chasson	Re: Russell; an unoticed freemason ?
	a conclusion I thought impossible based on the statement I read yesterday that referenced your work. It doesn't matter to me one way or the other, but I appreciate your research just the same. Thanks. I think so, but i don't want to be conclusive. I would appreciate some info about the financial's evolution of the Russell's family. Springmeier knowed when he wrote his book that Russell was not really a particular important people in Pittsburgh. So he had tried to say that during the 1880's Russell has a particular average of many comming from the illuminatis. Evidently, Springmeier didn't prove anything of what he said. And someone who lived near Pittsburgh who could exhumate in other pittsburgh's archive would be appreciate. What i have proved is before 1874, Russell father and son were not mason. After that, they didn(t let any tracks in the masonic's book of the history of the masonry of pittsburgh,even in the lodge number 223 or 288, not called before 1887, the mizpah (watchtower in hebrew according to springmeier) lodge. I can't prove that Russell didn't owned the United (not union) cimetery. But in fact, there is a book in the collection which explain the constitution of this kind of cimetery in Pittsburgh but it don't speack of this one. I can prove easily that the masonic temple near the Russell's gravestone was build 80 years after the death of Russell, that the plot was not donate to the masonry by russell or the watchtower but was buyed by the masonry in 1995. The more i work on the springmeier's works the more i found it stupid, but i have not a definitely prove. Bye Charles
IP: NyAWC14zS16fBhLP