1. W H Conley - and the Christian and Missionary Alliance

 In 1914 a religious writer, Rev. G.P. Pardington, produced a book of 238 pages that has a bearing on Watch Tower related history. It was a self-congratulatory history of a movement that dated its official start from 1889, although growing out of efforts from earlier in that decade.

The Christian and Missionary Alliance was founded by Albert B Simpson (1843-1919). Simpson was originally a Presbyterian clergyman who started an independent ministry in New York in the early 1880s. He was a prolific writer of books and hymns. Several ventures including two magazines came together into the Alliance by 1889.

Pardington’s book outlined their belief system: the Alliance’s theology was pre-millennial, strongly evangelical, with a special emphasis on miraculous physical healing, which Simpson believed he had personally experienced.

The book spends some time giving the history of various supporters and workers around the globe, most of whom had died by that time. However, for those with an interest in Watch Tower history, one reference stands out – to the first president of the Watch Tower Society.

Over pages 208 and 209 – part of chapter called “Our Honored Dead” there is a eulogy to one John Conley.

The date of death (July 25, 1897) and Pittsburgh location clearly identifies this person as William Henry Conley, who readers here will know as the first president of the (unincorporated) Watch Tower Society in 1881.

Conley was an associate of CTR throughout much of the 1870s, being mentioned in George Storrs’ Bible Examiner along with the Russells. He became a wealthy industrialist and co-owner of an iron and steel business known as the Riter-Conley Company. When Zion’s Watch Tower Society first started as an unincorporated body in 1881, Conley was one of four who donated substantial sums for a tract campaign. He was president of the Society and CTR was secretary-treasurer. Yet by the time the Society was incorporated in 1884 Conley was missing and CTR was now president.

He would reappear briefly with a letter to Zion’s Watch Tower in 1894 which we will come to later.

As noted by Pardington in 1914, Conley died back in 1897. But he was sufficiently well-remembered seventeen years later to merit a paragraph in the book. Although it has to be noted that he was not sufficiently well-remembered for Pardington to get his name right!

Going back to the time when William Henry and wife Sarah were very much alive, quite a picture can be built up of their high-profile involvement in this movement. The Alliance published a weekly paper originally called The Christian Alliance and Missionary Weekly. The Conleys are mentioned in its pages literally dozens of times.

A key reference is when Sarah died, a decade after her husband. Her obituary also covers some of William’s history. It is found in the Alliance Weekly for November 21, 1908.

William and Sarah’s support for the Alliance took many forms. To review, here are some sample extracts from The Christian Alliance and Missionary Weekly over the years. In addition to supporting mission work in Palestine, as noted by Partington above, William was noted for his hospitality.

As his home had earlier been made available for the Memorial celebration for the first two years of Zion’s Watch Tower, now it was available for Alliance activities. From their paper for April 13, 1894:

His hospitality extended to lavish spreads for Alliance visitors. From December 12, 1889:

Sarah Conley was very fond of music. From February 6, 1891:

And November 11, 1892:

William was not just a sideliner supporter, but as the above obituary for Sarah from 1908 shows, he also accepted office in the Alliance.

For the Pittsburgh branch of the Alliance he became the president (March 13, 1896):

This support for the Alliance was not just in administration, William also preached for the cause. Here he is presiding at a church meeting (September 11, 1896):

Some of the topics he preached on would not have sounded out of place from a ZWT evangelist, although the details may have differed. From March 5, 1895 – “Dispensational Truths” (complete with a chart):

From February 22, 1896 – “The Second Coming of Christ” – complete with another chart and William and Sarah singing:

From the same issue (February 22, 1896) – “Meat in due season”:

After William died, the obituary for his widow Sarah showed how much she continued her support for the Alliance. She also accepted positions in the movement.

From a regional convention covering five US States in 1907 (September 7, 1907)

Returning to the time when William died, his support was so notable that a room at the Alliance’s own training school was dedicated in his honor. The Missionary Training Institute in Nyack, New York, was founded by A B Simpson back in 1882 and in due course became the official educational facility for the Alliance. A special building was constructed for the school overlooking the Hudson River in 1897. A news item from December 2, 1916 referred back to this event:

Unlike Pardington, here in 1916 the writer at least got Conley’s initials right. So, while Conley rapidly faded from ZWT view, he was extremely visible elsewhere.

His support for the Alliance was mentioned in the newspapers when reporting on his death. From The Pittsburgh Press for July 31, 1897:

So why did W H Conley part company with CTR, at least theologically?

Several possible reasons are suggested here, and it may have been a combination of factors.

The first possible issue was how religious movements in the past sometimes evolve from proclaiming a future hope to trying to deal with the “here and now.” A general example is the Salvation Army where William Booth and others wanted to evangelize the poor, but are more known today for social care. This did not happen to the Bible Student movement. When ZWT began, its focus was clearly on preaching the message, gathering in the last of the “saints,” and declaring the hope that God will provide lasting solutions to mankind’s ills. It kept to that. Whereas the Conleys obviously veered towards social care – supporting hospitals, a refuge for women, rehabilitation of prisoners, etc. This was a different focus.

The second possible issue was a personal tragedy in the Conley family.

One assumes that William and Sarah were unable to have children themselves, because they adopted a little girl called Emma. She died in 1881. That she was adopted is clearly shown by the notice of her death in the Pittsburgh Daily Post for 15 December, 1881, which drew attention to the fact.

Her grave marker has the poignant inscription “Our Pet.”

Photo by the author

This tragedy may have affected Conley’s religious focus. A main feature of the Alliance platform was Divine Healing. Simpson firmly believed he had been miraculously healed; this was a main prompt in starting the organization.  For a while it would have links with the developing Pentecostal movement. It would be too late for Emma, but a belief in Divine Healing may have attracted Conley.

However, perhaps the most obvious reason for a parting of the ways was a straightforward theological divide. As ZWT commented on doctrines in its early years, there was an obvious rift in the making. The various groups that provided a background to CTR’s ministry had widely diverging views on God and Christ, but many were non-trinitarian.

In marked contrast, the organisation that Conley threw his money behind was strictly orthodox. It still exists and as the Alliance World Fellowship claims a membership of over six million today. A modern-day website lists its core beliefs. Under WHAT DO WE BELIEVE? the first statement of faith is:

“We believe that Jesus is the Christ, God incarnate.”

Elaborating further: “There is one God…existing eternally in three persons, Father, Son and Holy Spirit.”

Those are not words you would ever find in Zion’s Watch Tower. Instead, the issue for July/August 1881 (R249) calls the trinity a “heathen dogma” and by July 1883 (R505) the doctrine was described as “totally opposed to Scripture.” This allowed no room for compromise.

Other doctrinal differences likely surfaced when Conley helped fund George Peters’ monumental work The Theocratic Kingdom published in full in 1884. CTR obviously had a preview because he reviewed it in Zion’s Watch Tower for May 1883. Conley is given a prominent dedication for financial help given at the start of the third volume. CTR’s told his readers how they could obtain the work but there was a warning. He wrote:

“We regret to have it to state, however, that he is not free from Babylon's shackles, being yet identified with the Lutheran sect – hence has been hindered from a fuller development in grace and knowledge of the word and plan of God than if he stood in the full liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free.”

Peters identified himself as “Rev” in volume one, and “Evang. Luth. Minister” in volumes 2 and 3. Conley had come from a Lutheran background and likely knew Peters from earlier days.

CTR did not exactly raise enthusiasm for the book. He concluded his comments:

“While we cannot recommend it to you more than as above, to briefly state the facts and circumstances, yet if you should conclude to order it or a prospectus of it you should address our brother and friend as above.”

CTR called Peters a “brother” and “friend” but it was hardly an endorsement of a huge project Conley had helped bankroll.

So by 1884, perhaps for a variety of reasons, there had been a parting of the ways. Many years later, when CTR reviewed his association with Conley in The Watch Tower for July 1, 1912, pp.211-213, he singled out Conley’s take on faith-healing as a problem. He also suggested that Conley had been ensnared by materialism.

As noted earlier, Conley was to reappear “out of the blue” in a letter written to Zion’s Watch Tower in 1894.

CTR had been subjected to an attack on his personal integrity including his business dealings from four former associates. He responded with a special issue of Zion’s Watch Tower dated April 25, 1894, entitled A Conspiracy Exposed and Harvest Siftings. The aftermath of this was another special Zion’s Watch Tower for June 11, 1894, which reproduced many letters of support. One came from W H Conley. CTR introduced the letter before reproducing it.

“Another brother who was a member of the early Allegheny Bible Class writes as follows:

“My Dear Bro. In Christ:—
I have read carefully pages 92 to 119 of A Conspiracy Exposed and Harvest Siftings with special interest, and must say my recollection of events named by you are very much like your own; and while there are some details, in some cases, of which I know nothing, and hence cannot speak as to them, yet I do know there were such transactions as you name, and at the dates given. I am quite conversant with some of the dealings, and am surprised at the very merciful manner in which you speak of those with whom you were associated. "The servant is not greater than his Lord." "If they have done these things in a green tree, what will they do in the dry?"—"Perils among false brethren," etc., etc.
As to myself, you can rely on one thing, viz., All reports stating that I deny the ransom are absolutely false...
    W.H. Conley”

By this time however, he was fully and very publicly committed to the Missionary Alliance. There is no mention that he had once been president of the Watch Tower Society. CTR simply called him “a member of the early Allegheny Bible Class.” This avoided controversy and maybe even potential embarrassment for Conley.

Looking back on William Conley’s life of philanthropy, some subjective readers may conclude that probably the best thing he ever did with his money was that early help he gave in the start of Zion’s Watch Tower Tract Society.

2. W H Conley - CTR on William Conley

Charles Taze Russell gave his thoughts on Wiliam Henry Conley in a Watch Tower magazine for July 1, 1912. The article was “Delivered for the Destruction of the Flesh.” Under the subheading “The Cares of the World Overcome Many” CTR warned about being deluded by “the deceitfulness of riches.” He gave a warning example. While not namng names the main example cited has to be Conley. He was someone who had been very close to CTR, who started as a book-keeper and then made his fortune. This proved to be a snare. He joined the Christian Alliance and tried to practice faith healing. It didn’t work in his case, and in spite of calling in a doctor he subsequently died. His attitude had more or less cut the two men off from their previous intimate fellowship. CTR thought that, while he likely did not get into the kingdom, probably he would be part of the Great Company.

It is probably best to just let CTR speak for himself. Extracted from July 1, 1912, WT pages 211-213.

THE CARES OF THIS WORLD OVERCOME MANY

There was a gentleman with whom the writer was once very intimate; we were like brothers. One day he said, "Brother Russell, I should like very much indeed to be out in the Lord's work and to do some kind of service for the Truth, but I have a wife, and I understand that the Lord holds me responsible for the care of my wife. I could not think of going out and leaving her dependent. But if the Lord in His providence should ever send me money so that I could go without my wife's suffering any serious inconvenience, I would be very glad to go out and preach the Gospel." The Lord took him at his word. He was then a bookkeeper; but the Lord opened the way, by the death of a member of the firm, for him to become one of the principal partners in that firm. Without any effort at all he prospered financially until he was worth at least half a million dollars.

One day we said to him, "Brother, we have a very serious matter that weighs on us a great deal." He said,"Tell me what it is and I will assist you, whatever it costs." You see how gracious he was! He thought that we were after his money! Dear friends, we thank God that we have never yet found it necessary to ask for money; and we do not suppose that we ever shall. We said, "Brother, we are in great distress, and no one but you can help us." "Tell me what it is," he replied.We said, "Dear Brother, we desire to call your attention to something which you said several years ago when you were poor." Then we recited our previous conversation as best we could, and said, "The Lord has given you the money; He has done His part; are you ready to do yours?" With streaming eyes he answered, "Brother Russell, I am so bound to my business--hand and foot-- that it would be impossible now." The cares of this life, the deceitfulness of riches, according to his own words, had bound him hand and foot; but his heart was still loyal to God.

We have no desire to be his judge, but we are inclined to think that dear brother did not get into the Kingdom. While we do not know, yet we fear that his being bound "hand and foot" may have stood in his way, though we think that he was truly a child of God. Are we to suppose that because he failed to make that sacrifice which he had agreed to make, he would go down into the Second Death? We hardly think so. We think that the Lord loved him and that he had a very loyal character. The Lord loves good characters. Our thought is that quite probably the dear brother will be in the Great Company; and we are very glad that there will be a Great Company class...

…Regarding the case that we have mentioned earlier in this article you might ask, Did that Brother lose the knowledge of the Truth? We will tell you; for this is a very interesting question.

In this Brother's case we do not know what were the sentiments of his heart, of course, for we are not able to judge those. But he left us and joined the Presbyterian Church. Then he joined the Christian Alliance people and tried to believe in faith-healing and to practice it, although he had possessed much knowledge of the Truth along these lines. After pressing along the line of faith-healing, etc., he had several attacks of sickness and had to call in a doctor, notwithstanding faith-cures. Finally, after very serious illness lasting a number of weeks, he passed away. We do not know enough about him to say to what extent his mind was turned toward the Lord. We had no opportunity of knowing; for his attitude had more or less cut us off from our previous intimate fellowship.

3. W H Conley - the pictures

 We are all familiar with the line drawing of W H Conley found in history works on Pittsburgh and reprinted in Wikipedia, Find a Grave and Separate Identity volume one.

But what happened to any originals? When Sarah Conley died in 1908 she left detailed instructions for the disposal of her possessions. These included gifts of five pictures (probably photographs rather than paintings) which included one of the two of them, William and Sarah, together. The relevant paragraph from the will is at the end of this piece.

What happened to these pictures? Do they still exist is some dusty attic, maybe uncaptioned and forgotten? So many pictures from the past are, alas, orphaned today by lack of information.

The Rutherfords in Monrovia

In 1954 there was a little human interest story on the front page of the Daily News and Monrovia Daily News for June 8, 1954. An old lady named Mrs J F Rutherford was pictured with the mailman, “Buck” Bailey, who had been delivering for about thirty years. It was claimed he’d done the equivalent of walking around the world four times in that time.

Reproduced with permission from newspapers.com

This photograph and news story has an interesting link to Watch Tower history because the old lady was Mary, widow of Joseph F Rutherford, who was then living at 159 Stedman Place. The suggestion in the newspaper was that the postie had been delivering to her for thirty years. In fact, according to the Monrovia-News-Post for July 15, 1935, the Stedman Place property only had a planning permit that year.

However, a check of Google maps shows that immediately backing onto the 159 Stedman Place plot was 160 North Primrose Avenue. And this is where Mary had been for most of the 1920s, one assumes on Bailey’s postal round. And it could well be that the original plot for the North Primrose Avenue address had been extensive enough to allow the construction of a brand new property on it in 1935, fronting onto the parallel road.

Mary’s address was given as 160 North Primrose in a number of trade and street directories throughout the 1920s. One example below listed all the existing numbers in the street in 1928. Here you can see Mary at number 160.

 

It is noted that some numbers are missing. This is likely because the properties were either not constructed or occupied at this time, as the whole area was under development. Mary’s home, number 160, was constructed in 1922 so it is likely she moved into a new property that year or shortly thereafter.

Interestingly the same year as the above directory entry, 1928, the address was featured in advertisements as a contact address for IBSA publications.

Files of all the street directories are not all accessible, but this one below from 1925 is of particular interest. We note that there are two people living at 160 North Primrose.

So the occupant is Jos F Rutherford and his wife Mary. If any doubt that this could be our JFR, check out this cutting from March 9, 1925.

 

Rutherford is classed as a resident and his given address is 160 North Primrose. This information was repeated over several years. A brief look takes us up to at least 1928, where the August 6, 1928 newspaper gives his address as 180 North Primrose, which I would suggest is just a typo. Sometimes the paper calls him a Monrovian. From a 1927 newspaper:

 

So it was accepted locally that JFR was a resident, living 160 North Primrose Avenue. We might assume this was just winter months, but there were other times of year noted as well. Note here a visit made in August 1925.

 

This wasn’t a big secret. It was supported by the Golden Age magazine for March 25, 1925, pages 407-409. This reproduces two letters written by JFR in February 1925 over the George Fisher situation. One letter is a copy of what was sent directly to Fisher, and the other was written to Clayton J Woodworth, editor of Golden Age. The contents are not our subject here, although anyone with access to Golden Age can check it out, but here is the start and finish of Woodworth’s letter.

So JFR writes from Monrovia. The actual address is omitted, which was probably wise in view of the Golden Age’s wide circulation.

As was common with all Watch Tower officials (apart from perhaps CTR and Maria) their personal family affairs were kept private. But it can be reasonably established that, while Mary Rutherford lived in Monrovia and her son Malcom lived nearly, JFR also spent part of his year there throughout the 1920s. It may be that the increasing workload and the need for extra staff like stenographers contributed to the move to the larger Beth-Sarim in the 1930s. A May 27, 1942, Consolation magazine article referred to JFR and what it called his “office force” using the property at Beth-Sarim.

The family’s continued contact also shows up in May 1938 when Malcom and his wife Pauline shared part of an ocean voyage with JFR and some of his staff.

JFR died at Beth-Sarim, San Diego, in 1942. There were issues about his burial as discussed in the above mentioned Consolation magazine. One of the headlines reporting the situation still claimed JFR as an old Monrovian.

The story mentioned that Mary Rutherford “still resides here at 159 Stedman Place.”

After JFR’s death, his son Malcom with wife Pauline lived with Mary for a short time in the 1940s. They are listed as with her at the Stedman Place property in the Monrovia Street directory for 1944. When Mary died in 1962, Malcom inherited the property and he and his second wife Eleanor lived there until at least 1970.

The end of Nelson

Nelson Barbour’s paper, first The Midnight Cry and then Herald of the Morning, ran from 1873 to 1903.

Nelson died on August 31, 1905. Some sources say 1906, but the correct year is 1905. This is confirmed by newspaper reports of his death. Until recently the main news of his death was a short notice in John Paton’s World’s Hope magazine. But a couple of newspapers have gone online which confirm the event and the date.

He died while on a visit to Tacoma, Washington State. The story was taken up first by The Tacoma Daily News on the day he died, August 31, 1905:

With nearly the same wording, the next day’s Tacoma Daily Ledger for September 1 also carried the story:

There was only a very brief reference to his death in the papers in Rochester. He was no longer a “name” – if he ever had been – and no special attention was drawn to his passing.     The Tacoma papers however gave two names of associates – a Mrs J E Moore and a Mrs N W Fuller.

Nelson had been staying at the home of a Mrs J E Moore for about two months. She appears to be Julia Elizabeth Jenks Moore (1850-1937). Originally Julia Jenks, she married James W Moore in 1871 who was about 26 years her senior. In the 1900 Tacoma census she is 49 years old and James is 75. In the 1910 census she is a widow living with her son and his family. For several years during the first decade of the 20^th century she is in Tacoma trade directories as running her own business as a piano teacher. It may be that she was recently widowed at the time Nelson Barbour and Mrs N W Fuller came to stay with her.

Mrs N W Fuller, the friend who came with Nelson for the stay, has a more obvious connection with his Church of the Strangers. In the 1900 census for Rochester, she is living at home with Nelson and Emeline Barbour as a “boarder.” When Emeline died in late 1901, Nelson wrote her obituary in the January/February Herald page 174. He mentioned how Sister Fuller had been with them for nearly four years, and had accompanied Emeline on her last trip when she died in Florida. He also wrote that she would be making her home with him. The 1900 census shows Sister Fuller to be Nancy Fuller, a widow with no children. Nelson is 75 and she is 68, the same age as Emeline.  Nancy was born in New Hampshire in November 1831. In the 1905 census, the year of Nelson’s death, she is with him in Rochester, listed as: relationship “servant” and occupation “house-keeper.” Something strange has happened to her age. By all accounts she should now be around 73 but only admits to 66.

So the 1905 newspapers tell us that when Nelson died, Nancy arranged for the body to be taken back to Rochester for the funeral. Nelson would be buried alngside his late wife, Emeline, in the Throopsville Rural Cemetery, Auburn, New York.

However, that wasn’t the end of the story. There was an interesting sequel with Nancy center stage.

As recounted in the Rochester newspaper The Democrat and Chronicle for June 12 and July 11, 1906, there were big problems in Nelson’s church after his demise. He had made a will about a year before he died, providing money for a special book to be called “Washed in His Blood” as a final message to the world. It wasn’t a simple affair, there was work to be done putting it together from material that appeared in the Herald. His last will and testament also left all his household belongings to Nancy Fuller.

So far so good. But then, reportedly on the day he died, Nelson executed a codicil to his will which now included Nancy as one of the executors. The other two executors were Charles A Naramore and Leonidas B King.

     The book project involved someone being employed to put it all together. King claimed Naramore agreed to pay him $15 per week to do this. This became a bone of contention – if paid weekly, how long was it all going to take and how much from the estate would it cost? Then Nancy decided that she would produce the book herself. She had one key thing on her side – having inherited all Nelson’s household goods she also inherited his library. She then refused King access and took steps to get back what had already been used. On his side, King took steps to try and wrest back the project and also secure a fee now upped to $18 per week. So it went to court as yet another drain on the estate.

The newspaper had a touch of glee in its tone when it reported on what it called “a tempest in a teapot”:

“Of legal controversies there have been enough and to spare, but the personal jealousies and heart-burning that the brethren have endured are not to be mentioned in the same breath. Those who figure chiefly in the proceedings are Charles Naramore, Leonidas B King and Mrs Nancy W Fuller, all of whom were on friendly terms with one another and Mr. Barbour before his death… Because the brethren could not agree on who should continue the work of preparing the manuscript…it seems likely that the most of the $4,000 left for that purpose will be exhausted in “claims” against the estate and lawyers’ fees before the matter is settled…

“There are not lacking those who take sides…One faction declares that if Naramore has anything to do with the publication of the book he will get no help from it, and the same attitude is taken by the King faction. Then there are those who declare they will not touch the work if either Naramore or King has any hand in its preparing. And there you are… For the peace of mind of the brethren it is certainly well that they believe the dead sleep unconscious to the judgment day, for otherwise their consciences might be troubled over the effect of this strife on the consciousness of their late pastor.”

The newspapers do not appear to have published a resolution to the conflict, but “Washed in His Blood” was eventually published in 1907. There was a very small advertisement in The Democrat and Chronicle for May 4, 1907:

The book was published by the Unique Book Company. There is no mention of Nancy or any other faction in the book, which does not even carry Nelson Barbour’s name,

I have not been able to establish any more of Nancy’s family history. It is always more difficult with married female names, expecially if they had no descendants to trace. I could not find her in the 1910 census for Rochester. It may be that she moved away. It may be that she died. In case there is a story of interest to tell here, other readers are very welcome to try. And of course, a key question – whatever happened to Nelson Barbour’s library that Nancy Fuller inherited?