Chapter XXIV: Zionism (2)

In the meantime the Jewish population of Palestine has been increasing steadily and rapidly, by immigration chiefly of Ashkenazim refugees from Central and Northern Europe. In 1872 there were scarcely 10,000 Jews in the Holy Land; by 1882 they had risen to 20,000; in 1890 there were only 25,000; in 1902 they were estimated at 60,000--distributed in the various towns of Jaffa, Jerusalem, Safed, Tiberias, and others. In all these places are to be seen new Jewish colonies housed in neat white-washed buildings which stretch in barrack-like lines--the bounty of a Rothschild or a Montefiore. In addition to these urban colonies, there are numerous agricultural settlements in Central Judaea, Samaria, and Galilee. Immigration, stimulated by the persecution to which the Hebrew race is subjected in Eastern Europe, and facilitated by the construction of the Jaffa-Jerusalem railway, which has now been running for twelve years, continues, partly under the auspices of the _Alliance Israélite Universelle_. This society maintains many schools for boys and girls, endeavouring to infuse French culture and the new spirit into the ancient body of Judaism, which in Tiberias especially has always sought its refuge and its tomb. Besides general instruction, the pursuits of agriculture and gardening are assiduously encouraged. From the elementary schools the most promising pupils are sent to the Professional School of Jerusalem or to the Model Farm of Mikweh, founded in 1870, whence, at the conclusion of their studies, the students are placed in the Jewish colonies of Palestine and Syria as head-gardeners and directors of agriculture, while others are apprenticed to handicrafts, thus being gradually formed a population both morally and materially equipped for life’s work under modern conditions. The agricultural colonies, divided into three groups--Palestine, Samaria, and Galilee--have helped, it is said, to attach to the soil some 5000 out of the 60,000 Jews of the country. Other centres of the same nature are in the course of formation across the Jordan, towards the Howran range of mountains, where vast tracts of land were acquired a few years ago, and are slowly reclaimed from the waste of sand, rock, and marsh by the perseverance and untiring industry of the Jewish colonists.

But, while dwelling on this bright side of the Zionist movement--the side of enlightened enterprise--it is well to note another side not so promising. The recent traveller, already quoted, gives a very pessimistic account of his impressions. It is to be hoped that his statements are exaggerated and his pessimism inordinate; but, in the interests of historic truth, we feel compelled to listen to his tale: “The Ashkenazim,” he tells us, “preponderate so largely as to swamp the others. If there is ever a Jewish State, it will be Ashkenazim. The great mass of them is located in Jerusalem, and the rest in Safed, Tiberias, and Hebron. Gregarious by instinct, urban by habit, they herd together in the towns, creating new ghettos similar to those they have left in Europe. A fraction of them maintain themselves by petty commerce; the rest live on Haluka, a fund provided by their wealthy co-religionists in the West. This amounts to £50,000 annually in Jerusalem. Its object is to enable its recipients to study the Talmud and engage in religious exercises vicariously for those who contribute it. Haluka is a fruitful source of sloth and hypocrisy, and places undue power in the hands of the rabbis who are charged with its administration. To those who know only the trading Jew of our commercial centres, the modern Sadducees, it reveals a new aspect of the race--that of the Jew turning aside from all enterprise, content to live in pious mendicancy, his sole business the observance of the minutiae of the ceremonial law; the Jew who binds on his phylactery, wears long ringlets brought down in front of the ears in obedience to a Levitical precept, and shuns the carrying of a pocket-handkerchief on the Sabbath, save as a bracelet or a garter. Haluka is a mistake and a stumbling-block in the path of Zionism. To turn Palestine into a vast almshouse is not the way to lay the foundation of a Jewish State. It attracts swarms of slothful bigots whose religion begins and ends with externals, a salient example of ‘the letter that killeth,’ whose Pharisaic piety has no influence on their conduct in life. It has established an unproductive population of inefficients, drawn from the least desirable element of the race. Its evil effect is patent, and the better sort of Jews themselves condemn it or advise its restriction to the aged and infirm. It is depressing to move among crowds of burly men, contributing nothing to the commonweal, puffed up with self-satisfied bigotry and proud of their useless existence. Left to his own devices the Jew gives the land a wide berth and sticks to the town. But Western philanthropy has expended much money and energy in putting him on to the land, rightly judging that the foundations of a nation cannot be laid on the hawking of lead-pencils among the Bedawin who do not want them.

“An agricultural college has been established near Jaffa, but it was found that the youths availed themselves of the excellent general education it afforded in order, not to till the land, but to engage in more congenial and more profitable pursuits. Agricultural colonies were founded, and the colonists, in addition to free land, seed, and implements, were endowed by M. Edmund de Rothschild with 3 francs a day for every man, 2 francs for every woman, and 1 franc for every child. This enabled the recipients to sit down and employ Arabs to do the work, and has been stopped, to the great chagrin of the colonists. As a matter of fact, the best of the farms to-day depend on native labour. The mattock and the hoe are repugnant to the Jewish colonists, who all seek for places in the administration. The financial result is not cheering. The most prosperous concern, perhaps, is the wine-growing establishment of Rishon le Sion. Wine-making is the one industry the Jews take to. They practise it individually on a small scale. The Western tourist in Hebron is invariably accosted by some ringleted Israelite, who proffers him his ‘guter Wein,’ and his thoughts go back to childhood and that Brobdingnagian cluster of grapes which the spies bore between them from the neighbouring valley of Eschol. The attitude of the Jew with respect to agriculture is not to be wondered at. His hereditary tendencies are against it. Centuries of urban life and urban pursuits lie behind him. Inured to no exercise save that of his wits, poor in physique, unused to the climate, can it be expected that this child of the ghetto should turn to and compete with the strong brown-lined Judaean peasant on the burning hillside? The one exception is to be found in the Bulgarian Jews of Sephardim stock. Hardy, stalwart, accustomed to tillage, these have made efficient farmers, and next to them come the Jews from Roumania. But with every inducement to settle on the land, and all sorts of props and aids, the agricultural Jews in Palestine number only about 1000 out of an ever-augmenting population. The fact is significant.”[318]

Another point worth serious consideration is the political situation created by Jewish immigration into Palestine. The colonists, the majority of whom come from Russia, are a bone of contention between the rival foreign propagandas in the country. The Russians, as has been seen, while massacring the Jews in Bessarabia, court their favour in Syria. The German Emperor, while tolerating anti-Semitism in the Fatherland, earns the thanks of the Zionists by his affability towards the exiles. The French, through the educational efforts of the _Alliance Israélite_, whose pupils were hitherto mainly drawn from the Spanish Jews, seek to turn the Jews of Palestine, as of other parts of the Near East, into apostles of Gallic preponderance and into instruments for the promotion of Gallic interests. The Zionists are regarded by the French supporters of the _Alliance_ as its adversaries, and that for the reason that, while the mission of the _Alliance_, as it is understood by the French, is the extension of the Republic’s influence, and, therefore, very remotely connected with the religious and national aspirations of the Jewish people, these aspirations are precisely the point on which the Zionists lay the greatest stress.[319]

Lastly, the poverty of Palestine is a source of infinite difficulties which can only be overcome by proportionate labour. Mr. Zangwill has very eloquently described these conditions in one of his speeches: “My friends,” he said, “you cannot buy Palestine. If you had a hundred millions you could only buy the place where Palestine once stood. Palestine itself you must re-create by labour, till it flows again with milk and honey. The country is a good country. But it needs a great irrigation scheme. To return there needs no miracle--already a third of the population are Jews. If the Almighty Himself carried the rest of us to Palestine by a miracle, what should we gain except a free passage? In the sweat of our brow we must earn our Palestine. And, therefore, the day we get Palestine, if the most joyous, will also be the most terrible day of our movement.”[320]

It was the consideration of the various obstacles enumerated above, and others of a similar nature, coupled with the urgent need to find a home for those wretched outcasts whose refuge in England was menaced by the anti-alien agitation, that induced Dr. Herzl, in July 1903, acting on Mr. Chamberlain’s suggestion,[321] to propose that an agreement should be entered into between the British Government and the Jewish Colonial Trust for the establishment of a Jewish settlement in British East Africa. The British Government, anxious to find a way out of the “Alien Invasion” difficulty, welcomed the proposal, and Lord Lansdowne expressed his readiness to afford every facility to the Commission which, it was suggested, should be sent by the Zionists to East Africa for purposes of investigation. If a suitable site could be found, the Foreign Secretary professed himself willing “to entertain favourably proposals for the establishment of a Jewish colony on conditions which will enable the members to observe their national customs. For this purpose he would be prepared to discuss the details of a scheme comprising as its main features the grant of a considerable area of land, the appointment of a Jewish official as the chief of the local administration, and permission to the colony to have a free hand in regard to municipal legislation, and the management of religious and purely domestic matters; such local autonomy being conditional on the right of His Majesty’s Government to exercise general control.”[322] This project was announced at one of the meetings of the Zionist Congress at Basel in August, 1903, and the motion submitted to the Congress for the appointment of a committee, who should send an expedition to East Africa in order to make investigations on the spot, was adopted. But, though 295 voted in its favour, it was opposed by a great minority of 177 votes, and the Russian delegates left the hall as a protest. In a mass meeting of Zionists held in the following May in London Mr. Israel Zangwill spoke warmly in favour of the proposal, urging on his fellow-Zionists to take advantage of the offer made by the British Government. But he added, “The Jewish Colonisation Association, the one body that should have welcomed this offer of territory with both hands, stood aloof.”[323] Indeed, it cannot be said that this new departure of Zionism has commanded universal approval.

Nor did opposition to the scheme confine itself to platonic protests. In the following December, Dr. Max Nordau, one of the most distinguished men of letters among Dr. Herzl’s followers, who had declared himself at the Basel Congress of the previous August in favour of the proposal, was fired at in Paris by a Russian Jew, who in his cross-examination before the Magistrate confessed that, in making that attempt on Dr. Nordau’s life, he aimed at the enemy of the Jewish race--the supporter of a scheme which involved the abandonment by Zionists of Palestine as the object of the movement.[324] The incident afforded a painful proof of want of concord, not only among the Jews generally, not only among the supporters of various movements all theoretically recognising the necessity of emigration, but even among the partisans themselves of the Zionist cause. Dr. Herzl, anxious to allay the ill-feeling aroused by his alleged abandonment of the Zionist idea, wrote a letter to Sir Francis Montefiore, the president of the English Zionist Federation, repudiating any desire to divert the movement away from the Holy Land and to direct it to East Africa. Nothing, he protested, could be further from the truth. He felt convinced that the solution of the Jewish problem could only be effected in that country, Palestine, with which are indelibly associated the historic and sentimental bias of the Jewish people. But as the British Government had been generous enough to offer territory for an autonomous settlement, it would have been impossible and unreasonable to do otherwise than give the offer careful consideration.[325]

The clouds of misconception of which Dr. Herzl complained were not dissipated by this declaration. If the attachment to Palestine is to be the central idea of Zionism, it is hard to see how its realisation could be promoted by the adoption of East Africa as a home. East Africa, as a shrewd diplomatist has wittily observed, is not in Palestine nor on the road to it. Its name awakens no memories or hopes in the Jewish heart. Its soil is not hallowed by the temples and the tombs of Israel. Its hills and vales are not haunted by the spirits of the old martyrs and heroes of the nation. Neither the victories of the past nor the prophetic visions for the future are in any way associated with East Africa. In the circumstances, it is not to be wondered at that the proposal, as Dr. Herzl admitted, did not meet with the enthusiasm required for success, and that the strongest opposition to the scheme came from those very Jews in the Russian “pale” who stand in most need of a refuge from persecution. It must be borne in mind that those very Jews who suffer most severely from persecution are the most sincerely and wholeheartedly attached to the ancient ideals of the race, and, owing partly to this psychological cause, partly to their less advanced stage of development, they were the least able to appreciate the practical advantages of the scheme--the least disposed to submit to the dictates of prosaic expediency. They firmly believe that, sooner or later, the beautiful dream is destined to cohere into substance; and, like all dreamers, they abhor compromise.

The proposal, however, met with opposition in other quarters than the Russian Ghetto. Sir Charles Eliot, H.M.’s Commissioner for the East Africa Protectorate, did not approve of it. While disclaiming all anti-Semitic feeling, he said that his hesitation arose from doubt as to whether any beneficial result would be obtained from the scheme. The proposed colony, he pointed out, would not be sufficiently large to relieve appreciably the congested and suffering Jewish population of some parts of Eastern Europe, and he expressed the fear that the climate and agricultural life would in no way be suitable to Israelites. Moreover, when the country began to attract British immigrants who showed an inclination to settle all round the proposed Jewish colony, he considered that the scheme became dangerous and deprecated its execution. It was, Sir Charles declared, tantamount to reproducing in East Africa the very conditions which have caused so much distress in Eastern Europe: that is to say, the existence of a compact mass of Jews, differing in language and customs from the surrounding population, to whom they are likely to be superior in business capacity but inferior in fighting power. To his mind, it is best to recognise frankly that such conditions can never exist without danger to the public peace.[326]

Sir Harry Johnston also was at first opposed to the scheme, but, influenced partly by the development of the idea into a less crude plan, and by the opening up of the country by the Uganda Railway, partly, perhaps, by the intimate connection between the proposal and the solution of our own overcrowding problem, he was ultimately converted into a warm supporter of it.[327] Soon afterwards a Commission was despatched to East Africa to report on the tract of land offered by the British Government for the proposed Zionist settlement,[328]--a proof that official opposition was abandoned.

But the opposition on the part of the Jews remained, as was shown by the comments of the Jewish press of America on Mr. Israel Zangwill’s visit to that country with a view to interesting American Jews in the project, by his own “absolute and profound disgust” at their cold irresponsiveness, and even more clearly by the establishment of the London Zionist League. The President of this association, Mr. Herbert Bentwich, in his inaugural address, commenting on the matter, said that the British East Africa scheme had never touched Zionism in the slightest degree; that it was a mere accident in Jewish history to which Zionists could not devote their energies; that the offer of territory had been made as a practical expression of sympathy “by those who would exclude the alien immigrant from Great Britain and as such was gratefully to be received, but it could never be dealt with seriously,” and that the Zionists hoped not to amend but to end the Jewish distress; that being the object for which the league had been formed in London.[329]

The Commission’s report, published in English and German, was partly unfavourable and partly inconclusive; but even if it had been favourable it is doubtful whether it would have met with approval. At all events, when the scheme was definitely submitted to the Zionist Congress at Basel, towards the end of July, 1905, it gave rise to scenes of an unexampled character in the history of Zionism. The Congress was divided into “Palestinians,” who were opposed to any Jewish national settlement outside Palestine, and into “Territorialists,” who maintained that the true aim of Zionism is to obtain an autonomous settlement anywhere. The latter party, led by Mr. Zangwill, was strongly in favour of the British offer; the former was as strongly against it. After a stormy discussion the scheme was rejected, and a resolution was adopted by an overwhelming majority, in which the Seventh Zionist Congress reaffirmed the principle of the creation of a legally secured home for the Jewish people in Palestine, repudiating, both as object and as means, all colonising activity outside Palestine, and adjacent lands, and, while thanking the British Government for its kindness, it expressed the hope that the latter will continue to aid the Zionists in their efforts to attain their true aim. Thus this episode in the history of Zionism came to an end.

While the East Africa scheme was the subject of so much discord both among the Jews and elsewhere, the leader of the Zionists passed away. Dr. Herzl died at Edlach, in Austria, on the 3rd of July, 1904, denied the happiness of seeing the mission to which he had consecrated his life fulfilled. Among his adherents he has left the reputation of a fervent apostle of emancipation, an inspired idealist, a Messiah burning with the desire to rescue his people from persecution and to lead them back to the Land of Promise. But even those least inclined to follow his lead, could not but admire in him that single-minded devotion to an ideal and that steadfastness in its pursuit, which, whether success crowns their possessor or not, proclaim the great man. Among the masses of his suffering co-religionists the claims of Dr. Herzl to gratitude are less liable to qualification. His personality produced a deep impression on their imagination, and his efforts to realise the dream of eighteen centuries, aided by the magic of his eloquence and the grace of his manner, stirred their hearts to their inmost depths. Parents named their children after Dr. Herzl, and his death aroused universal grief. Ten thousand mourners, men and women, accompanied the funeral to the Vienna cemetery, where the remains of the leader were laid to rest amid the lamentations of his followers. The latter subsequently gave a tangible proof of their gratitude by providing for their leader’s orphaned family, and by resolving to perpetuate his memory in a manner that would have pleased him. The memorial is to take the form of a forest of ten thousand olive trees planted in some historic spot in Palestine, and to be known as the Herzl Forest.

It would be rash to affirm that Zionism has died with Dr. Herzl. Since his death, however, the movement has suffered a certain transformation. Although his East Africa project has been rejected by the majority of the party, and though both those who favoured it and those who opposed it are now persuaded of the hopelessness of a chartered home in Palestine, yet the plan of a return to the Land of Promise still is enthusiastically adhered to, especially by the sufferers of the Russian Ghetto: with the only difference that repatriation is no longer looked for from the Sultan, or from the European Powers, but from individual effort. Side by side with political and diplomatic activity abroad, the Congress of 1905 resolved upon practical work in Palestine itself. This will take the form of general investigation into the country’s resources and its economic possibilities, and attempts at amelioration of its administrative conditions. In other words, the colonisation of Palestine is to be encouraged and its autonomy postponed until the Jews are established in sufficient numbers to obtain their ultimate object. “Creep into Palestine anyway. Colonise, redeem the land, populate it, establish factories, stimulate trade; in a word, rebuild Palestine and then see what the Sultan will say.” This is the advice given by a prominent Jew to his co-religionists.[330] Whether these endeavours will yield the desired fruit or not is a matter on which it would be more prudent to express an opinion after the event. It is equally difficult to forecast the outcome of Mr. Zangwill’s “Jewish Territorial Organisation,” which, abandoning Zion at all events for the moment, seeks to found a Jewish Colony elsewhere. This variation of the Zionist programme has attracted the sympathy of many of those who stood completely aloof from the Herzl scheme. At the same time it has driven a wedge into Zionism proper.

Meanwhile, it would be idle to deny that, viewed as a whole, the Jewish Question at the present moment stands pretty much where it has been at any time during the last eighteen hundred years. A few Jews have solved the problem for themselves by assimilation to their surroundings. Some more dwell among the Gentiles in a state of benevolent neutrality: one with them on the surface, but at heart distinct; performing all the duties of citizenship conscientiously and sharing in the intellectual and political life of their adopted countries brilliantly; yet, by their avoidance of intermarriage, implying the existence of an insuperable barrier between themselves and those who have not the good fortune to be descended from Abraham. But the bulk of the race still is a people of wanderers; and their hope of restoration little more than a beautiful, melancholy dream. There are at the present hour upwards of ten million Jews, scattered to the four corners of the earth. Nine of these millions live in Europe: two-thirds of them in Russia, Roumania and Poland. In the Middle Ages persecution in the West had driven them Eastwards. Lately persecution in the East has turned the tide Westwards. There is no rest for Israel. If the past and the present are any guides regarding the future, it is safe to predict that for many centuries to come the world will continue to witness the unique and mournful spectacle of a great people roaming to and fro on the highways of the earth in search of a home.

London: Macmillan & Co. Ltd.]

FOOTNOTES

[1] The oldest Greek author in whose works the term occurs is the orator Isaeus who flourished B.C. 364; the earliest Latin writer is Plautus who died B.C. 184. Of course, the word, though very good Hebrew, may have been imported into Europe by the Phoenicians. But it would be a bold man who would attempt to distinguish between Jewish and Phoenician merchants at this time of day.

[2] I. Macc. xiii. 51.

[3] On the other hand, a famous Palestinian authority, Abbahu (c. 279–320 A.D.), was a noted friend of Greek. He taught it to his daughters as “an ornament.” Of Abbahu it was said that he was the living illustration of Ecclesiastes vii. 18 “It is good that thou shouldst take hold of _this_ (_i.e._ the Jewish Law), yet also from _that_ (_i.e._ Gentile culture) withdraw not thy hand: for he that feareth God shall come forth of them all.” Hellenism might appeal sometimes to the Jew’s head, though it never thrilled his heart. Cf. p. 39 below.

[4] Hdt. i. 1–5.

[5] Justin Mart. _Dial._ i.–vii.

[6] I am referring here to what seems to me characteristic of Hebraism in the earlier periods when it came into contact and conflict with Hellenism. In its subsequent development Pharisaism (which gradually absorbed the whole of the Jewish people) avoided undue asceticism and laid stress on the joy of living. “Joyous service” became the keynote of Judaism and Jewish life in the Middle-ages, as it was the keynote of many Pharisees in the first centuries of the Christian era. The Essenes, though highly important in the history of primitive Christianity, had less influence on the main development of Rabbinic Judaism.

[7] Bk. i. ch. vi. 5–7.

[8] Mac. xiv.–xv.

[9] _Pro L. Flacco_, 28. All the references made to the Jews and Judaism in Greek and Latin literature have been well collected and interpreted by T. Reinach in his _Textes d’auteurs grecs et romains relatifs au Judaisme_ (Paris, 1895).

[10] Suetonius, _Julius_, 84.

[11] Id. _Augustus_, 93.

[12] Suetonius, _Tiberius_, 36.

[13] Tacitus, _Historia_, v. 9.

[14] Suetonius, _Claudius_, 25. Cp. _Acts_, xviii. 2.

[15] _Sat._ i. 9, 69, etc.

[16] _Ant._ 18. 3 (4).

[17] _Sat._ v. 184.

[18] Fgm. ap. Augustin., _Civ. D._ 6, 11.

[19] _Sat._ xiv. 96–99, etc.

[20] Isaiah iii. 26.

[21] Deuter. vii. 3; Nehem. xiii. 25.

[22] Juvenal, _Sat._ xiv. 97.

[23] Tacitus, _Hist._ v. 9.

[24] _Hist._ v. 4.

[25] _Hist._ v. 8.

[26] _Ib._ 5. Cp. Juv. _Sat._ xiv. 103–4.

[27] _Annales_, xv. 44.

[28] Juv. _Sat._ iii. 12–14.

[29] _Hist._ i. 1.

[30] It is, however, only fair to add that the Jewish records know nothing of these atrocities, and, as M. Reinach justly comments, the above details (for which Dion Cassius is our sole authority) “inspirent la méfiance.” The numbers of the victims, as reported by Dion, are in themselves sufficient to throw doubt upon the story.

[31] H. Graetz, _History of the Jews_, Eng. tr. vol. ii. p. 405.

[32] Mommsen, _History of Rome_, Eng. tr. vol. iv. p. 642.

[33] Just. Mart. _Dial._ xvii.

[34] _c Cels._ vi. 27.

[35] This account of the fervid response of the Jews to Julian’s call, based on the authority of Christian writers, is pronounced by the Jewish historian Graetz “purely fictitious” (_History of the Jews_, Eng. tr. vol. ii. p. 606). At any rate, it seems to be a fiction that bears upon it a clearer mark of verisimilitude than many a “historical” document relating to this period.

[36] That the ‘Haman’ so burned was only an effigy is now clearly shown by an original Geonic Responsum on the subject discovered in the Cairo Geniza and published in the _Jewish Quarterly Review_, xvi. pp. 651 fol.

[37] The exact date of the “Tour” is disputed. It probably occupied the thirteen years between 1160 and 1173.

[38] Benjamin of Tudela’s _Itinerary_, p. 24 (ed. Asher). A new critical edition (by M. N. Adler) has recently appeared in the _Jewish Quarterly Review_. For the passage in the text see _ibid._ xvi. 730.

[39] H. Graetz, _History of the Jews_, vol. iii. p. 31.

[40] H. Graetz, _History of the Jews_, vol. iii. p. 38.

[41] With regard to the legal relations between the Jews and the various mediaeval states see J. E. Scherer’s _Beiträge zur Geschichte des Judenrechtes im Mittelalter_ (1901), a work unhappily left incomplete by the death of the author.

[42] Joseph Jacobs, “The God of Israel” in the _Nineteenth Century_, September 1879.

[43] J. E. Sandys, _A History of Classical Scholarship_, pp. 539 fol.

[44] H. Graetz, _History of the Jews_, vol. iii. p. 349. For some fine translations of Jehuda Halevi’s poems the reader may turn to Mrs. H. Lucas’ _The Jewish Year_ (Macmillan, 1898) and to Mrs. R. N. Salaman’s _Songs of Exile_ (Macmillan, 1905). Jehuda Halevi’s philosophical dialogue the _Khazari_ has recently been translated into English by Dr. H. Hirschfeld (Routledge, 1905).

[45] Joseph Jacobs, “The God of Israel,” _The Nineteenth Century_, September, 1879. The _Guide_ has been translated into English by Dr. M. Friedländer (1885; new edition, Routledge, 1904).

[46] H. Graetz, _History of the Jews_, vol. iii. p. 509.

[47] For Maimonides see the volume on the subject by D. Yellin and I. Abrahams in the _Jewish Worthies Series_, Vol. I. (Macmillan, 1903).

[48] Vogelstein and Rieger, _Geschichte der Juden in Rom_, i, pp. 136 fol. In general this work should be consulted for all points of contact between the Papacy and Judaism in the middle ages.

[49] Ibn Verga, _Shebet Yehuda_ (ed. Wiener), p. 50.

[50] Statutes of Avignon quoted by Israel Abrahams, _Jewish Life in the Middle Ages_, p. 408.

[51] In the first century of our era Aristo of Pella is said to have been the author of an attempt to prove from the Prophets that Jesus was the Messiah. Justin Martyr followed in his path, and the latter writer’s arguments subsequently reappear in the works of Tertullian and other Fathers. See W. Trollope’s edition of _S. Justini Dialogus_, p. 4.

[52] Heine’s famous satire “Disputation” well characterises the futility of these public controversies; “der Jude wird verbrannt” was Lessing’s grim summary in _Nathan der Weise_. See also Schechter, _Studies in Judaism_, pp. 125 fol.

[53] Lord Curzon, _Problems of the Far East_, p. 298.

[54] Israel Abrahams, _Jewish Life in the Middle Ages_, p. 407.

[55] Lord Curzon, _Problems of the Far East_, p. 303.

[56] _Inferno_, xi. 49–50.

[57] Deuter. xxiii. 19.

[58] Ps. xv. 1, 5.

[59] Koran (Sale’s tr.) ch. ii.

[60] _Rep._ 555 E.

[61] _Laws_, 742 c.

[62] _Pol._ i. 3, 23.

[63] Fifth Homily.

[64] We hear, for example, that early in the thirteenth century interest was fixed by law at 12½ per cent. at Verona, while at Modena towards the end of the same century it seems to have been as high as 20 per cent. The Republic of Genoa, a hundred years later, despite Italy’s commercial prosperity, paid from 7 to 10 per cent. to her creditors. Much more oppressive were the conditions of the money market in France and England. Instances occur of 50 per cent., and there is an edict of Philip Augustus limiting the Jews in France to 48 per cent. At the beginning of the fourteenth century an ordinance of Philip the Fair allows 20 per cent. after the first year of a loan, while in England under Henry III. there are cases on record of 10 per cent. for two months.

[65] The notorious legend of Hugh of Lincoln is placed by the chronicler, Matthew Paris, in the year 1255. The prolific nature of monkish imagination on this subject is shown by the subjoined facts due to Tyrwhitt’s researches: “In the first four months of the _Acta Sanctorum_ by Bollandus, I find the following names of children canonized, as having been murdered by Jews:

XXV. Mart. Willielmus Norvicensis, 1144;
Richardus, Parisiis, 1179;
XVII. Apr. Rudolphus, Bernae, 1287;
Wernerus, Wesaliae, anno eodem;
Albertus, Poloniae, 1598.

I suppose the remaining eight months would furnish at least as many more.” Quoted by Dr. W. W. Skeat, _Chaucer_, Intr., p. xxiii.

[66] A contemporary historian pathetically states that in 1248 “no foreigner, let alone an Englishman, could look at an English coin with dry eyes and unbroken heart.” Henry III. issued a new coin; but it was not long ere it reached the condition of the older one. In England the penalty for the crime was loss of life or limbs.

[67] W. Cunningham, _The Growth of English Industry and Commerce_, p. 187.

[68] The original charter of expulsion has recently been discovered; it was, by a gracious irony of history, found at Leicester at a time when a Jew had been thrice mayor of the town.

[69] See above, p. 98.

[70] Alami, quoted by H. Graetz, _History of the Jews_, vol. iv. p. 220.

[71] _A History of the Inquisition of Spain_, by H. C. Lea (Macmillan, Vols. I., II. and III. of which have now appeared, 1906), is a monumental work on its subject.

[72] _Apologia pro vita sua_, p. 29.

[73] This attachment of Jews to countries with which they have long been identified recurs at the present day. Jewish emigration associations are constantly faced by the reluctance of very many Russian Jews to tear themselves from Russia.

[74] As a matter of fact, Celestine V. hardly deserves this sentence. It was not cowardice but native humility, the consciousness of the temptations of power, physical weakness, and the hermit’s longing for tranquillity that impelled the Pope to resign after five months and eight days’ pontificate. Commentators had hitherto agreed in applying the above passage to Celestine V., but recent opinion rejects the traditional interpretation. However that may be, the point which concerns us is that Dante censures _a_ pope.

[75] See Berliner, _Persönliche Beziehungen zwischen Christen und Juden_. Reference should also be made to the same author’s _Geschichte der Juden in Rom._

[76] _Paradiso_, xii.

[77] Praef. ad Librum de _Serm. Lat._, quoted by Tyrwhitt in Dr. W. W. Skeat’s _Chaucer_, Intr., p. xxiii.

[78] See above, p. 170.

[79] A good account of the Roman Ghetto may be found in E. Rodocanachi’s _Le Saint-Siège et les Juifs: Le Ghetto à Rome_ (Paris, 1891).

[80] Browning in his _Holy-Cross Day_ has depicted the farcical grotesqueness of these efforts at conversion as unsparingly as Heine satirised the compulsory controversies. Cp. above, p. 98 _n._

[81] _Diary_, March 23, 1646.

[82] I. Abrahams, _Jewish Life in the Middle Ages_, pp. 409–410.

[83] S. Schechter, _Studies in Judaism_, p. 15.

[84] William Hazlitt’s Translation, ch. 857.

[85] Ch. 853.

[86] Ch. 852.

[87] Ch. 700.

[88] Ch. 859.

[89] Ch. 852.

[90] Ch. 864.

[91] _Ibid._

[92] H. Graetz, _History of the Jews_, vol. iv. p. 502.

[93] Ch. 857.

[94] Ch. 864.

[95] Ch. 866.

[96] Ch. 852.

[97] _Ibid._

[98] _Ibid._

[99] _Ibid._

[100] Ch. 856.

[101] Ch. 861.

[102] Ch. 864.

[103] Ch. 852.

[104] Ch. 855.

[105] Ch. 867.

[106] Ch. 862.

[107] Ch. 858.

[108] Ch. 852.

[109] Ch. 854.

[110] Ch. 860.

[111] Ch. 854.

[112] Ch. 855.

[113] Ch. 854.

[114] Ch. 861.

[115] Ch. 865.

[116] Ch. 869.

[117] Ch. 355. O Martin, Martin! What of the “circumcision of the heart,” to say nothing about Christian charity? But this was in 1541.

[118] Ch. 861.

[119] Ch. 865.

[120] Ch. 866.

[121] _Von den Juden und Ihren Luegen_ (1544) is the title of one of these pamphlets. See H. Graetz, _History of the Jews_, vol. iv. pp. 583 fol.

[122] For the history of the Hamburg Jews, see M. Grunwald’s _Hamburg’s Deutsche Juden_, 1904.

[123] On Pfefferkorn and Reuchlin see two papers by S. A. Hirsch in _A Book of Essays_ (Macmillan, 1905).

[124] See above, p. 175.

[125] Perhaps the most lucid and impartial estimate of Spinoza’s place in the world of thought, accessible to the English reader, is to be found in Sir Frederick Pollock’s _Spinoza: His Life and Philosophy_. This work also contains in an appendix a reprint of the English translation (1706) of the Dutch biography of Spinoza by his friend the Lutheran minister Johannes Colerus, published in 1705. The latest biography of Spinoza, based on new materials, is J. Freudenthal’s _Spinoza, sein Leben und seine Lehre_, Erster Band, _Das Leben Spinozas_ (Stuttgart, 1904).

[126] _Confessio Amantis_, bk. vii.

[127] See above, p. 199.

[128] It was by some of these German miners whom the merchant venturers of Cornwall engaged in exploiting the Cornish mines, under a charter granted by Queen Elizabeth, that the “dowsing rod” (_Schlagruthe_, or striking-rod) was introduced into England for the purpose of discovering mineral veins. Professor W. F. Barrett, “Water-Finding,” in the _Times_, January 21, 1905.

[129] Essay, _Of Usurie_.

[130] _Merchant of Venice_, Act i. Sc. 3.

[131] I. Abrahams, _Jewish Life in the Middle Ages_, p. 251.

[132] S. R. Gardiner, _History of the Commonwealth and Protectorate_, vol. ii. p. 30, n. 3.

[133] See above, p. 148.

[134] _Spectator_, No. 213, Nov. 3 1711.

[135] _Ib._ No. 495, Sept. 27, 1712.

[136] Quoted in H. Graetz’s _History of the Jews_, vol. v. p. 359.

[137] T. Carlyle, _History of Frederick the Great_, bk. xvi. ch. vii.

[138] This arrangement was abolished by the Separation Law promulgated on December 9, 1905, when the Republic resolved neither “to recognise, pay salaries to, nor subsidise any form of worship.” The Jews have shared the effects of this Act with the Protestants and Roman Catholics of France, and like the former of these Christian denominations, and unlike the latter, readily accepted the change.

[139] _Over the Teacups_, pp. 193 fol.

[140] J. G. Lockhart, _Life of Sir W. Scott_, Ch. xlvi.

[141] The original of Scott’s Rebecca is said to have been a real person--Rebecca Gratz of Philadelphia. Washington Irving, who knew Miss Gratz, introduced her to Scott’s notice. She was born in 1781, and died in 1869. Her claim to have been “the original of Rebecca in _Ivanhoe_” is sustained in a paper with that title in the _Century Magazine_, 1882, pp. 679 fol.

[142] _Don Juan_, Canto II. lxv. It is only fair to add that Scott also, at the time of his financial distress, embittered by the harsh treatment which he experienced at the hands of his Jewish creditors, Abud and Son, expressed himself in very strong terms concerning “the vagabond stock-jobbing Jews” in general, and the Abuds in particular. See Scott’s Diary under dates Nov. 25, 1825, and Oct. 9, 1826, in J. G. Lockhart, _Life of Sir W. Scott_, Ch. lxv. and lxxi.

[143] _Table-Talk._

[144] Luther’s _Table-Talk_, Ch. 852.

[145] Coleridge’s _Table-Talk_, April 14, 1830.

[146] Cp. above, p. 225.

[147] Editor’s note on May 30, 1830.

[148] Aug. 14, 1833.

[149] Editor’s note on April 14, 1830.

[150] Charles Lamb, Essay on _Imperfect Sympathies_.

[151] J. Morley, _Life of W. E. Gladstone_, Vol. i. pp. 106, 375.

[152] See below, pp. 378 fol.

[153] See _The Jewish Encyclopaedia_, passim.

[154] This phase of the internal history of Russia since 1881 is well summarised in an article on “The Constitutional Agitation in Russia,” by Prince Kropotkin, _The Nineteenth Century_, January, 1905.

[155] See Memorandum of the Armenian Patriarchate, protesting against the edict of spoliation, issued on June 12–25, 1903, in _Armenia_, October and November, 1906.

[156] See A. Vambéry, “The Awakening of the Tartars,” _The Nineteenth Century_, February, 1905.

[157] _The Times_, October 8, 1904.

[158] According to the census returns of 1897, the number of illiterate inhabitants in the country varies from 44.9 to 89.2 per cent.

[159] E. F. G. Law, “The Present Condition of Russia,” _The Fortnightly Review_, April, 1882.

[160] Vice-Consul Wagstaff’s report, in Goldwin Smith’s “The Jews,” _The Nineteenth Century_, Nov. 1882.

[161] See above, p. 148. Cp. p. 167.

[162] Olga Novikoff, “The Temperance Movement in Russia,” _The Nineteenth Century_, Sept. 1882. Cp. M. O. Menchikoff, “The Jewish Peril in Russia,” _The Monthly Review_, Feb. 1904.

[163] See above, p. 329.

[164] Goldwin Smith, _ubi supra_.

[165] _Ibid._

[166] Goldwin Smith, _ubi supra_.

[167] See above, p. 154.

[168] For a full account of this and other aspects of Russian domestic policy, the reader is referred to Herr Wolf von Schierbrand’s Russia: _Her Strength and her Weakness_, 1904.

[169] E. F. G. Law, _ubi supra_.

[170] Olga Novikoff, _ubi supra_.

[171] Goldwin Smith, “The Jews,” _The Nineteenth Century_, Nov. 1882. Cp. Pierre Botkine, Secretary of the Russian Legation in Washington, “A Voice for Russia,” _The Century Magazine_, Feb. 1893.

[172] Laurence Oliphant, “The Jew and the Eastern Question,” _The Nineteenth Century_, Aug. 1882.

[173] Pierre Botkine, Secretary of the Russian Legation in Washington, “A Voice for Russia,” in _The Century Magazine_, Feb. 1893. Cp. “A reply” to it by Joseph Jacobs, Secretary of the Russo-Jewish Committee, London, in the same periodical, July, 1893.

[174] In 1902–3 the Russian Empire, according to the Statistical Table in the _Jewish Year Book_, contained 5,189,401 Jews, representing 04.13 of the total population (125,668,000). There are serious reasons, however, to believe that their real number is considerably in excess of this figure.

[175] _The Times_, June 14, 1905.

[176] Towards the end of 1904 a Bill was introduced in the Council of the Empire, preventing the promotion even of baptized Jews. But, owing to reasons which will be explained in the sequel, it was withdrawn.--The newspaper _Voshod_, reported by Reuter in a despatch dated St. Petersburg, Dec. 23.

[177] H. H. Munro in the _Morning Post_, June 3, 1904.

[178] Statement by M. De Plehve, _The Standard_, April 8, 1904.

[179] Reuter telegram, dated Melbourne, June 4, 1903.

[180] _The Daily Chronicle_, June 22, 1903.

[181] Reuter telegram, dated Berlin, May 30, 1903.

[182] Andrew D. White, “A Diplomat’s Recollections of Russia,” _The Century Magazine_, Nov. 1904.

[183] Prince Kropotkin, “The Constitutional Agitation in Russia,” _The Nineteenth Century_, Jan. 1905.

[184] Those were the words of the Crown Prosecutor at the Kishineff Trial, _The Times_, Dec. 25, 1903.

[185] _The Times_, Dec. 19, 1903.

[186] _Ibid._

[187] Reuter telegram, dated Kishineff, Dec. 21, 1903.

[188] Reuter telegram, dated St. Petersburg, Dec. 17, 1903.

[189] M. O. Menchikoff, one of the editors of the _Novoe Vremya_, “The Jewish Peril in Russia,” _The Monthly Review_, Feb. 1904.

[190] Reuter telegram, dated St. Petersburg, June 4, 1903.

[191] _The Standard_ correspondent at Kieff, under date Dec. 18, 1903.

[192] A meagre account of the occurrence appeared in _The Standard_, Sept. 25, 1903.

[193] _The Times_, Dec. 21, 1903.

[194] Tugan-Baranowsky, “Anti-Semitism in Contemporary Russia,” _The Monthly Review_, Jan. 1904.

[195] Some very illuminating revelations concerning the organisation of these authorised riots were made during a recent trial at St. Petersburg. See Reuter telegram from that town, Oct. 26, 1906, and an account by the _Tribune_ correspondent under same date.

[196] See Reuter telegram, dated St. Petersburg, June 13, and Mr. Lucien Wolf’s letter in _The Times_ of June 14, 1904.

[197] Andrew D. White, “A Diplomat’s Recollections of Russia,” _The Century Magazine_, Nov. 1904.

[198] _The Standard_, Aug. 1, 1904.

[199] Lucien Wolf, “M. De Plehve and the Jewish Question,” in _The Times_, Feb. 6, 1904.

[200] Reuter telegram, Aug. 17, 1904.

[201] Reuter telegram, dated St. Petersburg, Sept. 12, 1904.

[202] Reuter telegram, dated Kattowitz (Silesia), Sept. 12, 1904.

[203] The Special Commissioner of the _Daily Telegraph_, Dec. 10, 1904.

[204] Reuter telegram, dated St. Petersburg, Sept. 3, 1904.

[205] Reuter telegram, dated New York, January 10, 1905.

[206] According to the returns of the last census (1899), 78 per cent. of the population over 7 years of age can neither read nor write.

[207] See above, p. 243.

[208] See a most interesting sketch of the movement in S. Schechter’s _Studies in Judaism_, pp. 1 fol., the same author’s article on the subject in _Nord und Süd_, January, 1905, and S. M. Dubnow’s article in the _Jewish Encyclopedia_, Vol. vi. pp. 251 fol.

[209] H. Sutherland Edwards, _Sir William White: His Life and Correspondence_, p. 84.

[210] _Ibid._ See also a summary of this period under title “The Jews in Roumania” in _The Standard_, Sept. 30, 1902.

[211] J. Morley, _Life of W. E. Gladstone_, Vol. iii. p. 475 (1891).

[212] The story is related at length by Gibbon, _Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire_, Ch. xxvi.

[213] One example will suffice. The peasant word for a convivial gathering is written _sedatore_, and pronounced shezetoare.

[214] Alexander A. Landesco, in _The Century Magazine_, May, 1906, p. 160.

[215] The Vienna correspondent of _The Times_, June 10, 1902.

[216] Carmen Sylva, “The Jews in Roumania,” _The Century Magazine_, March, 1906.

[217] See statistics of population in the _Jewish Year Book_ for 1902–03. Cp. the _Statesman’s Year Book_ for 1906.

[218] Report from Bucharest, published in the _Pester Lloyd_, see _The Standard_, Sept. 27, 1902. Cp. the article “Oath More Judaico” in the _Jewish Encyclopedia_, ix. p. 367.

[219] The Vienna correspondent of _The Standard_, Sept. 19, 1902.

[220] Reuter telegram, dated Bucharest, April 12, 1902.

[221] _The Times_, June 10, 1902.

[222] Reuter telegram, dated Washington, Sept. 17, 1902.

[223] _The Standard_, Sept. 23, 1902.

[224] The attitude of the various Powers is described at length by the correspondents of the London Press in their respective capitals. See _Standard_, Sept. 20, 25, 26; _Morning Post_, Sept. 20; _Daily Chronicle_, Sept. 22, etc.

[225] _The Daily Chronicle_, September 29, 1902.

[226] Carmen Sylva, “The Jews in Roumania,” _The Century Magazine_, March, 1906.

[227] Alexander A. Landesco, _The Century Magazine_, May, 1906, p. 160.

[228] The Vienna correspondent of the _Standard_, Sept. 26, 1902.

[229] Isocrates, _Panegyr._ 50.

[230] In Germany, out of a total population of 56,500,000, there are 587,000 Jews, of whom 376,000 reside in Prussia. In Austria there are 1,150,000 out of a total population of 26,000,000, and in Hungary 850,000 out of a total population of 19,000,000. The percentage of Jews, therefore, is in Germany 01.04, in Austria 04.80, in Hungary 04.43.--_Jewish Year-Book_, 1902–03.

[231] “The Jews in Germany,” by the author of “German Home Life,” _The Contemporary Review_, January, 1881.

[232] Ernest Schuster, “The Anti-Jewish Agitation in Germany,” _The Fortnightly Review_, March 1, 1881.

[233] Statutes quoted by Lucien Wolf in “The Anti-Jewish Agitation,” _The Nineteenth Century_, February, 1881.

[234] Ernest Schuster, _ubi supra_.

[235] See above, p. 307.

[236] “The Jews in Germany,” by the author of “German Home Life,” _The Contemporary Review_, January, 1881. For these and similar demands see also Ernest Schuster, _ubi supra_.

[237] Karl Blind, “The Conflict in Germany,” _The Nineteenth Century_, February, 1882.

[238] The Vienna Correspondent of the _Times_ in a letter dated Nov. 11, 1904.

[239] _The Times_, October 22, 1904.

[240] Reuter telegram, dated Vienna, June 11, 1906. Cp. “Hidden Forces in Austrian Politics,” a letter by “Scotus Viaticus” in the _Spectator_, July 7, 1906.

[241] The Vienna correspondent of _The Times_, January 7, 1907.

[242] Lucien Wolf, “The Anti-Jewish Agitation,” _The Nineteenth Century_, Feb., 1881.

[243] _Étude sur l’Ecclésiaste_, pp. 91 fol.

[244] See _Qu’est-ce qu’une Nation?_ a paper read at the Sorbonne on March 11, 1882, in _Discours et Conférences_, pp. 277 fol.

[245] See lectures and speeches delivered in 1883 in _Discours et Conférences_, pp. 336, 374, etc.

[246] See Ed. Drumont’s _La France Juive_, a work which, published in 1886, raised its author at once to the rank of commander-in-chief of the anti-Semitic forces in France.

[247] 86,885 in a total population of 38,595,000, _i.e._ a percentage of 00.22, _Jewish Year Book_, 1902–03.

[248] _The Standard_, Dec. 7, 1903.

[249] A statistic supplied to the Commission for Tlemcen shows that out of 6000 Jews there are only 10 possessing more than £2000, and another, supplied for Constantine, shows that out of 1024 Jewish electors there are only 10 possessed of real estate and 146 merchants. The rest lead a miserable hand-to-mouth existence.--_Le Temps_, Sept. 25, 1901.

[250] J. Morley, _Life of W. E. Gladstone_, vol. iv. pp. 552, 558.

[251] _E.g._ Sir J. G. T. Sinclair, _A Defence of Russia_ (1877); T. P. O’Connor, _Lord Beaconsfield: a Biography_ (1878); etc.

[252] In justice to the writer it must be added that this ungenerous and untrue caricature was the common estimate of Disraeli entertained by all his political opponents. Except Lord Acton, they all agreed with the Duke of Argyll in holding that Disraeli was a “fantastic adventurer”--a man who, having no opinions of his own and no traditions with which to break, “was free to play with prejudices in which he did not share, and to express passions which were not his own, except in so far as they were tinged with personal resentment.” See _Duke of Argyll: Autobiography and Memoirs_, Vol. i. p. 280.

[253] Malcolm MacColl, “Lord Beaconsfield,” _The Contemporary Review_, June, 1881.

[254] Goldwin Smith, “The Jews,” _The Nineteenth Century_, Nov., 1882. The writer repeats all these views, in almost identical terms, in _The Independent_, June 21, 1906.

[255] Israel Abrahams, _Jewish Life in the Middle Ages_, Introd.

[256] _Rise and Influence of the Spirit of Rationalism in Europe_, vol. ii. p. 281.

[257] Goldwin Smith, _ubi supra_.

[258] S. Singer, “The Russo-Jewish Immigrant,” in _The English Illustrated Magazine_, Sept. 1891.

[259] David Baron, _The Ancient Scriptures and the Modern Jew_, p. 179, 1900.

[260] Arnold White, _The Modern Jew_, 1899.

[261] _Jewish Year Book_, 1902.

[262] Report in _The Standard_, Dec. 14, 1903.

[263] Arnold White, _For Efficiency_, 1902, price 3d.

[264] “The Alien Inquiry: an omitted point,” _The Standard_, Sept. 5, 1903.

[265] _The Pioneer_, Nov. 14, 1904. Commercial jealousy, embittered by racial prejudice, is also at the root of the anti-Japanese agitation now raging in California.

[266] Charles Grant, _The Contemporary Review_, March, 1881.

[267] See an article under the title “The East-End Hevra” in _The Standard_ of April 27, and a reply to it in the issue of May 1, 1903.

[268] J. H. Schooling, “Foreigners in England,” _The Fortnightly Review_, November, 1904. Mr. Chamberlain also, in the debate on the Aliens Bill (May 2, 1905), frankly avowed that he supported that measure because it harmonised with his policy of protection, and he very logically dwelt on the identity of the principle underlying both programmes.

[269] Report of the Commission, pp. 19, 20.

[270] _The Daily Chronicle_, January 9, 1903.

[271] _The Daily Chronicle_, Feb. 17, 1904.

[272] For the text of the Bill, see _The Times_, April 1, 1904.

[273] _The Standard_, leading article, April 26, 1904.

[274] Mr. Winston Churchill’s letter to a member of the Jewish community in Manchester, May 30, 1904.

[275] _The Daily Chronicle_, May 18, 1903.

[276] _The Daily Chronicle_, May 4, 1904.

[277] Letter by Mr. Balfour, dated May 9, 1904.

[278] _The Daily Chronicle_, May 13, 1904.

[279] _Ibid._ May 14, 1904.

[280] _A Modern Exodus._ By Violet Guttenberg.

[281] Report in _The Standard_, April 2, 1904.

[282] Report in _The Times_, April 17, 1905.

[283] Mr. Wyndham’s statement in the House of Commons, April 25, 1904.

[284] “Milesian,” letter in _The Times_, April 4, 1904.

[285] E. B. Levin, letter in _The Times_, April 12, 1904.

[286] “Milesian,” _ubi supra_.

[287] “Milesian,” _ubi supra_.

[288] See _The Times_, April 8 and 12, 1904.

[289] _The Standard_, August 8, 1904.

[290] J. H. Schooling, “Foreigners in England,” _The Fortnightly Review_, November, 1904.

[291] W. Evans Gordon, “The Economic Side of Alien Immigration,” _The Nineteenth Century_, February, 1905.

[292] W. Evans Gordon, letter in _The Times_, March 22, 1904.

[293] Letter in _The Standard_, August 8, 1904.

[294] _Ibid._ July 7, 1904.

[295] J. Morley, _Life of W. E. Gladstone_, vol. iii. p. 475.

[296] For a list of such works see the article “Inquisition” in the _Encyclopaedia Britannica_.

[297] Jeremiah xxxii. 37. Cp. Isaiah xi. 12 etc.

[298] S. Schechter, _Studies in Judaism_, pp. 131–2.

[299] For an exhaustive account of the historic development of Zionism see Lucien Wolf, “Zionism,” in the _Encyclopaedia Britannica_.

[300] For a full enumeration of the arguments and sentiments which impelled the mass of Russian and Roumanian Jews in the early ’Eighties to prefer an Eastern to a Western exodus, see Laurence Oliphant, “The Jew and the Eastern Question,” _The Nineteenth Century_, August, 1882.

[301] Laurence Oliphant, _ubi supra_. On the other hand, it must not be forgotten that the members of the Chovevi Zion Societies represented but a very small proportion of the total Jews of the world.

[302] _The Jewish World_, Aug. 15, 1902.

[303] The St. Petersburg correspondent of _The Times_, Oct. 14, 1902.

[304] See the late Minister’s of the Interior utterances on the subject: Lucien Wolf, “M. De Plehve and the Jewish Question,” in _The Times_, Feb. 6, 1904.

[305] _The Jewish Question_, Gay and Bird, 1894, p. 27.

[306] Pp. 31–32.

[307] P. 38.

[308] _Table-Talk_, April 13, 1830.

[309] Lucien Wolf, “Zionism,” _Encyclopaedia Britannica_.

[310] _Aspects of the Jewish Question._ By “A Quarterly Reviewer,” 1902, p. 76.

[311] P. 16.

[312] M. J. Landa, “The Doom of Zionism,” in _The Manchester Guardian_, Jan. 10, 1905.

[313] “Palestine Revisited,” _The Statesman_, Oct. 23, 1904.

[314] Lucien Wolf, article on “Zionism” in the _Encyclopaedia Britannica_.

[315] Report in _The Daily Chronicle_, May 18, 1903.

[316] Reuter telegram, dated Basel, Aug. 24, 1903.

[317] Reuter telegram, dated St. Petersburg, Oct. 12, 1903.

[318] “Palestine Revisited,” _The Statesman_, October 23, 1904.

[319] On this aspect of the Jewish question see an article by M. Anatole Leroy-Beaulieu in the _Revue des deux Mondes_, March 1, 1903; and another on _La Langue Française en Orient_ in _Le Monde Illustré_, April 11, 1903.

[320] _The Daily Chronicle_, May 18, 1903.