Thanks Athanasius. I had read the points you refer to, but didn't interpret them as you did. On page 130 (R5685) Russell wrote an article entitled "Advantages and Disadvantages of Debates" and while not mentioning the Rutherford-Troy Debate, at this point (perhaps he is leading to it), he does refer to the Russell-Eaton Debate and the Rusell-White Debate. In spite of that he had come to the point where he felt religious debates could be harmful. And, than, he goes on to give his reasons, one of which you pointed out.
Scrolling down we come to the Rutherford-Troy Debate. Russell's complete comments about the debate are on page 143 (R5684) at the end. [We rejoice greatly that the blessing of the Lord was so richly with our dear Brother Rutherford on the occasion of the debates referred to above. Apparently the Lord guided these debates and blessed the outcome. However, we still feel a prejudice against public debates for religious questions, and have elsewhere expressed our reasons].
So, while at the current moment of writing he might have felt a prejudice against public religious debates, he did not always feel so as he himself had engaged in religious debates. Then, this hypothetical thought occurred to me. Since Rutherford had been so successful in his debate and if he continued engaging in such debates, could this take Russell out of the limelight and focus it too much on Rutherford? Could this really be the reason why he had now come to be against religious public debates rather than those he talks about in his article? Was he becoming jealous of Rutherford? Was he beginning to fear that Rutherford might get too powerful? If this is the case, than I can see how a rift could be in the making. But none of this is spelled out, so it seems to me that it would be reading something into the text that is not really there.
Now to the other article "Judge Rutherford's Spicy Defense." Again all is not clear to me. I produce it below:
"Brother Rutherford, grieved by the various untruthful, slanderous attacks upon the Editor, has prepared a pamphet in my defense. A copy of it has just been handed me. I have not yet read it, though, of course, I knew of its preparation and in a general way of its contents. I preferred not to have anything to do with its publication. It explains Brother Rutherford's views as a lawyer, as a brother, and as a man who most fully understands the entire situation. It contains some interesting illustrations and is priced at ten cents per copy, or eight dollars per hundred copies, postpaid. It is not unreasonable to expect that nearly all of our readers will be very glad to have this pamphlet, as it will furnish them with evidence on every point thus far brought forward by my maligners.
:Orders for pamphlets should be addressed to Judge Rutherford, New York City, P.O. Box 51. However, we will have a supply at THE WATCH TOWER Office, and, if one is ordering other things, the pamphlet can be supplied also. It is entitled, 'A GREAT BATTLE IN THE ECCLESIASTICAL HEAVENS.' "
I'm not sure what to think of this. He is not against the pamphlet, but "preferred not to have anything to do with its publication." Maybe he thought that people would be less impressed if it was published under his instigation. Better to have an "outside source" do it. Again, we are left to speculation. I also wonder what he meant when he states that "nearly all of our readers will be very glad to have this pamphlet." Wonder who would be those not glad to have it?