs. Phillis Brown.
This was reprinted with approval in The Alexandria, Virginia, Gazette and Virginia Advertiser of October 29, 1873 under the heading Petty Coat on the Rostrum. The Savannah Advertiser said: “Mrs. Westmoreland, a Southern woman herself, ought to have a better knowledge of the sentiments of her own sex in the South. If Mrs. Westmoreland herself should undertake a canvass of the South under the banner of Mesdames Stanton and Livermore, she would fail to win over to her cause a sufficient number of women to start even a first class sewing society.”[13]
There is strong indication that
Maria’s speech was misrepresented by a hostile press. An April 1874 press
report said: “Mrs. Maria J. Westmoreland has finished a lecture which she calls
the ‘Daughters of Eve,’ in which she very properly takes the ground that
woman’s widest field lies within the sacred precincts of home.”[14]
It is possible that she held both to the viewpoints reported in the press.
There is some indication she did. But we think the northern newspapers quoted
in the south exaggerated Maria’s speech. The best indication that the press
misrepresented her speech is found in The New York Daily Graphic: “Mrs.
Westmoreland is ‘defended’ by an enthusiastic Savannahan, who declares she said
nothing about the rights of the ballot in the recent Convention.”[15]
Maria responded through an open
letter to the Southern press. Unfortunately it survives, as far as our research
shows, in a brief quotation:
I
did not say I hoped lecturers would be sent through the South. I said that I
hoped they would go, and with letters of introduction which I would gladly give
them. I knew they would have a happy and perhaps a lucrative time, and I knew
that a few women at least would be delighted to know that women were
accomplishing so much ... Why are these attacks constantly made upon me, and by
my own people? Is it because they hate me personally? It cannot be for anything
I ever did to them, for my house, heart and well-wishes have ever belonged to
my people, and an unkind word from them is always answered by my tears. Is it
kind, is it liberal or charitable for them to try to draw down a woman who is
trying honestly and by hard labor to support herself and two children?[16]
The newspaper that quoted this
suggested that she should have sought better association than the Women’s
Conference and was paying just consequences for failing to do so. The
criticisms are all from men, many of whom resented Reconstruction and sought to
preserve pre-war culture.
In
mid-December 1872 she was engaged to lecture by the Fraternals, a newly-formed
society whose goal was help for indigent women, of whom there were many in New
York City. The New York Sun described them as “chivalrous order of
gentlemen,” saying: “It had been found by investigation that there is not in
New York a place where a moneyless woman who preserves the respect of the
world, can go for lodging except to the free but uncomfortable shelter of a
police station; although there are numerous benevolent houses of refuge, to
enter which would stamp her with infamy. Mr. Dooly mentioned the case of a
woman who had walked the streets all night as the best thing to be done.”[17]
Their goal was to found comfortable housing throughout the city. Maria was
drawn to this type of work, and agreed to lecture to help raise funds. The
Kingston, New York, Daily Freeman noticed her impending lecture. It would
be accompanied by illustrations, and “she allows any gentleman in the audience
to come up on stage and learn how the thing is done.” The writer snidely
observed that Maria was “rather ancient” (she was thirty-eight) “and not a very
comely piece of anatomy – indeed rather angular – she don’t illustrate much.”[18]
The accuracy of this report is uncertain. What is certain is that the editor of
the Freeman was as illiterate as he was rude. The Daily Graphic held
a differing opinion: “Mrs. Westmoreland
is a very handsome woman, and – is it impertinent to say? – probably has a
large acquaintance with her theme.”[19]
Maria’s portrait
Maria
Westmoreland in 1873.
Her
audience was “fashionable and appreciative ... [and] seemed to keenly enjoy the
racy and piquant witticism of the lecturer.” The New York, Daily Graphic,
just quoted, added that “her selection of a subject last evening was a ‘happy thought.’
All men appreciate ‘kisses’ from rosy lips, whether given or talked about,
especially when the theme is handled with a rare blending of delicacy, wit and
sentiment.[20]
Favorable
impressions of Maria’s lecture resulted in invitations to repeat it in Boston
and Washington, D.C. In February 1874, Maria took her “Kisses” lecture to
Willard Hall in Washington, D.C. The Washington, D.C., Star declared
that Maria’s lecture would be the “literary event of the week.” It came at an
appropriate time, St. Valentine’s Day. “Judging from the number of tickets
disposed of, the fair authoress will be greeted by a brilliant and fashionable
audience.[21] A newspaper article
described her as “a beautiful representative of the ‘Sunny South.’” It said
that the “attractive character” of her subject resulted in a “large and
cultivated audience.” After a short concert, she was introduced by Henry Stuart
Foote, former governor of Mississippi, “who read a letter from the Hon. Alex.
H. Stephens regretting his inability to attend on account of sickness.”[22]
Maria returned to her Georgia home
sometime near August 1874, the New York Daily Graphic announcing that
“Mrs. Maria J. Westmoreland is occupied at her home in Georgia writing a
psychological novel, which is likely to excite a profound sensation.”[23]
She delivered her “Kisses” lecture to an Atlanta audience the press described
as “large and distinguished.” One report tells us that she planned a summer
tour of resort areas.[24]
In 1880 her publisher reissued her second novel, Clifford Troup¸ with a
new title, Drifted Together, and issued anonymously.[25]
The Eighties
Maria
fades from newspaper notice in the 1880s. Venet’s take on this was:
She largely faded from view by the end of the 1870s.
Although the two novels went through several editions, critics panned them, and
speaking engagements appear to have dried up. Her marriage may have collapsed,
for Maria did not attend her daughter’s Atlanta wedding in 1882, and she is not
buried next to Willis, who died a much-respected member of Atlanta’s medical
community in 1890.[26]
Maria’s
marriage deteriorated. If we re-read her open letter to the Southern press, we
find her asking: “Is it kind, is it liberal or charitable for them to try to
draw down a woman who is trying honestly and by hard labor to support herself
and two children?”[27]
When her husband, Willis Westmoreland, returned to Georgia after their joint
visit to New York City, he stopped supporting her and their children. Willis,
though respected as a physician, was volatile, ready to threaten a duel, and
just as ready to run off to Arkansas to avoid it.[28] He deteriorated mentally to the point of
commitment to the State Insane Asylum at Milledgeville, Georgia, where he died
June 26, 1890. At some point the children returned to their father’s care.
Maria and Willis lived separately, and then divorced. By the 1880s, we find her
living in West Virginia and married into the Washington family. In 1882 she
married William Lewis Washington [1844-1902], a man of some wealth and a
colonel in the Confederate Army.
They
were in New York City by 1887, and a letter from her to Richard Watson Gilder,
the publisher of Century Magazine, seeking an appointment exists,
apparently to further her literary career. A follow-up letter dated June 18,
1887, also exists showing that she had an appointment with Robert Underwood
Johnson at Century Magazine. We do not know the result.[29]
William
quickly tired of Maria. In a letter written in 1890 he discussed their divorce
proceedings, saying that Maria should be “placed in a lunatic asylum.” In a
separate letter he wrote that Maria was “an opium eater” and not responsible
for her actions. We have no basis upon which to judge this true or false and
are left with merely reporting it. Letters between Maria and other members of
the Washington family suggest that they held a kinder view of Maria. [30]
William quickly went through two more marriages, which probably reflects more
on him than any of his wives.
W. L. Washington photo here
It is
to this period we must assign her exploration of alternative religions. She
wrote a biography, printed in very limited numbers and which we could not
locate.[31]
What remains of this story is found in the December 13, 1891, New York, New
York, Sun, which reported that she “has been a member of almost every
religious denomination and a disciple of all manner of strange vagaries
including spiritualism, theosophy and Christian science [sic].” This is typical
Sun innuendo and insult, a type of insult the Sun directed at
anyone religious but out of the ordinary. Maria told the Sun reporter
that she had sought the “truth of religion” for forty years which takes us back
to 1851, her twelfth or thirteenth year. Serious questing usually takes place
in more mature years, though it can begin quite early.
The Nineties
After
separating from W. L. Washington, about 1890, she moved from their shared
quarters in the Park Avenue Hotel to a rented, older Greek Revival house at 179
McDougal Street, in the Washington Square area.[32]
She
became interested in the near return of Christ, reading Charles A. L. Totten’s
prophetic speculations. Totten was a retired army officer, a British Israelite
proponent, and believed Christ would return in 1899.[33]
She read Russell’s Plan of the Ages. We do not know the circumstances. A
group of wealthy, somewhat prominent widows and matrons resident in New York
City promoted the book; principal among these was Viola Gilbert whom we profile
in volume three of Separate Identity. She and Maria were social peers.
It is possible, even likely, that Maria was introduced to Russell’s writings
through Gilbert. We simply do not know.
However,
Maria was impressed and traveled to Allegheny to meet Russell, returning with his
photo and a determination to preach. The insinuating, insulting, rather vulgar Sun
reporter wrote:
photo
Maria’s Calling Card – New
York Public Library Collection.
She has been searching for the truth for forty years,
and, as she says, only succeeded in gathering a flock of hungry parasites, who
fattened off her substance and pretended to have all manner of faith in her.
Not until a year ago did the truth come to her, and since that time she has
been preparing to open a campaign for the saving of the world, which will end
before many years.
The truth came to her with the aid of a certain
Charles Russell – a big-eyed, unctuous-looking man, if his picture does not
flatter him. Mr. Russell lives in Allegheny, Pa., and is responsible for a good
deal more than this church in the house of Maria.
Mr. Russell has written some of the largest and
dullest books in the world to prove that the millennium is at hand. He preceded
Totten; is more voluminous and more wearisome, if possible. He is spending all
his time at the propagation of his ideas about the millennium, and runs a
publishing house in its interests.
Maria thinks exceeding well of Russell and is inclined
to adopt his plan of the end of the world, although she is still flirting with
Totten and may yet go over to him. Russell says the first trumpet sounded in
1878 or thereabouts, and that the millennium will come in 1914. He is a good
deal agitated about this, but not so much agitated as is Maria.[34]
She
told the reporter that for weeks after “the truth was revealed to her she ...
ran about the streets telling everybody, policemen, beggars, street walkers.”
She went to the “big churches,” asking “embarrassing questions of the ministers
as they descended from their handsome pulpits.” Failing to receive satisfactory
answers she traveled to Allegheny, “and there got the powerful call to start a
church.” She invited previous acquaintances to her meetings. The reporter
described them as “the best people of New York – the worldly, be-diamond,
décolleté people” of New York City.
The Sun’s
reporter was a modernist who, as did most of his ilk, responded to fervent
belief with ridicule. Despite this, much detail penetrates the fog. At the time
of this report, Maria was teaching what she found in The Plan of the Ages.
If she was persuaded by Totten’s Anglo-Israelitism, she was not the only Watch
Tower adherent to be so. Russell saw the issue as irrelevant to the times. The
Sun suggested that she had “an entire [sic] new system of theology, and
talks about the Presbyterians and Methodists and the rest in a most startling
way – She thinks the wicked are to be instantly killed off, instead of burned
or tortured with remorse. She thinks – but if you care to know all that she
thinks go see her.” The public was invited to come on Fridays to discuss and
debate. Maria used what she saw as a New Testament pattern, calling the group
who met with her The Church in Maria’s House, and alternately, according to the
reporter, The School of Christ. Probably the reporter misunderstood the phrase
“school of Christ.” From The Sun’s article we pull this:
Maria is endeavoring to return to the Apostolic Church
in every way. Her method of expounding the Scriptures is novel and, to one
unfamiliar with any but the orthodox standards most startling. She is well
educated and isby no means absurd in her talk. She can reason with adroitness
and subtlety, and she has an amazing flow of language. She is quick tempered
too, and, as she regards it as inspired do not hesitate to show it when her
view are called into question.
As we
observed in the previous chapter, meetings could be contentious. Those held in
Maria’s house were. The Thursday meetings for ‘the church’ were described this
way:
If you should happen to strike the church in Maria’s
house of a Thursday afternoon you will hear in all probability voices raised
high in argument. There will be swinging word-blows exchanging in the shrillest
tones and the most vigorous language a well-strained Anglo-Saxon vocabulary
affords. This will be Maria driving home the truth as it is revealed to her.
“Sometimes,” she will explain, “the Lord gives it to me to speak the truth with
wonderful power. I do not spare words. I tear my adversaries in pieces. The
woman who came to combat me had to her bed, and many do not get over a visit
for days. Oh, the truth is mighty.
Despite
the controversies, Maria’s mission reached some. Two students attending The
Union Theological Seminary who testified that “Maria has taught them more in a
few lessons than all the professors at Union have ... in the time they have
been going there.” The Sun article was designed to discourage contact
with Mrs. Washington, to ridicule her, but it did not succeed. Maria turned to
a forum with which she was very familiar, a salon. Using as a pattern her
youthful literary salons, she promoted Millennial Dawn teachings among her
social peers, holding two meetings a week, one for visitors and one for those
who saw themselves as part of the “little flock,” the 144,000, heaven bound
congregation.
photo here
Park Avenue Hotel – About
1900.
William and Maria Washington
Took Rooms Here in 1887.
Russell
was in New York City in November 1892 “in response to the urgent solicitations
of the friends in and adjacent to” the City. He
‘preached’ in the morning at Cooper Union on the subject “In Our Days.” In the
evening he spoke at Hardman Hall on “The Restitution of All Things” and again
that night on “The Millennium and Its Day of Preparation.” Maria Russell
accompanied him. An announcement in Zion’s Watch Tower said: “Notice is given thus publicly and in season, that
readers from surrounding places may attend, if they can make it convenient.”
Russell said, “Private meetings will be held elsewhere on Monday.” Russell used
the phrase “in response to urgent solicitation” as a code word for the need to
address troublesome issues among the brethren. We do not know what the issues
was or where the private meetings were held, or how they affected Maria
Washington.
We
believe, based solely on circumstantial evidence, that Maria attended the Watch
Tower convention held in Chicago in 1893. Late in life Maria was described as
having an angular face. A comparison of her known portrait with the large
format group photo taken at the convention leads us to tentatively identify her
in that group. In any event, she was in Chicago in October 1893 with a small
but organized group of evangelizers. The Chicago, Illinois, Inter-Ocean
reported on her work:
Mrs. Maria J. Washington and her associates in
evangelistic work are meeting with great success in the neighborhood of the
World’s Fair.
The meetings are largely attended and numerous conversations
are reported. Services will be held at four centers in the vicinity of the
exposition today, Mrs. Washington having the assistance of an energetic
volunteer band of workers numbering over twenty. ....
Mrs. Washington is a lady of means who devotes all her
time and energy to religious work, devoting particular attention to the rescue
of the fallen and abandoned. Not many years since she occupies a very prominent
place in society at the National capital. She is the widow of a gentleman who
belonged to the family of the illustrious Washington. She surrendered her
fashionable environments and associations to give herself up to the labors of
charity among the poor and lowly. Her efforts have been most fruitful, a rare
and peculiar magnetism of manner enabling her to win friends with ease. She has
labored in New York and in some of the southern cities, but will make Chicago
her home for some time to come.[35]
In
Chicago, as in all of America’s larger cities, women faced the problem of
earning a living wage “under conditions which would make it possible for her to
escape illness and prostitution.” Chicago was at the center of labor reform.
Maria found congenial company with which to pursue the issue. The
Inter-Ocean and other papers described her as a widow. In fact she was not,
but was twice divorced. We do not know if the papers were being polite to a
well-doing woman or if Maria misrepresented herself. Care for poor, abandoned,
under-class women was Maria’s interest since the Civil War years. Despite
Russell’s suggestion that the work of God’s people lay elsewhere, she
persisted. While this was contrary to advice as found in Zion’s Watch Tower,
Russell observed that others followed this path, and it did not break
fellowship. His view was that because Christ was present, social issues
would soon be solved by his kingdom.
Maria
returned to Atlanta early in 1894, leaving no discernable impression on Chicago.
Her message remained a socially conscious one. [continue]
The
Atlanta Constitution of April 26, 1894, reported that she established a “rescue
mission for the redemption and saving of fallen women.” She gave a series of
public lectures on religious topics that were well attended, and, though the
events were free. Her November 25th lecture was entitled “Go Sin No
More,” and a special invitation was extended to “old friends specially and the
public generally.” After her lecture she asked for an “offering” to support her
rescue mission.[36]
Maria
may have abandoned major portions of Russellite belief. The Atlanta
Constitution reported her as giving a series of lectures in DeGive’s Opera
House. According to the December 2, 1894, Constitution¸ she attracted
large and appreciative crowds. Her lecture for that night was “The Lord’s
Second, Personal and Imminent Coming.”[37] If
Christ’s return was imminent, it had not yet occurred. While noting this, we
should draw conclusions cautiously. Advertisements from Russell’s own lectures
and those of Watch Tower missionaries used similar language.
In
1897, Maria wrote to E. F, Cheatham, one of the extended Washington family
asking him to escort her daughter, Carolina, and a friend to the theater.
Proper ladies did not go alone, even in 1897. She wrote that she was happy in
new life as a missionary but barely able to pay bills. She asked for a loan.
The loan was granted, and her son, W. F. Westmoreland, Jr., sent a letter of
thanks for Cheatham’s kindness. Maria died in 1900 and is buried in Atlanta.[38]
Maria
represents several we know and probably many of whom we know nothing who
accepted all or parts of Watch Tower belief, but rejected Russell’s call to
focus on Kingdom work. An example is Keim who sought immediate remedies to
human ills through “Christian Socialism,” yet remained on the fringes of Watch
Tower congregations. Maria’s path was barely within what The Watch Tower
advised. In 1881 Russell suggested that true Christians preach Christ, but that
they also visit the sick, finance the Lord’s work, are willing to “sacrifice
reputation” and suffer “the reproach of the world and a degenerate nominal
church.”[39] In this volume of Separate Identity we
meet a number who continued to belong to fraternal lodges, the Grand Army of
the Republic, a Union veterans’ organization, and who continued to participate
in community affairs. Maria’s journey is similar. She sought immediate
remediation of the poor, as far as she was able, expending her fortune in this
work. She sought to rescue prostitutes, many of whom were mere children. We
think Maria’s story is representative and important because of that.
[1] W. F. Westmoreland’s biography: H. A. Kelly: A
Cyclopedia of American Medical Biography, Philadelphia, 1912, volume 2,
page 494ff. Mariah’s family and biography: The Living Female Writers of the
South, Claxton, Remsen & Haffelfinger, Philadelphia, 1872, page 188ff;
Ida Raymond: Southland Writers: Biographical and Critical Sketches of the
Living Female Writers of the South, Claxton, Remsen & Haffelfinger,
Philadelphia, volume 1, 1870, page 447ff.
“Dr.
Willis F. Westmoreland was born in Fayette county, [sic] Ga., June 1, 1828. He
studied medicine in the Georgia Medical College, in the Jefferson Medical
College, and the medical department of the University of Nashville, Tenn. He
graduated at the Jefferson Medical College in 1850. He also spent three years
in Europe, principally in Paris, in making himself proficient with the
principles of his profession. He first settled in Fayette county, [sic] and in
1851 removed to Atlanta. His specialty is surgery. He is a member of the American
Medical Association, of the Georgia Medical Association; was its president in
1873, and of the Atlanta Academy of Medicine. He was one of the original
founders of the Atlanta Medical and Surgical Journal in 1855, and ever since
has been a contributor to medical literature. From 1854 he has been a professor
in the Atlanta Medical College.” – W. P. Reed: History of Atlanta, Georgia¸
D. Mason & Co., Syracuse, New York, 1889, page 312.
[3] S. C. Clayton: Requiem for a Lost City: A Memoir of
Civil War Atlanta and the Old South, Mercer University Press, Macon, Georgia,
1999, page 67.
[4] W. H. Venet: A Changing Wind: Commerce and Conflict
in Civil War Atlanta, Yale University Press, New Haven, Connecticut, 2014,
page 49.
[5] Contributions Received by the “Ladies’ Soldier’s Relief
Society” for the Atlanta Hospitals, The Southern Confederacy¸ April 10,
1862.
[6] We have drawn heavily from W. H. Venet’s excelling
book, A Changing Wind: Commerce and Conflict in Civil War Atlanta, Yale
University Press, New Haven, Connecticut, 2014, page 215.
[7] T. H. Stout: Southern Female College, The Christian
Index, July 11, 1872. The Index was a Baptist publication.
[10] Shots at Social Myths, New York Home Journal as
reprinted in The Atlanta Constitution, December 2, 1873.
[11] Mrs. Westmoreland’s Lecture, New York Evening Post
as reprinted in The Atlanta Constitution, November 30, 1873.
[12] A Georgia Authoress in a New Role: The Nashville,
Tennessee, Union and American, November 2, 1873.
[16] The letter is quoted in part in: An Indignant Woman, The
Nashville, Tennessee, Union and American, November 26, 1873.
[18] Current Topics, The Kingston, New York, Daily Freeman¸
December 17, 1873. Kingston is about ninety miles from New York City. Few
likely to attend would have read the Freeman.
[25] J. L. Whitney: A Modern Proteus: Or a List of Books
Published Under More Than One Title, F. Leypoldt, New York, 1883, page 70.
[27] The letter is quoted in part in: An Indignant Woman, The
Nashville, Tennessee, Union and American, November 26, 1873.
[31] The title as announced in The Atlanta Constitution,
is The Growth of a Soul: A Testimony for Jesus in Three Parts – Part I. Old
Faith. Part II. Unfaith. Part III. Faith.
[33] Totten
receives unfavorable mention in a more recent Watchtower publication. See: Do
You Believe Everything You Read, Awake! November 22, 1970, page 5. In
1890 Totten started publishing Our Race: Its Origin and Destiny, a
quarterly, to promote his Anglo-Israelite theories. N. Goodrick-Clarke [Black Sun: Aryan Cults, Esoteric Nazism, and the Politics
of Identity, New York University Press,
2002, page 235] suggests that Anglo-Israelitism came to America through Totten.
This is, of course, false.
[35] Their Labors Rewarded: Mrs Maria J. Washington and
Associate Evangelists Meeting with Success, The Chicago, Illinois,
Inter-Ocean¸ October 8, 1893.
