After Charles Taze Russell died on October 31, 1916, the Watch Tower Society faced the most significant leadership transition in its history. Russell had anticipated this moment years earlier and carefully outlined, in his Last Will and Testament, how the Society's publications and affairs should continue after his death. Rather than appointing a single successor, he established a system of shared oversight involving an Editorial Committee, a Board of Directors, and trustees who would safeguard the Society's voting interests.
Within months of Russell's death, however, Joseph F. Rutherford was elected president of the Watch Tower Society. His administration quickly moved toward a much more centralized style of leadership. Supporters viewed these changes as necessary to preserve the Society's unity and effectiveness, while critics argued that they departed from Russell's written instructions and fundamentally changed the organization's structure.
The following comparison places Russell's expressed wishes alongside the major actions taken during Rutherford's first year as president, allowing readers to examine the historical record and judge for themselves how closely the events of 1917 aligned with Russell's intentions.
| Russell's Will (1916) | Rutherford's Actions (1917) |
|---|---|
| No single man was to control The Watch Tower. Russell wrote: "The entire editorial charge of ZION'S WATCH TOWER shall be in the hands of a committee of five brethren." (Central Kentucky Bible Students) | Within months of becoming president, Rutherford effectively centralized editorial authority. On June 1, 1917, The Watch Tower announced: "The Editorial Committee has ceased to function." (Central Kentucky Bible Students) |
| Articles required agreement. Russell required that at least three of the five editors approve any article before publication. (Central Kentucky Bible Students) | Editorial approval increasingly came through the president's office rather than the committee envisioned by Russell. Critics argued this bypassed Russell's safeguards; Rutherford maintained the new arrangement was necessary for efficient administration. (Wikipedia) |
| Russell warned against personal headship. He explained that the purpose of the committee was to guard against "any spirit of ambition or pride or headship" so that Christ—not any individual—would be recognized as Head of the Church. (Central Kentucky Bible Students) | New by-laws adopted in January 1917 declared that the president was the executive officer and general manager, with broad authority over the Society's affairs. (Wikipedia) |
| The Editorial Committee was to be self-perpetuating. Vacancies were to be filled by the remaining committee members, not by the president. (Central Kentucky Bible Students) | One named editor, F. H. Robison, did not function as contemplated in Russell's arrangement, and the committee itself soon ceased operating in the form Russell described. (dokumen.pub) |
| Russell placed his voting shares with five trustees (all women) rather than entrusting them to a future president. (Central Kentucky Bible Students) | During the succession dispute, those trustees did not exercise the continuing influence some expected from Russell's arrangement. Later Bible Student critics argued that Rutherford effectively neutralized this provision. (dokumen.pub) |
| Russell envisioned oversight by the Board of Directors. The Board had defined responsibilities under the Society's charter and in Russell's organizational plans. (JW.ORG) | By July 1917, four directors challenged Rutherford's leadership. Rutherford obtained legal advice that they were not legally serving directors under Pennsylvania law, declared their positions vacant, and appointed four replacements. The removed directors obtained contrary legal opinions and maintained the action was unlawful. (Wikipedia) |
| Russell left no named successor. He created committees and procedures rather than appointing a single spiritual heir. (Central Kentucky Bible Students) | Rutherford was elected president on January 6, 1917. Although elected according to the corporate process, his administration quickly evolved into a much stronger presidential model than Russell's written arrangements contemplated. (Wikipedia) |
| Russell's system distributed authority. Editorial, corporate, and trustee functions were intentionally divided among different groups. (Central Kentucky Bible Students) | By the end of 1917, authority had become substantially centralized in the office of the president, a pattern that continued and expanded throughout Rutherford's presidency. (Wikipedia) |
Russell's own words
One sentence from Russell's will summarizes his intent better than almost anything else:
"My object in these requirements is to safeguard the committee and the journal from any spirit of ambition or pride or headship and that the Truth may be recognized and appreciated for its own worth, and that the Lord may more particularly be recognized as the Head of the Church and the Fountain of Truth."
That statement is often contrasted with the January 1917 by-law declaring:
"The President is the executive officer and general manager of the Society..."
which greatly expanded the authority of the presidency.
A historical observation
Even the official Jehovah's Witness history acknowledges that Russell's will established a five-man Editorial Committee and that a significant leadership struggle followed his death. The official account, however, presents Rutherford's consolidation of authority as a necessary development, whereas many independent Bible Student historians view it as a departure from Russell's expressed wishes.
If Russell deliberately structured the movement to prevent one man from controlling doctrine, how did it evolve into an organization centered on a strong presidential office—and eventually into the modern Governing Body?
That question naturally connects the events of 1917, 1971 (the formal creation of the modern Governing Body as distinct from the corporation's directors), and 2012 (when the Governing Body identified itself exclusively as "the faithful and discreet slave").
If you want to delve into the mendacity of Rutherford, I strongly suggest reading Rutherford's Coup. I believe it is also available on Amazon as a E book.