by Doug Mason 18 Replies latest watchtower bible
If you go to the site of the Australian Government official archives at
http://www.naa.gov.au/the_collection/recordsearch.html
select "Search Now"
and enter the name Henninges on the following screen, you will find 5 records pertaining to the couple.
Doug
Here are the search results:
Title
AUTHOR Ernest Charles Henninges : ADDRESS Melbourne : TITLE OF WORK Bible Talks for Heart and Mind : TYPE OF WORK Book : APPLICANT Ernest Charles Henninges : DATE OF APPLICATION 20 Aug 1909 : DATE COPYRIGHT REGISTERED 7 Sept 1909 : WORK ENCLOSED? [Yes]Series number
A1336Control symbol
1148Contents date range
1909 - 1909Access status
OpenLocation
Canberra
Barcode
3399019Title
HENNINGES Ernest Charles: Nationality - American: Date of Birth - 12 July 1871: Arrived per SS OMRAHSeries number
MT269/1Control symbol
VIC/AMERICA/HENNINGES ERNESTContents date range
1921 - 1921Access status
OpenLocation
Melbourne
Barcode
5969204Title
Victorian Railways Commissioners versus HENNINGES Rose BallSeries number
A10074Control symbol
1916/31Contents date range
1916 - 1917Access status
OpenLocation
Canberra
Barcode
3142126Title
HENNINGES Rose Ball: Nationality - American: Date of Birth - 19 March 1869: Arrived per SS OMRAHSeries number
MT269/1Control symbol
VIC/AMERICA/HENNINGES ROSEContents date range
1921 - 1921Access status
OpenLocation
Melbourne
Barcode
5969205Title
AUTHOR Ernest Charles Henninges and Rose Ball Henninges : ADDRESS Melbourne : TITLE OF WORK The Parables of Our Lord : TYPE OF WORK Book : APPLICANT Ernest Charles Henninges and Rose Ball Henninges : DATE OF APPLICATION 26 May 1913 : DATE COPYRIGHT REGISTERED 28 May 1913 : WORK ENCLOSED? [Yes]Series number
A1336Control symbol
2709Contents date range
1913 - 1913Access status
OpenLocation
Canberra
Barcode
3416917
There you go, more proof that Rose Ball was born in 1869 and was NOT still a teenaged girl in the early 1890s. This adds to the data from Rose's death certificate (which I also obtained online from the Victoria vital records website), the 1880 census, and the evidence from early Watchtower publications.
*** yb75 p. 69 United States of America (Part One) ***
As though the strain of Russell’s marital difficulties was not enough, his foes stooped to making scurrilous charges against him to the effect that he was immoral. .... The girl in question came to the Russells in 1888 as an orphan [[also false]] about ten years old. They treated her as their own child and she kissed both Mr. and Mrs. Russell good night each evening when retiring. (Court Record, pages 90 and 91) Mrs. Russell testified that the alleged incident occurred in 1894, when this girl could not have been more than fifteen years old.
Edited so we could see what was flowing off the screen -- LL
I just submitted a request for some of these records.
Rose Ball was sued by the Railway Commission? What on earth was that about?
Rutherford probably got the age of 10 years and an orphan from the Watch Tower version in 1906. Russell never does state Rose Ball's age, claims he did not know, but the figure of 10 years as well as 13 years is given. The impression is left with the reader that she was a child and not a 19-year old. Russell also does not claim that she was an orphan, but that they treated her as if she were their own daughter.
Is the complete divorce transcript available online? Russell claimed that he later sued newspapers twice over the "jellyfish" story and won both times. Are these court records available?
The Conspiracy Exposed shows that Rose Ball was a director of the Society, and is mentioned a few times also, as I remember in the letter in support of Russell from the Allegheny church. As I remember Rose Ball and Henninges married around 1897,did Russell marry them? Although Rose Ball was not around in 1906 in Allegheny, it is difficult to understand after only a decade or so how no one around Russell would not have known her age or could have not told Russell her precise age.
Leolaia claims that Rose Ball was Russell's personal secretary, but I have never read this. Is this documented somewhere? This fact would be highly pertinent.
The fact that Russell was either ignorant, wrong or purposely mislead about her age damages the credibility of his story, and does look suspicious, but that isn't enough to convict of wrong doing beyond a reasonable doubt. Maria's story is still hearsay, it was stricken from the records, she did not make it the grounds of her suit, and the divorce was granted on the grounds of mental cruelty. Perhaps Russell was cross-examined on the discrepancy of Rose Ball's age.
Maria and Charles's stories don't match, it is still not clear what actually happened. Those who regard Russell as cult leader wouldn't be surprised by anything, but for others they would need more proof that he was guilty of immorality. However, either way, many don't care to know about the sex life of other people, either dead or alive, whether JWs/Bible Students or not, and they find attacks of religion on this basis to be offensive and to reflect poorly on the person who uses it as an argument. I have told this fact about Rose Ball's true age to several people, and it did not seem to change any one's mind, they held the same view as before, and only made them think less of me for being interested in the first place. There is more certain facts out there that can used instead.
Henry Ward Beecher had a sex scandal in his life, and went to court, and I forget the outcome, but it did not seem to destroy his ministry.
Thanks for posting this Doug. More info to support Rose's age.
When I was a JW I heard the supposed allegations of child sexual abuse. And brushed them off as not true.
But I'm sitting here wondering why they would disclose Rose's age to clear Russell's name. The alternative is that he may have been unfaithful to his marriage vows to Maria, his wife, but also to his vow of celibacy
Which is worse adultery or pedophile?
Now Maria said in court that she believed Charlie had never been unfaithful to her. But Cinton may be of use here. I never had sex with that woman
hmmmmm Well we know that a lot can go on without actual intercourse. In fact even if there was no sexual contact a lot might be going on emotionally.
Those who regard Russell as cult leader wouldn't be surprised by anything, but for others they would need more proof that he was guilty of immorality. However, either way, many don't care to know about the sex life of other people, either dead or alive,
Thing is...the sex life by itself may not indicate anything...................but the sexual infidelity combined with mental cruelty and other facts/ allegations can all stack up to a demonstrable pattern. The pattern, to an educated eye, can give evidence that leads to a reliable conclusion of NPD (Narcissistic Personality Disorder) and/ or some other damaging mental illness/ malignant social impairment.
It's the pattern that is most telling....
Free copies of the Henninges' books can be obtained from Christian Bible Students Melbourne
Thanks for the link to the Melbourne site that publishes Henninges works. I used to have a copy of a commentary on some New Testament book (I think it was Hebrews) that was written by him and remember reading a section that referred to terrible sins being committed by people who appear righteous. I can't remember the specifics (I no longer have the book) but I remember getting this vibe that Henninges had Russell in mind. I could be wrong but it just kind of hit me as I read it. I wish I could remember the wording now.
Doug, have you seen any of the commentaries published by Henninges?
Thanks Merry, that might be cheaper than getting a xerox from the archives.
stev...I would love to get my hands on a copy of the divorce transcript; I only have copies of a few pages. I thought I saw somewhere a reference to secretarial work that Rose had done (I did not mean that she was an exclusive personal secretary, as Maria held those duties), but I cannot find what I thought I saw. She does conduct an interview on Russell's behalf and write up the results (and getting it notorized) in the Conspiracy Exposed pamphlet (pp. 53-54), but it is unclear in what capacity Rose was in other than as a director of the WTB&TS. Still, the two are similar as close personal associates of the Watchtower president, with important duties in the organization. But I wanted to point out another uncanny parallel between Rose Ball and Bonnie Boyd: Bonnie claimed "she was an adopted daughter of Judge Rutherford, and had been with him continuously since she was 16" (San Diego Union, 2/18/1942, p. B-7). Because Bonnie lied so much about her age (even on official documents), it is impossible to determine her true age, but this account puts her age at the youngest found anywhere else (I give my analysis in the Berta-Bonnie thread). And this very young age is mentioned in the same context as her status as an "adopted daughter", a claim that I seriously doubt since Rutherford afaik had no legal relationship with her, unless she meant that Rutherford treated her as if she were his daughter. Russell referred to Rose Ball as "our foster child" who came to him as "a child in short dresses" (Harvest Gleanings, Volume 1, p. 500), a claim that certainly underlay Rutherford's characterization of Rose as a child of 10 who came to Russell as an orphan. Maria Russell at the trial presented Rose in an entirely different fashion (at least in the part that I have seen). She said that Rose "was about nineteen or twenty when she came to us, and this [when she married E. C. Henninges] was twelve years afterwards. It would make her about thirty-two, past thirty; I suppose about thirty-two" (Russell vs. Russell, court transcript, p. 67). Maria is right here, if Rose was born in 1869, she would have indeed been 19 years old in 1888 when she joined the Russell household. This made her an adult, not a "foster child". Perhaps she was estranged from her family (who were very much alive), and she sought lodging out on her own, and maybe she was emotionally immature (but cf. her responsibilities in the WTB&TS), but these do not substantiate Rutherford's attempt to make Rose too young for the alleged improprieties, which was the point of emphasizing her young age.
Certainly nothing about the alleged impropriety can be proved or substantiated, and usually in such matters the benefit of the doubt remains. But the dishonesty about Rose in attempts to defend Russell does look suspicious, in a way that raises questions about Russell's credibility on the matter. But as you said, all we have are questions on Russell's relationship with Rose that don't look good. We don't know what really happened and how Russell really treated her. I think the bigger thing -- as always in such matters -- is the "coverup". Maria certainly knew the truth about Rose's age, why didn't Russell or his legal aide Rutherford express the same truth?
Here is the comment in the 1906 Watchtower:
*** w06 7/15 p. 221-222 All the Way My Savior Leads Me ***
Mrs. Russell charged an improper intimacy between her husband and "Rose," who became a member of the Russell household in 1888 .... The next day Mr. Russell on the witness stand explained that "Rose" and her brother "Charles" were members of the family and office assistants -- the former at Mrs. Russell's request. "Rose" was quite childish in appearance, wore short dresses, and looked to Mr. Russell to be about 13 years old. He did not know her age, but another who knew her guessed that she was then only 10 years old. She may have been older than 13 in 1888 [in fact, she was 19, which Maria Russell correctly stated].
