The Naturalization of Joseph

(Expanded from material previously published in the article: https://jeromehistory.blogspot.com/2020/04/1-three-weddings-but-no-funeral-this.html

Most books that mention the Russell family indicate that CTR’s father, Joseph Lytle Russell, came to the United States from Ireland in 1845. The source is his obituary in several Pittsburgh papers from 1897, which state that he reached America “about 1845.” From this, some have assumed that he and Ann Eliza came as a married couple and settled in Pittsburgh.

The main problem with obituaries is that the person who could verify the information is unavailable to do so. We now know that both of the above assumptions are incorrect. We have reasonable proof that Joseph was in Pittsburgh as early as 1843, and Ann Eliza was still single in Pittsburgh in early 1849.

A key document that led to a search for further evidence, as more material appeared online, was Joseph’s naturalization document. Around 40 years ago, when a member of the British Society of Genealogists, this writer spent some time in their library in London, trying to find when Joseph came to America. A reference there that I have not seen online since sent me to contact the Prothonotary’s Office in Pittsburgh. This is where Joseph would have renounced allegiance to the old country and sworn allegiance to the United States. They finally sent me a not very clear copy of the document. As received, it is reproduced below.

Due to the marvels of AI, and the opportunity to dig further, it has now been possible to reconstruct this document into a more readable form. Apart from the name of the official who handled the matter, which appears to be a wild guess from an illegible signature, we can be reasonably certain that the rest of the form is accurate. It will appear in a forthcoming book, but is reproduced here for anyone who wants to read and copy it.

Depending on your device, you may need to click on it to see it all, or even download and print it out on standard-sized paper.

The key point is that when Joseph said the oath on 26 October 1848, he was swearing that he had been living in America for at least five years. That would take us back to 1843. It is also noticed that his character witness was one W Glendining. William Glendining was a partner with Joseph’s brother, Charles Tays Russell, in a flour and produce business. The partnership was dissolved in 1860.

Armed with the date 1843 and the increasing number of newspapers scanned and searchable, it was possible to find Joseph L Russell in the Pittsburgh Daily Post. Letters were waiting for him at the post office. Also that year, his two brothers, James and Charles Tays, had their names recorded in the same listings. So the three brothers were together in Pittsburgh in 1843.

The same listings from the same newspaper included A E Birney in 1848 and Miss A E Birney in early 1849. So she and Joseph met in Pittsburgh, maybe as a result of Presbyterian Church socials, and were married in 1849. Their first child, Thomas, was born in May 1850. CTR followed in 1852.

For more documentation and graphics, please see the earlier referenced article above.

An Interview from 1879

 

Taken from the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette for 11 August 1879.

THE FINAL DAY

The Millerites Say the World Will be Destroyed by Fire To-day – A Comforting Interview With an Alleged Second Adventist,

The first part of this article reviewed the history of Second Adventism and William Miller, not very sympathetically. One strand of Adventism had reportedly predicted the end of the world by fire for the day of the article, August 11, so a reporter was sent out to interview a Second Adventist for comments. He settled on CTR.

This is the transcript of that interview from the second part of the article.

 

A reporter of this journal started out last evening to look up a Millerite or Second Adventist, for the purpose of obtaining more definite information concerning the big conflagration. Among the persons sought out and interviewed was Mr. C. T. Russell, of Cedar avenue, Allegheny. That gentleman was informed as to the reporter’s mission, when he said:

“In the first place, I am not a Second Adventist; secondly, I don't believe the world will be burned to-morrow; and, thirdly, I don’t believe the world will ever be literally burned with fire. My expectation is that the present, or Gospel age, will end much the same as the Patriarchal and the Jewish age. The Jewish age, you know, ended with the death of Christ, when the Gospel age commenced, and this will be succeeded by the millennium, when Christ will reign on earth. The change will not be manifested by any such demonstration as the burning of the earth.”

 “That is certainly a comforting assurance,” said the reporter; “but where do you find anything in the scriptures to sustain your assertion?”

 “In Ecclesiastes, 1–4: ‘One generation passeth away and another generation cometh; but the earth abideth forever.’”

“Is it not stated somewhere in the Bible that the earth shall be devoured by fire?”

“It is, but I understand the word ‘fire’ to be used symbolically. We find in Zephaniah iii.—‘Wait ye upon me, saith the Lord, until the day that I rise up to the prey, for my determination is to gather the nations, that I may assemble the kingdoms, to pour upon them mine indignation, even all my fierce anger; for the earth shall be devoured with the fire of my jealousy. For then will I turn to the people a pure language, that they may call upon the name of the Lord, to serve Him with one consent.’ This describes the fire that is going to burn the earth; it is the fire of jealousy—symbolic fire—and while it destroys the kingdoms the masses of the people will be left alive, and they are to be blessed after their time of national trouble.”

“How are they to be blessed?”

“In the book of Daniel it is written that ‘the kingdom of God will take the place of earthly kingdoms.’ In Revelation, also, is this text: ‘The kingdoms of this world become the kingdoms of our Lord, and He shall reign forever and ever.’ I hold that the survivors of the Gospel dispensation will be associated with Christ in the heavenly kingdom which is to take the place of the earthly kingdoms.”

“Will that kingdom be on this earth?”

“Yes. This passage from Daniel, vii.–27, shows it: ‘The kingdom and dominion under the whole heaven shall be given to the people of the saints of the Most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom.’”

“Will the ruler of this kingdom be visible on the earth?”

“No. ‘The kingdom of God cometh not with observation.’”

“How could the king rule and yet be invisible?”

“The same as Queen Victoria rules India. She is not in India, but she rules it.”

“You say you are not a Second Adventist, Mr. Russell. What do you call yourself?”

“People of my faith have no denominational name. We are simply Christians, and are opposed to denominational names.”

Thanking Mr. Russell for his cheering information that the world would not be burned to-day, the reporter hurried back to send out the gratifying intelligence to the people.

Selena Barto or Lena Guibert, Which?

Maria Frances Ackley Russell was one of five children who lived to adulthood. Her siblings included Laura Raynor, Emma Russell, Lemuel Ackley, and then a query raised in various writings – was the final name Selena Barto or Lena Guibert?

Did Selena or Lena change her name? Why the confusion? A close look at the records that now exist can clear this up.

First, the correct name of Maria’s sister WAS Selena Barto. Selena Ackley (1846-1929) married Baptist minister Charles Edward Barto (1841-1883). He was an agent of the American Tract Society, headquartered in Philadelphia, which specialised in evangelising Native Americans. He died of “apoplexy” in his early 40s, leaving Selena a widow with two small children. She never remarried. She spent much of her life in the Pittsburgh area, but did own property near Chicago where her brother, Lemuel, was a lawyer. It was in representing her in a Chicago court in a financial claim against a police officer that the officer drew a gun and killed Lemuel in 1921.

We know Selena Barto was the correct name because she is mentioned by that name in her mother’s obituary from 1901, and is also mentioned by name in her mother’s last will and testament. From the Pittsburgh Post for 4 October 1901:

There does not appear to be any evidence that Selena (here: Salina) had any specific interest in the affairs of the Bible Student movement, unlike her three sisters, Maria Russell, Emma Russell, and Laura Raynor.

As for the mysterious Lena Guibert, she appears just once in Zion’s Watch Tower in the special 15 July 1906 issue, where CTR explains the complexities of his conflict with Maria. Before they separated, there were various accusations, and at one point, CTR had a document prepared, which was signed by all those involved, retracting accusations made against him. This was read to the congregation as an apology and reprinted on pages 219-220.

The five signatories of the document are listed below:

It seems to have been assumed that since CTR mentioned his problems with Maria and “her sisters,” Lena Guibert must have been one of those sisters. However, when the background to the document is carefully checked, CTR plainly says on page 219:

(quote)

“Mrs Russell’s two sisters and one of the two persons who on the previous Sunday night had been convicted of slander and false witness signed it with us, and on Sunday afternoon I requested the consecrated ones to remain for a special service, and to them I read the said letter.”

Emma and Laura were the two sisters. So Lena would have to be one of the two other persons who had entered the controversy in the class.

So who was she?

Lena (or Lina) Guibert appears in records like street directories for Pittsburgh in this era, and was a member of the Allegheny class that met at Bible House. In 1917-1918, she is listed as the next of kin for her son Albert Daniel Guibert on his draft registration card. His address then was in Cedar Avenue, Pittsburgh, formerly Allegheny. Using his history as the reference, we find his mother’s maiden name was Marlina (Lena) Hartman. She had been married to a Civil War veteran, Peter Guibert, and had three children by him, including Albert Daniel. The marriage failed, and Peter (originally from France) married again and had a second family.

So Lena (Lina) Guibert was a member of the Allegheny Bible class, and was probably separated or even divorced from her husband Peter at the time, which may have made her sympathetic toward the accusations Maria made.

So we have two different people here. But the one who was Maria’s sister was Selina Barto.