diff options
Diffstat (limited to '76770-0.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | 76770-0.txt | 8364 |
1 files changed, 8364 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/76770-0.txt b/76770-0.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..1607dbb --- /dev/null +++ b/76770-0.txt @@ -0,0 +1,8364 @@ + +*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 76770 *** + + + + + + Aspects of Jewish Power + in the + United States + + + Volume IV + of + The International Jew + The World’s Foremost Problem + + _Being a Reprint of a Fourth Selection + of Articles from_ + The Dearborn Independent + + + + + Preface + + +This is the fourth volume of reprinted studies in the Jewish Question as +they appeared in THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT. The articles follow the same +general line as the previous volume in showing the various angles of +Jewish influence and achievement in the affairs of the people of the +United States, but they do not by any means exhaust either the number of +the angles nor the depth of the significance in the angles traced. + +Deliberate public opinion has shown many signs of a new alertness to the +movement which was proceeding deftly and unnoticed in the midst of +America, and many checks have been put in operation. The work of THE +DEARBORN INDEPENDENT was undertaken at a disadvantage because of the +tremendous emphasis of the American mind on racial peace and because of +the ease with which racial propagandists can make a purely economic and +political matter assume the aspects of a religious controversy. THE +DEARBORN INDEPENDENT opened the Question to public gaze, and was +therefore assumed to be the attacker. In this country our sense of +fairness always leaves the advantage with the attacked, and false +accusations quickly fall. The country has seen, however, the truth of +the statements and has observed the mild and unprejudiced manner in +which they were made, so that it may now be said that truth has made its +way. + +Most gratifying are the signs which Jews themselves have given that +certain abuses must be quickly stopped. A Jewish leader has appealed for +the removal of the exemption which nullifies the Constitution of the +United States in favor of the Jew with reference to the use of liquor. +Other Jewish leaders have sought to compel Jewish theatrical controllers +to observe elementary decency in their productions. + +These articles have always held that the cleansing must come from within +Judah itself. It is recognized that racial pride might prevent many +improvements being attempted under fire, but American Jews cannot afford +to be ruled by a false pride in this respect. These are days of judgment +for all the corruptive forces of society and the Jews cannot expect to +escape responsibility for their part in these things. + +May, 1922. + + + + + Contents + + + Page + LXII. How Jews Gained American Liquor Control 7 + LXIII. Gigantic Jewish Liquor Trust and Its Career 19 + LXIV. The Jewish Element in Bootlegging Evil 31 + LXV. Angles of Jewish Influence in American Life 41 + LXVI. The Jews’ Complaint Against “Americanism” 54 + LXVII. The Jewish Associates of Benedict Arnold 67 + LXVIII. Benedict Arnold and Jewish Aid in Shady Deal 81 + LXIX. Arnold and His Jewish Aids at West Point 95 + LXX. The Gentle Art of Changing Jewish Names 109 + LXXI. Jewish “Kol Nidre” and “Eli, Eli” Explained 121 + LXXII. Jews as New York Magistrates See Them 132 + LXXIII. Jews Are Silent, the National Voice is Heard 143 + LXXIV. What Jews Attempted Where They Had Power 156 + LXXV. The Jewish Question in Current Testimony 167 + LXXVI. America’s Jewish Enigma—Louis Marshall 179 + LXXVII. The Economic Plans of International Jews 193 + LXXVIII. A Jew Sees His People As Others See Them 207 + LXXIX. Candid Address to Jews on the Jewish Problem 223 + LXXX. An Address to “Gentiles” on the Jewish Problem 235 + +_“United, then, by the strongest feelings of solidarity, the Jews can +easily hold their own in this disjointed and anarchic society of ours. +If the millions of Christians by whom they are surrounded were to +substitute the same principle of cooperation for that of individual +competition, the importance of the Jew would immediately be destroyed. +The Christian, however, will not adopt such a course, and the Jew must, +inevitably, I will not say dominate (the favorite expression of the +anti-Semites) but certainly possess the advantage over others, and +exercise the supremacy against which the anti-Semites inveigh without +being able to destroy it.”—Lazare._ + + + + + LXII. + How Jews Gained American Liquor Control + + +To those who have been surprised and confounded by the widespread +evidence, which even the newspapers have been unable to suppress, that +the bulk of the organized bootlegging which is being carried on in this +country is in the hands of Jews, it would have been less of a surprise +had they known the liquor history of this country. + +The claim made for the Jews, that they are a sober people, is +undoubtedly true, but that has not prevented two facts concerning them, +namely, that they usually constitute the liquor dealers of the countries +where they live in numbers, and that in the United States they are the +only people exempted from the operations of the Prohibition law. + +Here as elsewhere the principle holds true that “the Jew is the key.” +The demoralization which struck the liquor business, causing its +downfall, and the demoralization which has struck Prohibition +enforcement for a time, cannot be understood without a study of the +racial elements which contributed to both phenomena. If in what follows +the Jews find objectionable elements, they should remember that their +own people put them there. It is impossible to doubt that if the +organized Jews of the United States were to make one-thousandth of the +protest against the illegal liquor activities of their own people that +they make against the perfectly legal and morally justifiable exposures +being made in THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT, the result would be not only +favorable but immediate. + +There was a time when the term “whisky” had a much more respectable +connotation than it has today. There was a time when to use whisky and +even to make it, were customs sanctioned by the better class of public +opinion. + +It is a common explanation of the difference between _then_ and _now_, +that people of the latter period became more sensitive morally than +their forbears, that whereas the previous generation guzzled its whisky, +innocently oblivious of the evil in it, the latter generation developed +a stronger moral discrimination and banned the custom. + +The truth is this: the people did not become better; _the whisky became +worse_. When the entire story of the people’s justifiable indignation is +written, the competent historian will trace along with the people’s +rising disgust, the whisky’s decreasing quality. + +Attention to this matter will materially assist an understanding of the +fact that Jews and bootlegging are so continuously and prominently +connected in the public prints these days. + +Readers of the old romances know how proud the master was of his wines. +Vintages ripened under certain skies, on certain hills, where certain +waters flowed, with cellarage in certain soils, had a faculty of aging +gracefully, mellowing to a smoothness and purity and desirableness that +made for cheer and health without the alloy of sordid inebriety. The +bouquet of wine, the perfected essence of the grape subjected to the +further courses of nature, has been a theme of praise for centuries. If +it were uttered today the source of the utterance would be suspected, +and very probably with good reason, of being in pay of the “wets.” For +the vile stuff which civilization threw out is not at all the wine of +popular custom and century-long esteem. + +Nevertheless, it is not difficult for even a modern to grasp the fact +that there was an art in making wine and strong drink, in which art men +took pride. That art required time, experience, a love of good quality. + +It is a little difficult to speak of this art in connection with +whisky—wine being a more poetic word—yet it is a matter of knowledge +that three places in the world have devoted to the production of whisky +the same spirit which France and Portugal devoted to their wines. These +three districts are Glenlivet in Scotland, the region of Dublin in +Ireland, and the Blue-Grass region of Kentucky. Why in these three +regions? First, because there were men—non-Jews, of course—who were +willing to wait ten years to produce a good article. Second, the waters +of these regions are of a quality which is beautifully adapted to the +making of pure goods. Pure whisky, it should be remembered, is a +vegetable product matured by natural forces and no other. Grain, water +and time—not even artificial heat added, nor any other thing—completes +the best whisky product. + +In older times in America there were men who were as choice of their +whiskies as of their horses or books. There was then such a thing as +quality. But there was no such thing as delirium tremens. That came +later, with the disappearance of pure whisky. A distiller seldom grew +rich—he was too engrossed in maintaining the quality of his product; and +it consumed much time. + +There were certain brands known nationally because of their mildness and +purity—purest wine of the choicest grapes, aged in the best adapted +cellars, was not more mild or pure. There are names that remain until +this day—Pepper, Crow, Taylor, and others—the names of men who took time +and pains, whose names became “brands” which guaranteed quality and +purity. These men were distillers in the true sense, not manufacturers +nor compounders, but _distillers_ in a time when distilling was both a +science and an art, and not a mere name to conceal a gigantic fraud on +the public. + +In time to come, when the people’s justifiable moral indignation will +permit a study of the steps by which the reputation of whisky came to +its present low degree, they will see how much better it would have +been, how much more efficacious and clarifying, if the attack on whisky +had included an exposure of the men who had driven whisky out of the +country and were selling rank poison as a substitute. The saloon, the +brewer, the man who used strong drink were all of them made the target +for attack; the Jews who demoralized the whole business went on +collecting their enormous and illegitimate profits without so much as +their identity being revealed. + +Whisky ceased to be whisky and beer grew less like beer; the results +upon humanity became apparent and deplorable. So society raised the +license fee and increased the restrictions. To meet this, the Jewish +compounders turned out still cheaper stuff, and still more vicious +mixtures. Licenses went up, and quality went down; the Jewish +compounders always getting a larger margin of profit. And through the +long, long fight, no one, with one or two notable exceptions, had the +sense and the courage to point a finger at the solid racial phalanx +lined up behind the whole rotten combination. + +Distilling is one of the long list of businesses which has been ruined +by Jewish monopoly. Those who favor Prohibition will probably thank the +Jew for his work in that direction. It may be that the Jew is destiny’s +agent to demoralize the business that must pass away. But set against +that the fact that it is Jewish influence that demoralizes Prohibition, +too, and both “wets” and “drys” have an interesting situation to +consider. + +In general, the Jews are on the side of liquor and always have been. +They are the steadiest drinkers of all. That is why they were able to +secure exemption from the Prohibition laws; their religious ceremonies +require them to drink an amount which the law has considered to equal +ten gallons a year. And so the Prohibition law of the United States—a +part of the Constitution of the United States—is made legally +ineffective to the extent of ten gallons a year a Jew. The amount, of +course, is very much more; it is always easy to get 100 gallons through +a 10-gallon loophole. In fact, thousands of gallons have come through +that 10-gallon loophole. + +It will come to many people as new knowledge that the liquor business of +the world has been in the hands of Jews. In the United States the liquor +business was almost exclusively in the hands of Jews for 25 years +previous to Prohibition, during the period, in fact, when the liquor +trade was giving point and confirmation to Prohibition arguments. This +knowledge has an important bearing on the interpretation of our times. + +In the volume, “The Conquering Jew,” published by Funk & Wagnalls +Company in 1916, John Foster Fraser writes: + + “The Jews are masters of the whisky trade in the United States. + Eighty per cent of the members of the National Liquor Dealers’ + Association are Jews. It has been shown that 60 per cent of the + business of distilling and wholesale trade in whisky is in the hands + of the Jews. As middlemen they control the wine product of + California. Jews visit the tobacco-growing States and buy up nearly + all the leaf tobacco, so that the great tobacco companies have to + buy the raw product from them. The Jews have a grip on the cigar + trade. The American Tobacco Company manufactures about 15 per cent + of the cigars smoked in the United States. The Jews provide the + rest.” + +It was also true in Russia, Poland, Rumania. The Jewish Encyclopedia +states that “The establishment of the government liquor monopoly (in +Russia in 1896) deprived thousands of Jewish families of a livelihood.” +They controlled the liquor traffic, the vodka business which undermined +Russia. The government made the liquor business a national monopoly in +order to abolish it, which was done. Liquor in Russia was Jewish, as the +Encyclopedia testifies. Anyone reading carefully the article on Russia, +especially pages 527 and 559 in the Jewish Encyclopedia, will be in no +doubt as to the fact. In Rumania the whole “Jewish Question” was the +liquor question. The land of the peasants came into control of the +liquor sellers, and the business of handling liquors was a strict Jewish +monopoly for years. In Poland the same was true. It is not surprising, +therefore, that in the United States whisky also became Jewish. + +For convenience in detailing this story, most of the observations made +will center in the state of Kentucky. Almost every one of age knows the +phrase “fine old Kentucky whiskies.” It was once a phrase that meant +something. Kentucky produced, in her limestone regions, the kind of +water that served best with the grain ingredients of whisky. The word +“Bourbon,” known mostly as a kind of whisky, is really the name of a +county in Kentucky where “Bourbon whisky” was first made. How profoundly +the region in which whisky is manufactured affects the product may be +gathered from the fact that a primitive Kentucky distiller named +Shields, who became famous for a brand of Bourbon made from the waters +of Glen’s Creek, conceived the idea of lowering his costs by +transferring his distillery to Illinois, where he would be nearer the +rich cornfields. He was disappointed. Illinois water would not make +Bourbon. “The rule of the region” is supreme. Jamaica rum owes its +characteristic to the waters of Jamaica. Port wine is best produced in +the region of Duro in Portugal, champagne in the region of Rheims in +France, and beer in Bavaria. And so, in Kentucky there was the right +combination of elements which made the whisky product of that state +world famous. + +An alcoholic spirit from grain may be made in any climate and by many +methods. Neutral spirits, high wines and alcohol, are not indigenous +anywhere. They can be made in any back room or cellar, in very little +time. Little care is required. A concoction of drugs and spirits, +properly colored and flavored, fraudulently labeled “whisky” and passed +out over the bar, is a crime against the art of distilling, against the +human nervous system, and against society. + +Readers may recall that in 1904, Dr. Wiley, then chief of the United +States Bureau of Chemistry, had a great deal to say about this. But +because he did not point out that the evil he was attacking was fostered +by a single class of men bent on gain at the cost of ruin to an American +industry and to countless thousands of American citizens, few paid any +attention to him. The public supposed that Dr. Wiley was discussing a +technical question which interested American distillers only. It vastly +more interested the American citizen, if he had but known it, if anyone +had but had the clear vision and the courage to expose the great Jewish +whisky conspiracy. + +The difference between the non-Jewish and the Jewish method, as +illustrated in the history of American whisky, is thus described by Dr. +Wiley: + +“The aging of whisky takes years of time. It is expensive. The whisky +leaks out. It is allowed to stand for four years at least. The object of +this is to permit the oxidation of the alcohols.... There is a loss of +interest on the value of the whisky while it is aging; hence it is an +expensive process. + +“But the manufacture of compounded, or artificial whisky has for its +purpose the avoiding of this long and expensive process. The makers +begin with the pure article of spirits which can be made in a few +hours.... To this is added enough water to dilute it to the strength of +whisky. The next step is to color it.... This is done by adding burnt +sugar and caramel. The next thing is to supply the flavors.... By the +way I have described, in two or three hours the compounder can make a +material which looks like, smells like, tastes like, and analyzes like +genuine whisky, but it has a different effect on the system. The people +who drink this whisky are much more liable to receive injury from it +than those who drink the genuine article.” + +All sorts of practices were resorted to. Drugs and raw “crops” of whisky +were bought up and the business of “rectifying,” as it was called, began +the ruin of the natural and wholesome process of distilling. Quick +money, regardless of what happened to the customer; that was the motive +of the rectifying business. + +This rectifying business was mostly Jewish. Here and there a non-Jew was +associated with Jewish partners, but rarely. The way had been found to +trade on the reputation of the term “whisky” by compounding a liquid +which looked and tasted like whisky but the effect of which was harmful. +That was the capital fraud—the capture of the name “whisky” for a +synthetic poison. There was a concealment of the meaning of “rectified +spirits,” a deceptive use of the word “blend,” and even a most +fraudulent misrepresentation concerning aging. If chemical deception +could be used to make a whisky taste as if it were nine years old, then +it was advertised as “Nine Years in the Wood.” Here is a bit of Jewish +court testimony: + + Q. Is your make of whisky nine years old? + + A. Nine years old, but I want to explain in that respect that the + whisky may not have existed nine years before it was put into that + bottle.... That brand of whisky which we brand as nine years old + blended, means that it is equal to nine-year-old whisky in + smoothness and quality. + + Q. How did you arrive at the fact which you put upon this bottle + that the whisky was nine years old? + + A. Because it is comparatively nine years old. + + Q. How do you arrive at that result? + + A. By sampling. You take the whisky that is allowed to remain in the + original package for nine years and compare it with our + nine-year-old blend and you will find them in smoothness the same. + Therefore, we class it as nine-year-old whisky. + +Let the reader form his own judgment on that type of mind. The whisky +bore a name resembling a time-honored brand of pure goods, and it +flaunted the name Kentucky, when it was _not_ whisky at all, was _not_ a +Kentucky product, but was compounded of neutral spirits from Indiana, +prune juice from California, rock candy from anywhere, and raw Illinois +whisky from Peoria to give it flavor. + +Although Louisville, Kentucky, became headquarters of whisky men, it was +Cincinnati, Ohio, a thoroughly Judaized city, which became a greater +headquarters for the pseudo-whisky men, the compounders, mixers and +rectifiers. The list of Cincinnati liquor dealers reads like a directory +of the Warsaw ghetto. In Louisville the Judaic complexion of the city, +as well as society, is very noticeable; indeed, most of the leading Jews +in the whisky business are now Kentucky “Colonels.” + +The Jewish character of the whisky business since the Civil War may be +visualized, by the simple expedient of noting how many of the better +known brands have been at various dates under Jewish control: + +There is “Old 66,” owned by Straus, Pritz & Co. + +“Highland Rye,” owned by Freiberg & Workum. + +“T. W. Samuel Old Style Sour Mash,” owned by Max Hirsch, the Star +Distilling Company. + +“Bridgewater Sour Mash and Rye Whiskies,” “Rosewood and Westbrook +Bourbon Whiskies,” distilled by J. & A. Freiberg. + +“T. J. Monarch” and “Davies County Sour Mash Whiskies,” controlled by J. +& A. Freiberg. + +“Louis Hunter 1870,” “Crystal Wedding,” and “Old Jug,” blended by J. & +A. Freiberg. + +“Gannymede ’76,” put out by Sigmund and Sol H. Freiberg. + +“Jig-Saw Kentucky Corn Whisky,” “Lynndale Whisky,” “Brunswick Rye and +Bourbon,” by Hoffheimer Brothers Company. + +“Red Top Rye” and “White House Club,” by Ferdinand Westheimer & Sons. + +“Green River” came into the control of E. La Montague. + +“Sunnybrook,” a widely advertised brand, on whose advertising matter a +man in a United States inspector’s uniform stood behind as if endorsing +it, was at the time owned by Rosenfield Brothers & Co. + +“Mount Vernon,” as from the Hannis Distilling Company, was at the time +owned by Angelo Meyer. + +“Belle of Nelson” came into control of the Jewish trust, which was +brought to legal birth by Levy Mayer and Alfred Austrian, the latter +being the Chicago attorney whose name will be recalled in connection +with the baseball articles in this series. + +“James E. Pepper” was owned by James Wolf. + +“Cedar Brook” was owned by Julius Kessler & Co. It was formerly the old +“W. H. McBrayer” brand, but the real W. H. McBrayer, knowing the new +methods that were arising in liquor-making, requested in his will that +his name should not be used as a brand after he had ceased to see that +the product was worthy of his name. + +In the Pittsburgh and Peoria districts, the same story held true; the +alleged whisky made in those districts was controlled, with one +exception, by Jews. + +The Great Western Distillery, in Peoria, is owned by a corporation of +Jews. Two of its brands were “Ravenswood Rye” and “Ravenswood Bourbon.” + +The Woolner Distillery made “Old Grove Whisky” and “Old Ryan Whisky,” +and “Bucha Gin.” + +In the city of Peoria alone there are fifteen great fortunes, all held +by Jews, and for the most part made in what passed in Peoria for Whisky. + +Take the city of Cincinnati alone and note what even an incomplete list +reveals as to the names of the men classified as “distillers”: + +Bernheim, Rexinger & Company; Elias Bloch & Sons; J. & A. Freiberg; +Freiberg & Workum; Helfferich & Sons; Hoffheimer Brothers Company; Elias +Hyman & Sons; Kaufman, Bare & Company; Klein Brothers; A. Loeb & Co.; H. +Rosenthal & Sons; Seligman Distilling Company; Straus, Pritz & Company; +S.N. Weil & Company, and F. Westheimer & Sons; with many other Jews +concealed under fancy trade names and corporation designations. It is +the same throughout Ohio, which state, incidentally, is one of the most +Jew-ridden states in the Union. + +The lists here given do not by any means begin to indicate the numbers +of the Jews who were engaged in the liquor business, they only indicate +the complexion which the business takes on when a search is made behind +the “brands” and the trade names. Any citizen in any city of size will +have no trouble in confirming the statement that most of the rectifiers +and wholesalers and brokers in the whisky trade of his city also were +Jews. + +But it is not only the fact that the liquor business was controlled by +Jews that assumes importance. That is a fact which no one will deny—not +even the Jewish defenders. But it is the additional fact that there was +spread over this country the machinery of a vicious system which while +it was destined to ruin the liquor business—as perhaps it deserved to be +ruined—also ruined hundreds of thousands of citizens who trusted that +“pure and unadulterated” meant what the words were intended to convey. +It would be a separate story to tell of all the manipulation of labels, +the piracy of brand names, the conscienceless play upon the words “pure +and unadulterated” of which the un-American “compounded liquor” combine +was guilty. Of course, the stuff was “pure and unadulterated”—so is +carbolic acid—but it was not whisky! There were law violations galore, +and it was well enough recognized in the rectifying business as a +regular practice to appropriate annually a certain sum to pay the fines +that were bound to be assessed against it. A riot of adulteration and +chicanery ensued, with whisky being made in many saloon cellars and the +dangerous secrets of synthetic booze-making being peddled abroad among +the customers of the trust. + +Presently the saloon men became aware of the fact that they were the +goats of the game. Seldom was the Jew engaged in dishing out five-cent +beers or ten-cent whiskies; it remained for the “boob Gentile” to do +that; the Jew was at the wholesale end where the real profits were made. +But it was the saloon man who took the brunt of the blame. The Jewish +“distillers,” as the compounders and blenders of the Louisville and +Peoria districts were called, wore silk hats and their respectability +was unquestioned. The saloon men made an eleventh hour effort to save +their business, but the stuff they were pouring out had not improved, +and Prohibition came, sweeping the saloon away, but, as the sequel will +show, not depriving the Jewish compounder of his profits. + +How much of the liquor business of the United States was in whisky and +how much in rectified spirits? + +The Twelfth Census of the United States, 1900, said: “_Most of the +distilled liquors consumed as a beverage by the American people pass +through rectifying houses._ The different classes of rectified spirits +range from the cheapest concoctions of neutral spirits and drugs to the +simple blending of young and old whisky.” + +Twenty years ago statistics showed that 80 per cent of the so-called +whisky put up in the United States was imitation whisky. Chief Chemist +Wiley, whose concern was not with the quantity but with the quality, +gave it as his information “that over half the whisky in this country +was compounded whisky. Less than half was genuine; and while they +usually mix a little old whisky with it, they often sell it purely and +simply as it is, whisky which has no claim to be called whisky under the +real meaning of that term.” + +But all that was only a beginning. The time came when the vision of a +great liquor combination rose in certain minds in this country. It was +planned to sweep the good brands and the bad brands alike into one +common management—whose control the reader will by this time suspect—and +thus not only capitalize the reputation which the old-time American +distillers had made through years of honest distilling, but use the +trade names of pure goods as a mask for a deluge of the dishonest kind +of liquor which left a trail of suicide, insanity, crime and social +wreckage in its path. + +This, with independent testimony as to the Jewish direction of it all, +will form the subject matter of a separate story. + + +—— + +Issue of December 17, 1921. + + + + + LXIII. + Gigantic Jewish Liquor Trust and Its Career + + +It has been shown how the American whisky business became Jewish. The +_distillers_ of pure whisky which required years to make, were driven +out by the _manufacturers_ of drugged and chemicalized liquors which +could be made in three or four hours. The latter, being cheaper and more +intoxicating, so completely usurped the market that the public never +knew that it was not whisky. It had stolen the name of whisky, and under +that name the righteous indignation of the people prohibited it; and +under that name still it is being sold by bootleggers at an advance of +1,000 per cent. The use of the fraudulent label is not new, it is not a +product of Prohibition days; it began with the advent of Jewish capital +into the liquor business. Whisky, carefully and scientifically made, +purified by long years of repose in the warehouse, was an American +product; “red eye,” “forty rod stuff,” “knock ’em dead” and “squirrel +whisky” mixed and sold the same day, were Jewish products. + +The Pure Food Law came into the fight to protect the American industry, +but it was flouted at every turn. Bad liquor was in such a deep state of +public disgrace that the people paid little attention to Chief Chemist +Wiley’s efforts. They thought when he said “whisky” he meant the stuff +that they knew as “whisky,” and they disregarded him. The degeneracy of +the liquor business became deeper and deeper, to the amazement of both +its friends and its foes, and no one had the key to the situation +because no one saw, or seeing, had courage to expose, the Jewish program +behind the scenes. + +To resume the story: Even after the cheap compounded liquors which +masqueraded as “whisky” had won a commanding place in the market, to the +serious detriment of the business in pure brands, the Jewish compounders +were far from satisfied. There remained a few American brands whose +names, by reason of their dependability, topped the list. Their very +quality, though of limited quantity, was a constant challenge to the +vicious mixtures of which the rectifiers produced millions of gallons a +year. + +How to remove those standard American brands, with their honest labels, +from the market?—that was the problem which the leaders of the Jewish +compounding business tackled. The first resort was, characteristically, +to trickery. Shipments of pure goods would be sidetracked somewhere en +route, while the rectifiers drew off half the whisky and refilled the +barrels with mixed compounds. People who have been amazed at the stunts +of the bootleggers—the sidetracking of whisky shipments, the “robbery” +of loaded trucks, and so on—would not be so surprised if they knew that +every trick was used by the compounders of bad liquor twenty years ago! +It was Jewish then, as it is Jewish now, but no one dared say so. Merely +to list the tricks would require too much space. It was a nasty business +from any point of view. + +But still the standard brands held their place in public confidence. The +Jew who claims to be the superior of the American in skill did not think +of making a better whisky and thus winning the market; he thought to get +rid of the better whisky that the vicious, adulterated product might own +the field. + +It was the day of Trusts. Big Business was amalgamating. It occurred to +the leaders of the compounding business that if they could sweep all the +honest distilleries into a combine with all the backroom rectifying +places, put them all under one management and run down the quality of +famous brands to the standard of cheap ones—cashing in on the names of +the brands, and doubly profiting by decreasing the cost which quality +requires—they could thus accomplish in a financial way what had been +formerly tried by less respectable methods. + +The inception of the idea of a “whisky combine” was legitimate. The +Kentucky distillers (who must at all times be distinguished from +compounders and rectifiers) endeavored in 1898 to establish a +combination that would unite all the legitimate distilleries in the +fight against the flood of counterfeit whisky. It is, however, +significant that there was not enough capital in the legitimate whisky +business to finance the plan. But when the idea was picked up by the +makers of spurious liquor, there were millions of dollars at their +command—just as today, with industry suffering, there are millions of +Jewish capital at the disposal of the motion picture business! + +In the Louisville _Courier-Journal_, February, 1899, the story of the +first operations toward a combine is told, the language being inflated, +of course, that hesitant distilleries might be stampeded. “Absorbed +Kentucky Distilleries in a Mammoth Combine. Capital Stock $32,000,000. +Some of the Biggest Plants in the State Involved. Sixteen in Louisville. +Controls 90 per cent of the Product and Nearly All Standard Brands.” + +“Levy Mayer, of Chicago, has acted as counsel in the drawing up of the +papers. He becomes the general counsel of the new company.” + +This article contained a list of Kentucky distilleries, all of them +American—that is, non-Jewish. It was the well established brands, the +names of quality, that were sought. These names were all non-Jewish. + +“Levy Mayer, the general counsel of the new company, said tonight: ‘The +Kentucky Distilleries and Warehouse Company is a reality and will bring +prosperity to the state of Kentucky where depression has prevailed for +some years on account of the discord which has existed among the +distillers of Bourbon whisky, who for a generation prior enjoyed a great +prosperity.’” + +A most ingenuous statement. But Mr. Mayer is a most ingenuous man. +However, there is some truth in his statement: it was true that the +legitimate distillers had suffered from depression, not because the +American people were not consuming liquor, however, but because the +American people had been turned from pure whisky to “red eye”; and Mr. +Mayer’s smooth statement that this depression was “on account of the +discord which has existed among the distillers of Bourbon whisky” needs +revision to “the fight between the non-Jewish makers of real whisky and +the Jewish makers of compounded liquor.” + +In the story of the combine a great deal is heard of Mr. Mayer and +Alfred Austrian. Mayer is a Chicago Jew who is worth a story by himself. +He is one of those Jews with whom candidates for the American +presidency—mostly those candidates who are in debt—feel it necessary to +stay, when he invites them. Mr. Austrian is sufficiently well known by +his connection with the baseball scandal. He was attorney for Rothstein, +the gambler, whose name figured so prominently in that scandal, and who +is credited with doing things to the grand jury testimony in a way that +makes a pretty tale. Austrian also appeared for two St. Louis Jew +gamblers, implicated in the baseball scandal, who were afterward +indicted. Austrian is also credited with being the author of the +so-called “Lasker Plan” of baseball reorganization. The services of +Mayer and Austrian to the liquor interests of Chicago and Cook County, +were and are important. + +There were Jewish names previously appearing. About 1889 Nathan +Hoffheimer had tried to bring all the Kentucky whisky business under one +head, and later Morris Greenbaum tried it. It will probably be conceded +that both these men are Jews, and it is provable by the records that +they were endeavoring to consolidate the whisky business. But the big +stunt was really pulled off under the guidance of the two Chicago Jews, +Mayer and Austrian. + +“The various companies forming the Trust are: + +“_American Spirits Manufacturing Company, $35,000,000_; Kentucky +Distilling and Warehouse Association, $32,000,000; The Rye Whisky +Distillers Association, $30,000,000: the Standard Distilling Company, +$28,000,000; and the Spirits Distributing Company, $7,500,000. + +“_The forerunner of the gigantic combination of the whisky interests of +the country was the organization of the American Spirits Manufacturing +Company_ upon the ruins of the old whisky trust which was controlled and +directed by Joseph Greenhut.... + +“_Attorney Levi Mayer, of Chicago, who has been legal adviser of the +whisky people from the inception of the American Spirits Manufacturing +Association_, was called to New York Saturday last to confer over the +legal form of the charter and the closing of the negotiations.” + +The italicized portions indicate the connection, and it was a connection +maintained to the end, and may indeed be continued yet. + +Then, in the current accounts of this merger of the liquor business +under Jewish control, another name appears. On March 15, 1899: + +“Angelo Meyer, a big whisky buyer of New York, is in Louisville trying +to buy a big lot of whiskies.” It appears that Mr. Meyers put on a poor +mouth and told how hard it was to buy whisky in big lots. + +And then on March 17, two days later, this appeared: “Mr. Angelo Meyer, +the wealthy Philadelphia whisky man, has been appointed one of the +general managers of the business of the Kentucky Distilleries Company, +and is engaged in appointing men to take charge of the various +departments of the combine’s affairs.” + +The discrepancy in the above two paragraphs need not be charged to the +untruthfulness of the newspaper reporter. Reporters as a rule faithfully +report what they are told; but sometimes what they are told is not true. + +“Mr. Meyer has commonly been called the Napoleon of the whisky trade. He +is largely interested in the recently formed combine. + +“‘We intend to make plenty of whisky. No brand will be killed,’ said Mr. +Meyer.” + +Henceforth the names of Levy Mayer, Alfred Austrian and Angelo Meyer +appear most frequently in the reports. + +“Alfred Austrian, who is Levy Mayer’s legal representative, says that +all the distilleries now negotiated for will be absorbed in three weeks +more.” + +“In an interview today Mr. Angelo Meyer said, ‘I believe confidently +that in the next five years a business calling for 10,000,000 gallons of +whisky a year will be built up.’” + +In April, 1899, another Jewish movement appeared: “Joseph Wolf, the +Chicago whisky dealer, who is said to own more Kentucky whisky, +independent of the Kentucky Distilleries and Warehouse Company, than any +other individual or corporation, is behind the new whisky combine formed +in Chicago with a capital stock of $3,000,000. The purpose of the new +trust, which it is said will be given the title of the Illinois +Distilleries and Warehouse Company, is to fight the Kentucky +Distilleries and Warehouse Company.” + +The few remaining Kentucky distillers were wary; they regarded Wolf, +probably with reason, as simulating enmity to the other part of the +Jew-made whisky trust, in order to sweep into his net the remaining +independents. + +“Alfred Austrian and C. H. Stoll, attorneys for the Kentucky +Distilleries and Warehouse Company, will leave Louisville today for +Chicago to confer with Levy D. Mayer, chief counsel for the trust; and +in fact, counsel for three big whisky and spirits combines.” + +“Alfred Austrian, of Chicago, left last night for Cincinnati to close +the deal for the celebrated Sam Clay distillery of Bourbon County.” + +Under an exciting headline detailing the departure of the Jew lawyer +Austrian to Chicago to see the Jew lawyer Mayer, there is the story of a +still greater whisky combine: + +“The projected combination of all the whisky interests of the country +will probably be completed in Chicago today. A rye whisky trust is now +being formed, and will soon be ready for incorporation and presentation +to men with capital.... It is said that the capitalization of the rye +whisky trust will be $60,000,000, and the combined capitalization of the +five companies will amount to about $175,000,000.... Levy Mayer, of +Chicago, Alfred Austrian, of Chicago, and C. H. Stoll, of New York, are +the attorneys for the three trusts, Mr. Mayer being the chief counsel.” + +And still later, a statement by Levy Mayer: + +“The new rye distillery combination will be the largest individual +whisky amalgamation in the world. It is controlled and is being financed +by the same people and the same trust companies of New York and +Philadelphia now controlling and financing the Kentucky Distilleries and +Warehouse Company, whose capital is $32,000,000; the Standard Distilling +and Distributing Company, with a capital of $28,000,000; the American +Spirits Manufacturing Company, with a capital of $35,000,000; and the +Spirits Distributing Company, with a capitalization of $15,000,000. + +“Rumor has it,” and Mr. Mayer smiled as he patted a big bundle of legal +documents, “that after the rye consolidation has been perfected all the +separate companies will be merged into one central company, which will +have an aggregate capital close to $200,000,000. A whisky combination of +that size will certainly hold foremost place among the world’s liquor +trusts and organizations.” + +Another dispatch: “Alfred Austrian today returned to Louisville from New +York, where he assisted in forming the combine of the American Spirits +Manufacturing Company (and the three other companies). + +“Mr. Austrian leaves tonight for Chicago, where he expects to close the +deal with Elias Bloch & Sons to purchase the Darling distillery in +Carroll County, and with Freiberg and Workum to secure their two plants +in Boone County.” + +Here it is possible to see the Jewish agents of Jewish capital hurrying +to and fro with every assurance of success, working along well-defined +lines, known to themselves but concealed from the public, building up a +colossal structure which public opinion was to hurl down in two decades. +But two decades were enough for enormous revenues to be derived from the +criminal debasement of all kinds of liquor, which became more apparent +from the time of the giant consolidation. + +Whisky became so rotten that in Kentucky, the pioneer whisky state, +there were only four whole “wet” counties by 1908. The first decade of +absolute Jewish control put even the first whisky state in the “dry” +column. + +The Jewish compounders did not care how they marketed their goods, so +long as they could sell them in quantities. The cheap “barrel house” +appeared with its windows full of gleaming bottles and gaudy labels and +“cut rate” whisky prices. The compounders became saloon owners toward +the end of the saloon era, and many Jews went into the “barrel house” +business for a quick clean-up. The proportion of vicious dives increased +everywhere, and the moral guardians of society were amazed at “the wave +of vice” that was “sweeping over the country”; but they did not have the +key that explained it. The whisky business was riding to a wild finish, +but the men at the helm knew exactly what they were doing, every moment +of the time. To look back upon that period, with all the facts at hand, +makes it more and more apparent how fitting is the term, “boob Gentile.” + +Why, even Norman Hapgood knew how bad it was, and _Collier’s Weekly_, +under his editorship, was the first journal in the land to print the +names of Jews in connection with the liquor debauchery of the country. +But those were the good old days, when Hapgood could tell the truth even +about Hearst, the man for whom he now writes his graceless palaver of +pro-Jewish propaganda. + +In _Collier’s Weekly_, during the year 1908, solid truths appeared, +which are in point today as proofs of what was transpiring. There was a +specially scathing attack on what was called “nigger gin,” a peculiarly +vile beverage which was compounded to act upon the Negro in a most +vicious manner. Will Irwin spoke of this gin as “the king iniquity in +the degenerated liquor traffic of these United States.” This author and +_Collier’s_ started a new fashion in giving publicity not only to the +names of certain brands of liquors, but also the names of the men who +made them. It turned out that the maker of a brand of “nigger gin” which +had spurred certain Negroes on to the nameless crime, was one Lee Levy. +Mr. Irwin wrote: + +“Because the South is not through with Lee Levy, and because its +citizens may at least drive him out of business—if they cannot get him +behind the bars—one declaration of the _Commercial Appeal_ is worthy of +reply. That paper raises a question of fact—it charges that Levy’s gin, +Dreyfuss, Weil & Company’s gin, Bluthenthal & Blickert’s gin, the Old +Spring Distilling Company’s gin, do not exist; or that, if they exist, +their sales are insignificant. Let me present my own evidence on that +point.” + +Mr. Irwin then details some of his experiences. The gin which he was +discussing was provocative of peculiar lawlessness, its labels bore +lascivious suggestions and were decorated with highly indecent +portraiture of white women. “I bought, for evidence, many other brands, +some emanating from the big liquor cities and some put up by local +people; but I could always get Levy’s. I never saw it in any saloon +which bars the Negro. + +“In Galveston, which prides itself on its clean government, some brand +or other was for sale in nearly all the corner grocery ‘drums.’ + +“In a Negro street of New Orleans I saw five saloon shop windows in one +block which displayed either Lee Levy’s or Dreyfuss, Weil & Company’s. +This latter firm is more clever in its work than the others, much more +delicate and subtle in its labeling policy. It takes one who understands +the Negro and his slang to appreciate the enigma of their wording; it +all comes in a ‘caution label’ on the obverse of the bottles. + +“....Such gins were sold everywhere in Birmingham ... a bottle of the +stuff, half empty, had been taken from a Pickens County Negro just after +his arrest for the nameless crime. + +“Levy—so the gossip of the liquor trade has it—grew rich through this +department of his business. Dreyfuss, Weil & Company advertise +everywhere that theirs is ‘the most widely sold brand in the South.’ And +more and more one hears of tragedies that lie at the end of this +course.” + +That is a sample—an expurgated sample—of what went on in every part of +the country. Newspaper reporters will remember how the police used to +wonder about the change that came over certain foreign communities. +“They come here nice people,” the experienced police captain would say, +“but in a short time they are giving us all sorts of trouble. They don’t +do that in their own country.” + +“It’s the drink,” somebody would suggest. + +“No, they drink in their own country, they drink all the time there. +It’s the _kind_ of drink they get here that does it—the ‘rot-gut,’ that +drives them wild.” That was the captain’s diagnosis, made a thousand +times, but no one was the wiser. No one saw the key, which was the Jew. + +In the South a terrible lynching period came and divided the country +into pro-lynching and pro-Negro parties, but still no one saw the reason +for it all. The race question rose to threatening proportions, the +Americans of North and South looked at each other askance, there was a +cooling of sympathy between the regions. Northerners were inclined to +look at Southerners as unjust and inhuman in their treatment of the +Negro, and Southerners were inclined to look upon Northerners as +temperamentally unsympathetic and stupidly ignorant of what the +conditions were. + +Behind it all were the products of men like Lee Levy and Dreyfuss, Weil +& Company, to use only the names quoted from _Collier’s_. + +The ancient Jewish policy of Divide-Conquer-Destroy was in operation. +Jewish policy favors disunion as a preparation to the kind of union +which Jewish leaders want. Jewish influence was strong for disunion in +the Civil War. Jewish influence is directly behind the present attitude +of the Negro toward the white man—look at the so-called “Negro welfare +societies” with their hordes of Jewish officials and patrons! Jewish +influence in the South is today active in keeping up the memory of the +old divisions. And, with reference to the Negro question, “nigger gin,” +the product of Jewish poisoned liquor factories, was its most +provocative element. + +Trace the appearance of this gin as to date, and you find the period +when Negro outbursts and lynching became serious. Trace the localities +where this gin was most widely sold and you will find the places where +these disorders prevailed. + +It is extremely simple, so simple that it has been overlooked. The +public is being constantly deceived by an appearance of complexity, +where there is none. When you find the fever-bearing mosquito, yellow +fever is no longer a mystery. + +The same policy of “Divide-Conquer-Destroy” tells the story of the +liquor traffic. Jewish influence divided between distilling and +compounding, drove out distilling, and in the end destroyed the traffic +as a legalized entity. + +It needs to be said, however, that the destruction is not part of the +Jewish intention. “Divide and Conquer” the formula as the Jewish leaders +conceive it, as, indeed, it is stated in the Protocols. The “destroy” +comes as Nemesis upon Jewish achievements. Russia was divided and +conquered, but just as the Jews had conquered it, the canker worm of +fate began to consume their conquest. The story is repeated wherever +Jewish intrigue has succeeded. Whatever the Jews can succeed in making +Jewish, falls! + +It may be fate. It may be Destiny’s way to the survival of the fittest. +That which succumbs to complete Judaization, as Jewish leaders conceive +it, may deserve to fall. The justification of its destruction may appear +in the possibility of its Judaization. Anything that _can_ be Judaized +is to that extent sentenced to oblivion. + +The story of Jewish control of liquor has now been carried through two +stages, the “Divide and Conquer” stages. The third stage follows with +swift and relentless steps. Blind though the country was to the Jewish +character of the liquor business, it was not blind to the ravages of +that business upon society. + +There came a sentiment that moved ceaselessly through the country, and +mounted to stormy power; people could only speak of it as a “wave.” The +term became hackneyed by overuse, but it was accurately descriptive. The +indignation of the people, the arousal of their just moral resentment +was as a flood which rose to cleanse the land. The attack was on liquor, +and the attack was just. The attack was on liquor and it came none too +soon. The country was drenched in vile concoctions which rapidly +undermined large sections of the population. Crime increased and +domestic misery was everywhere. The people attacked the only thing they +could see—they attacked the stuff and the places that distributed it. +They did not see the $200,000,000 Jewish whisky combination, they did +not see the sinister devices by which strong drink was made vile and +viler with the growth of Jewish control. + +The people rose and swept away the saloon. They did not sweep away the +stocks of liquor. They did not sweep away Jewish interest in liquor. +They left the source untouched. And that source is still existent. + +There remains another chapter of the narrative: the coming of +Prohibition and of the illicit traffic in liquor. It remains to be seen +whether the same thread carries through the latter phases. + + +—— + +Issue of December 24, 1921. + + + + + LXIV. + The Jewish Element in Bootlegging Evil + + +A student of the liquor history of the United States is left wondering, +not that Prohibition came, but that the authorities ever allowed matters +to go so far as to compel the people to take the issue into their own +hands. That is the point where those who believe in “personal liberty” +and those who believe in “public safety” ought to meet each other. It +cannot be contended that every believer in Prohibition is a crank, nor +can it be contended that every believer in “personal liberty” is a +drunkard or a liquor guzzler; each of them stands for a principle that +is a principle of right. But the Prohibitionist has been able to command +victory over the “personal liberty” advocate because the stuff that the +Prohibitionist is against ought not to be sold nor used under any +circumstances, whereas the stuff the “personal liberty” advocate thinks +he favors is not the stuff he thinks it is at all. + +If the element in question were poisoned tooth paste, or opium, or any +other concededly dangerous substance, both the Prohibitionist and the +“personal liberty” advocate would agree. What the honest “personal +liberty” advocate needs to learn is that the liquor which caused the +adoption of Prohibition was most dangerous to the individual and +society. The question was not one of “liberty” but of safety. + +It is scarcely to be hoped that all the “personal liberty” groups will +come to agree with this, because most of them are formed of the very men +who made and profited by the drugged and chemicalized substances which +were sold over the bar and in bottles. + +Liquor men themselves must agree with the facts. Even Bonfort’s Wine and +Spirits Circular admitted years ago that “the bulk of spirits sold today +in glass under well-known brands is not what it is represented to be.” +“The truth of the matter is (we dislike to say it) the wine and spirit +trade of this country is honeycombed with fraud, and the most radical +measure should be applied and applied vigorously.” “Many a dealer +prominent socially, morally, religiously and in philanthropic circles +will take a lot of neutral spirits, only a few days old, flavor them +with a little heavy-bodied whisky, and brand them on the label or glass +with the name of any state or county desired, and with any age, and this +he will do with all smiles and glee and inward delight that is said to +characterize the bold buccaneer when he cuts a throat and scuttles a +ship.” + +These excerpts show how near the official publications of the liquor +trade could come to describing the practice and indicating the Jew. The +last quotation was a direct hit at Louisville liquor Jews, one of which +compounders furnished a room at the Y. M. C. A. of that city, another of +whom adorned the town with public gifts, all of whom are Kentucky +“Colonels”; though their ancestry is not exactly Kentuckian, nor even +American. + +The wine companies of Ohio, whose vineyards on Kelleys Island and +elsewhere had built up a standard business, joined in the protest. They +pointed out that counterfeit wines were flowing out of factories in +Cleveland and Cincinnati, while the legitimate wine districts of +Sandusky and Put-in-Bay were being saddled with the stigma of poisoned +goods. As all the counterfeit business was in the hands of Jews, the +statement is unavoidable that the whole movement of the degradation of +liquor was Jewish. + +Then came Prohibition. The Constitution of the United States was +amended, the amendment being ratified by 45 states. The issue had been +actively before the nation longer than any other issue except the +slavery question, so that the people’s action on it must be regarded as +deliberate. And the liquor business was legally ended. BUT— + +What was the Jewish attitude toward Prohibition while it was being +argued before the nation? What has been the Jewish attitude toward +Prohibition since it has been adopted? + +Both questions can be answered the same way. There are, of course, +Kentuckians and others who have convinced themselves that the Jewish +compounders foresaw Prohibition and welcomed it, because they saw that +it would increase their profits 1,000 per cent. But whatever the truth +of that may be, there are no available records to support it. The Jews +destroyed the business—that is true; but whether intentionally, for +greater illegitimate profits, we cannot say. There are, however, records +of Jewish activity during the reform agitation. The Jews were against +Prohibition. Their press and pulpit were against it. Their whole +influence in politics and finance were against it. They were the +backbone of the entire “wet” propaganda, and are today. The great +temperance organizations will tell you that Jews did not contribute to +their work. One national Prohibition organization admits a gift of $5 in +many years. Will Irwin, investigating the early Prohibition movement in +the South for _Collier’s_ in 1909, found that _The Modern Voice_, a +Jewish religious weekly which is still published, was engaged in +carrying the “wet” propaganda into the southern states. _The Modern +Voice_ lost more votes than it made for its lack of taste in printing a +halftone picture of Christ endorsing the liquor traffic. J. K. Baer, one +of the editors of this Jewish paper, explained his activity in this +direction by saying, “We are a Jewish weekly, and the Jews are opposed +on moral grounds to prohibition.” A Mr. Rosenthal was associated in the +work. This was typical of the Jewish press everywhere. The Jewish stage +was enlisted, every man and every girl, just as it is now, to deride +those who protested against the destruction of the American people by +counterfeit whisky and wine. Jazz music, the movies, fake medical +“experts”—every agency under Jewish control was mobilized to assist the +fight for a continuance of the privilege of drugging the people’s drink. + +This will scarcely be denied, at least by Jews. Some “Gentile fronts” +may feel obliged to rush to the defense of the Jews by denying it, but +their work is unnecessary. Jews themselves make no bones about it. They +did not favor Prohibition, but they did not fear it; they knew that they +would be exempt, they knew that it would bring certain illegitimate +commercial advantages; they would be winners either way. Jewish luck! + +It is not surprising, therefore, that violation and evasion of the +Prohibition law has had a deep Jewish complexion from the very +beginning. THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT would be glad to be excused from +making the raw statement that bootlegging is a 95 per cent controlled +Jewish industry in which a certain class of rabbis have been active; we, +therefore, avail ourselves of the report of an address of Rabbi Leo M. +Franklin, of Detroit, president of the Central Conference of American +Rabbis, as given before that body at Washington in April, 1921, +confirming the general fact: + +“In making the recommendation I gave you in my message in regard to this +matter, and in going to the extreme in suggesting that we appeal to the +government to rescind that part of the Prohibition law which gives +rabbis permission to issue permits for the purchase and distribution of +wine for ritual purposes, I did so after very mature consideration. I am +sure that after (his successor) shall have been in the chair of the +conference for any length of time, he will come to exactly the same +conclusions as I did. + +“You gentlemen, members of the conference, who have dealt with this +situation as a local question have had, here and there, some small +question to solve; but when you become president of the conference and +have letters from every part of the country, almost day by day, asking +you as president of the conference to give the necessary authority to +all sorts of men in all sorts of conditions, to purchase and distribute +wine for ritual purposes, then you will take a different angle on this +whole situation. + +“I pointed out to one of my colleagues, next to whom I was just now +sitting, that within the past month I have received requests from three +different men calling themselves rabbis in their communities, for +authorization to purchase and distribute wine. I know that I am not +exaggerating when I say that during this last year I received requests +from not less than 150 men in all parts of the country for permits to +distribute wine.... I had the applicants investigated, and I may say to +you that in nine cases out of ten we found those who were attempting to +use this conference, through its executive officers, for the obtaining +of this authority, were men who had not the slightest right to stand +before their communities as rabbis. + +“What were they for the most part? They were men without the slightest +pretense at rabbinical training or position who, for the purpose of +getting into the wholesale liquor business, if you will, organized +congregations. Nothing on God’s earth could prevent them from doing so. +They simply gathered around them little companies of men; they called +them congregations; and then, under the law as it now exists, they were +privileged to purchase and distribute wine to these people. And I call +your attention to the fact that many of the so-called members of these +congregations were not members of one congregation only! (Laughter.) +This is not a laughing matter. They were not only members of one +congregation, but members of two, three, four and upward. Why, you don’t +know what good Jews many have become since this law has gone into +effect! + +“What is more, gentlemen, perhaps some of you don’t realize what +popularity has come to the—sermon, and how many Jews have suddenly come +to realize the beauty and the duty of the Kiddush on Friday night. I +tell you it is a mighty serious problem, and say what you will, our +conference, under present conditions, is being used as a medium by +unscrupulous men, by the dozens and by the hundreds, to carry on a +bootlegging business in the name of religion.... + +“Now you say there have been just small scandals here and there. A wine +company in New York was raided last week and a quarter of a million +dollars’ worth of wine was taken away by the authorities, supposed to be +for ritual purposes. Don’t forget that rabbi after rabbi last week in +New York, a few of whom I happen to know, and in Rochester, Buffalo, +Flint, Michigan, and Port Huron, Michigan—in any number of small towns +throughout the country, if you have read your papers carefully, you will +find that Rabbi So-and-So has been arrested as a bootlegger.” + +The discussion of this subject by the other rabbis present was very +interesting. There was a request that “personal experiences be +debarred,” but some crept in. Rabbi Cohen, for example, was quite +explicit. “Being one of those who opposed the whole Prohibition law, I +am not in sympathy with the whole Prohibition law.... It seems to me +that we rabbis ought not to stand in the way of our own members in their +legitimate ways of getting wine for their homes.... If a member wants +the wine, I would like to be in a position that he may have the wine, +even though he may not absolutely have to have it.” + +Rabbi Cohen pronounced the typical Jewish view. If the fool Gentiles +want to prohibit themselves from having liquor, let them do it, but if +there is a loophole for the Jews such as the rabbinical permit offers, +it should be used generously for any “member,” “even though he may not +absolutely have to have it.” + +The pre-Prohibition Jewish liquor business is also the post-Prohibition +Jewish liquor business. That fact is established by mountainous +evidence. This does not mean, of course, that every bootlegger you meet +is a Jew, nor that you will ever meet a Jew serving as an itinerant +bootlegger. Unless you live in Chicago, New York or other large cities, +an actual meeting with the Jew in this minor capacity will not be +frequent. The Jew is the possessor of the wholesale stocks; he is the +director of the underground railways that convey the stuff +surreptitiously to the public; seldom does he risk his own safety in +being the last man to hand the goods to the consumer and to take the +money. + +But notwithstanding all this carefulness, the bulk of the arrests made +in the United States have been among Jews. The bulk of the liquor +permits—a guess of 95 per cent would not be too high—are in the hands of +Jews. More and more the Jews are being appointed as Prohibition +enforcement officers at the central points of distribution. It is a +fact, as Rabbi Franklin showed, that part of the trouble arises over the +abuse of what has been called “rabbinical wine,” but big as it seems by +itself, it is really a small part in comparison with the whole. Numbers +of lesser rabbis have profited from the sale of liquor, no doubt of +that. And not only among their own people, but from any people making +the demand. “If you sign a Jewish name you can get it,” is the +watchword. Newspaper offices have been kept “wet” in some cases by +“rabbinical wine,” which accounts for the dribble of “wet” propaganda in +the so-called humorous and other columns of the evening journals. + +It happens that “rabbinical wine” is a euphemism for whisky, gin, +Scotch, champagne, vermuth, absinthe, or any other kind of hard liquor. +The stocks that existed when Prohibition went into force have not only +_not_ decreased, but have actually increased, because of the increase in +the “doctoring” of the stuff. It has been cheapened, its bulk has been +increased and it has been made, if anything, more deadly than before. +“As fatal as bootleg whisky” is a saying founded on thousands of deaths. + +The wholesale stocks of compounded liquor remained in the hands of the +men who owned them, while the retail stocks in stores and saloons had to +be disposed of. That was one of the first big mistakes—that the little +fellow was compelled to get rid of his stock, while the big fellow was +permitted to keep his. The so-called rabbis, who had advance information +of the special privileges which the Jews were to enjoy under the +Prohibition law, were very active in buying up the smaller stocks and +storing them away. Of course, no one could prevent them. Was it not +“ritual wine”?—even though it was any kind of liquor, it went under the +“cover name” of “ritual wine,” and of course, as everybody knows, great +scandal resulted. Protests like that of Rabbi Franklin indicate that a +part of Jewish public opinion resents the policy of exempting Jews from +the Prohibition law, but this is minority opinion. What the Central +Conference of American Rabbis may think is of little consequence to the +mass of Jews in America. The people to scrutinize with regard to this +are not the Rabbi Franklins, who are amenable to the significance of +American opinion, but those Jews who do not consult with Americanized +rabbis, but run the political end of Jewry as they choose. + +There is no reason why the Jews should be exempt from the operation of +the Constitution of the United States at all, yet the Constitution is +suspended in their favor when the Ten-Gallon Permit is given. + +But it would be a great mistake to suppose that there is or could be any +objection to the Jews’ ritualistic use of wine, or that the present +scandal with regard to law violation rises from that. It is not a +religious question at all. It is purely a commercial question. The +people who are breaking the Prohibition law are the same people who +broke the Pure Food law with regard to the ingredients of whisky. They +are essentially a lawbreaking class. + +The “Gentile boobs” who patronize bootleggers today are being sold a +liquor which is never what it is represented to be, in spite of names +blown in the bottles, in spite of seals and in spite of labels. The most +conscienceless fraud is being perpetrated on gullible people at an +increase in profit of from 400 to 1,000 per cent. The stuff brought from +Havana is Jew whisky shipped there, “doctored” still more and shipped +back at increased prices—the “Gentile boobs” fancying they are getting +something extra special “just brought in from Havana.” + +Twenty years ago Jewish liquor dealers of Chicago were using genuine +James E. Pepper bottles refilled with vile ingredients compounded in +back rooms. Twenty years ago there were counterfeit whiskies sold in the +United States bearing forged Canadian Government stamps. The forgers of +the labels were Jewish liquor houses. Twenty years ago there was +unlimited faking of liquor labels, a Chicago printing house furnishing +Jewish liquor houses with clever imitations of any reputable label in +use, to be placed on bottles containing doped goods. Foreign, American +and Canadian labels were unscrupulously adopted and brazenly advertised +everywhere. + +These abuses did not wait for Prohibition; they were daily Jewish +practices twenty years ago. + +The only difference now is that the stuff which is sold is still worse. + +The enforcement of the Prohibition law ought to be rigidly complete, for +the same reason that the enforcement of the Pure Food law should have +been complete years ago—it is necessary to prevent the wholesale harming +of an ignorant public. + +The maintenance of _the idea of drink_ in the minds of the people is due +to Jewish propaganda. There is not a dialog on the stage today that does +not drip with whisky patter. As all the plays making much noise this +year are not only Jew-written, Jew-produced and Jew-controlled, but also +Jew-played (the stage swarms with Jewish countenances this year), the +drip of whisky patter is constant. If theatergoers were at all observant +they would see that most of their money goes to support pro-Jewish +propaganda in one form or another, which is, of course, a tribute to +Jewish business genius—what other people could embark on a pro-racial +propaganda and make the opposite race pay for it? + +This _idea of drink_ will be maintained by means of the Jewish stage, +Jewish jazz and the Jewish comics until somebody comes down hard upon it +as being incentive of treason to the Constitution. When a Jewish +comedian can indulge in a 15-minute monologue “panning” the United +States, defaming Liberty, heaping contempt upon the Pilgrims, and openly +praising a violation of a portion of the Constitution of the United +States—and when choruses sing this sort of thing, and slap-stick artists +take it up, and it becomes evident that the country is being ringed +around every week by repeated attacks upon what the people have +established—it is certain not to be very long before a heavy hand will +be laid on the whole business. + +The Department of Justice should pay some attention to the treason +nightly spouted on the legitimate stage before Americans who pay as high +as $5 each in support of the propaganda. + +First and last, the illicit liquor business in all its phases, both +before and after Prohibition, has always been Jewish. Before Prohibition +it was morally illicit, after Prohibition it became both morally and +legally illicit. + +And it is not a cause for shame among the majority of the Jews, sad to +say; it is rather a cause for boast. The Yiddish newspapers are fruitful +of jocular references to the fact, and they even carry large wine +company advertisements week after week. + +As before Prohibition the key to the steady degeneration of the liquor +business was the fact of Jewish domination, so now the key to the +organized and lawless rebellion against a recently enacted article of +the Constitution is also Jewish. Prohibition enforcement officers will +find a short-cut to successful enforcement along this line. And if +law-abiding Jews would help with what they know, the work could be soon +accomplished. + + +—— + +Issue of December 31, 1921. + + + + + LXV. + Angles of Jewish Influence in American Life + + +The Jewish Question exists wherever Jews appear, says Theodor Herzl, +because they bring it with them. It is not their numbers that create the +Question, for there is in almost every country a larger number of other +aliens than of Jews. It is not their much-boasted ability, for it is now +coming to be understood that, give the Jew an equal start and hold him +to the rules of the game, and he is not smarter than anyone else; +indeed, in one great class of Jews the zeal is quenched when opportunity +for intrigue is removed. + +The Jewish Question is not in the number of Jews who here reside, not in +the American’s jealousy of the Jew’s success, certainly not in any +objection to the Jew’s entirely unobjectionable Mosaic religion; it is +in something else, and that something else is the fact of Jewish +influence on the life of the country where Jews dwell; in the United +States it is _the Jewish influence on American life_. + +That the Jews exert an influence, they themselves loudly proclaim. One +is permitted to think that they really claim a stronger influence than +they possess, especially in those higher regions where excellent and +determinative influences have been at work. The Jews claim, indeed, that +the fundamentals of the United States are Jewish and not Christian, and +that the entire history of this country should be rewritten to make +proper acknowledgment of the prior glory due to Judah. If the question +of influence rested entirely on the Jewish claim, there would be no +occasion for doubt; they claim it all. But it is kindness to hold them +to the facts; it is also more clearly explanatory of conditions in our +country. If they insist that they “gave us our Bible” and “gave us our +God” and “gave us our religion,” as they do over and over again with +nauseating superciliousness throughout all their polemic +publications—_not a single one of these claims being true_—they must not +grow impatient and profane while we complete the list of the real +influences they have set at work in American life. + +It is not the Jewish people but _the Jewish idea_, and the people only +as vehicles of the idea, that is the point at issue. As it was +Prussianism and not the German people that was the objective in the +recent war, so in this investigation of the Jewish Question, it is +Jewish influence and the Jewish Idea that are being discovered and +defined. + +The Jews are propagandists. This was originally their mission. But they +were to propagate the central tenet of their religion. This they failed +to do. By failing in this they, according to their own Scriptures, +failed everywhere. They are now without a mission of blessing. Few of +their leaders even claim a spiritual mission. But the mission idea is +still with them in a degenerate form; it represents the grossest +materialism of the day; it has become a means of sordid acquisition +instead of a channel of service. + +The essence of the Jewish Idea _in its influence on the labor world_ is +the same as in all other departments—the destruction of real values in +favor of fictitious values. The Jewish philosophy of money is not to +“make money,” but to “get money.” The distinction between these two is +fundamental. That explains Jews being “financiers” instead of “captains +of industry.” It is the difference between “getting” and “making.” + +The creative, constructive type of mind has an affection for the thing +it is doing. The non-Jewish worker formerly chose the work he liked +best. He did not change employment easily, because there was a bond +between him and the kind of work he had chosen. Nothing else was so +attractive to him. He would rather draw a little less money and do what +he liked to do, than a little more and do what irked him. The “maker” is +always thus influenced by his liking. + +Not so the “getter.” It doesn’t matter what he does, so long as the +income is satisfactory. He has no illusions, sentiments or affections on +the side of work. It is the “geld” that counts. He has no attachment for +the things he makes, for he doesn’t make any; he deals in the things +which other men make and regards them solely on the side of their +money-drawing value. “The joy of creative labor” is nothing to him, not +even an intelligible saying. + +Now, previous to the advent of Jewish socialistic and subversive ideas, +the predominant thought in the labor world was to “make” things and thus +“make” money. There was a pride among mechanics. Men who made things +were a sturdy, honest race because they dealt with ideas of skill and +quality, and their very characters were formed by the satisfaction of +having performed useful functions in society. They were the Makers. And +society was solid as long as they were solid. Men made shoes as +exhibitions of their skill. Farmers raised crops for the inherent love +of crops, not with reference to far-off money-markets. Everywhere The +Job was the main thing and the rest was incidental. + +The only way to break down this strong safeguard of society—a laboring +class of sturdy character—was to sow other ideas among it; and the most +dangerous of all the ideas sown was that which substituted “get” for +“make.” With the required manipulation of the money and food markets, +enough pressure could be brought to bear on the ultimate consumers to +give point to the idea of “get,” and it was not long before the internal +relations of American business were totally upset, with Jews at the head +of the banking system, and Jews at the head of both the conservative and +radical elements of the Labor Movement, AND, most potent of all, the +Jewish Idea sowed through the minds of workingmen. What Idea? The old +idea of “get” instead of “make.” + +The idea of “get” is a vicious, anti-social and destructive idea _when +held alone;_ but when held in company with “make” and as second in +importance, it is legitimate and constructive. As soon as a man or a +class is inoculated with the strictly Jewish Idea of “getting”—(“getting +mine;” “getting while the getting is good;” “honestly if you can, +dishonestly if you must—but _get_ it”—all of which are notes of this +treasonable philosophy), the very cement of society loses its +adhesiveness and begins to crumble. The great myth and fiction of Money +has been forced into the place of real things, and the second step of +the drama can thus be opened up. + +Jewish influence on the thought of the workingmen of the United States, +as well as on the thought of business and professional men, has been +bad, thoroughly bad. This is not manifested in a division between +“capital” and “labor,” for there are no such separate elements; there is +only the executive and operating departments of American business. The +real division is between the Jewish idea of “get” and the Anglo-Saxon +idea of “make,” and at the present time the Jewish idea has been +successful enough to have caused an upset. + +All over the United States, in many branches of trade, Communist +colleges are maintained, officered and taught by Jews. These so-called +colleges exist in Chicago, Detroit, Cleveland, Rochester, Pittsburgh, +New York, Philadelphia and other cities, the whole intent being to put +all American labor on a “get” basis, which must prove the economic +damnation of the country. And that, apparently, is the end sought, as in +Russia. + +Until Jews can show that the infiltration of foreign Jews and the Jewish +Idea into the American labor movement has made for the betterment in +character and estate, in citizenship and economic statesmanship, of the +American workingman, the charge of being an alien, destructive and +treasonable influence will have to stand. + +The last place the uninstructed observer would look for traces of Jewish +influence is in the Christian church, yet if he fail to look there he +will miss much. If the libraries of our theological seminaries were +equipped with complete files of Jewish literary effort in the United +States during the past 15 years, and if theological students were +required to read these Jewish utterances, there would be less silly talk +and fewer “easy marks” for Jewish propaganda in the American pulpit. For +the next 25 years every theological seminary should support a chair for +the study of Modern Jewish Influence and the Protocols. The fiction, +that the Jews are an Old Testament people faithful to the Mosaic Law, +would then be exploded, and timid Christians would no longer +superstitiously hesitate to speak the truth about them because of that +sadly misinterpreted text: “I will bless them that bless thee, and curse +him that curseth thee.” + +There is a mission for the pulpit to liberate the Church from what the +New Testament Scriptures call “the fear of the Jews.” + +The pulpit has also the mission of liberating the Church from the error +that Judah and Israel are synonymous. The reading of the Scriptures +which confuse the tribe of Judah with Israel, and which interpret every +mention of Israel as signifying the Jews, is at the root of more than +one-half the confusion and division traceable in Christian doctrinal +statements. + +The Jews are _not_ “The Chosen People,” though practically the entire +Church has succumbed to the propaganda which declares them to be so. + +The Jewish tinge of thought has of late years overspread many Christian +statements, and the uninstructed clergy have proved more and more +amenable to Jewish suggestion. + +The flaccid condition of the Church, so much deplored by spokesmen who +had regard for her inner life, was brought about not by “science,” not +by “scholarship,” not by the “increase of light and learning”—for none +of these things are antagonistic even to incomplete statements of +truth—but by _Jewish-German higher criticism_. + +The defenders of the faith have fought long and valiantly against the +inroads made by the so-called Higher Criticism, but were sadly +incapacitated in their defense, because they did not see that its origin +and purpose were Jewish. It was not Christian; it was not German; it was +Jewish. It is almost wholly discounted today in the practical life of +the church, but it still adheres to the darker corners of the colleges, +along with the Red Bolshevism which is taking root there under Jewish +influences. + +Let the Christian minister who wishes to know the source of Jewish +influence in the church look over the names of the more notorious +“German” Higher Critics of the Bible, and consider their race. Add to +them one Frenchman, an atheist and a Jew, and you have modern “liberal” +sources very complete: + + Wellhausen + Strauss + Ewald + Kuehne + Hitzig + Renan + +It is perfectly in keeping with the Jewish World Program that this +destructive influence should be sent out under Jewish auspices, and it +is perfectly in keeping with non-Jewish trustfulness to accept the thing +without looking at its source. A great many so-called “liberals” played +the Jewish game for a time; they are now coming back to the old citadel +which stood in its own strength and without their patronage while the +fever of the Higher Criticism raged. + +The church is now victim of a second attack against her, in the rampant +Socialism and Sovietism that have been thrust upon her in the name of +flabby and unmoral theories of “brotherhood” and in an appeal to her +“fairness.” The church has been made to believe that she is a forum for +discussion and not a high place for annunciation. She has been turned +from a Voice into an echo of jangling cries. Jews have actually invaded, +in person and in program, hundreds of American churches, with their +subversive and impossible social ideals, and at last became so cocksure +of their domination of the situation that they were met with the +inevitable check. + +Clergymen ought to know that seven-eighths of the economic mush they +speak from the pulpit is prepared by Jewish professors of political +economy and revolutionary leaders. They should be informed that economic +thought has been so completely Judaized by means of a deliberate and +masterly plan of camouflaged propaganda, that the mass-thought of the +crowd (which is the thought mostly echoed in “popular” pulpits and +editorials) is more Jewish than Jewry itself holds. + +The Jew has got hold of the church in doctrine, in liberalism, +so-called, and in the feverish and feeble sociological diversions of +many pulpits and adult classes. + +If there is any place where a straight study of the Jewish Question +should be made, with the Bible always in hand as the authoritative +textbook, it is in the modern church which is unconsciously giving +allegiance to a mass of Jewish propaganda. + +It is not reaction that is counseled here; it is progress along +constructive paths, the paths of our forefathers, the Anglo-Saxons, who +have to this day been the World-Builders, the Makers of cities and +commerce and continents; and not the Jews who have never been builders +or pioneers, who have never peopled the wilderness, but who move in upon +the labors of other men. They are not to be blamed for not being +Builders and Pioneers, perhaps; they are to be blamed for claiming all +the rights of pioneers; but even then, perhaps, their blame ought not to +be so great as the blame that rests upon the sons of the Anglo-Saxons +for rejecting the straightforward Building of their fathers, and taking +up with the doubtful ideas of Judah. + +Colleges are being constantly invaded by the Jewish Idea. The sons of +the Anglo-Saxon are being attacked in their very heredity. The sons of +the Builders, the Makers, are being subverted to the philosophy of the +destroyers. Young men in the first exhilarating months of intellectual +freedom are being seized with promissory doctrines, the source and +consequences of which they do not see. There is a natural rebelliousness +of youth, which promises progress; there is a natural venturesomeness to +play free with ancient faiths; both of which are ebullitions of the +spirit and significant of dawning mental virility. It is during the +periods when these adolescent expansions are in process that the youth +is captured by influences which deliberately lie in wait for him in the +colleges. True, in after years a large proportion come to their senses +sufficiently to be able “to sit on the fence and see themselves go by,” +and they come back to sanity. They find that “free love” doctrines make +exhilarating club topics, but that the Family—the old-fashioned loyalty +of one man and one woman to each other and their children—is the basis, +not only of society, but of all personal character and progress. They +find that Revolution, while a delightful subject for fiery debates and +an excellent stimulant to the feeling of supermanlikeness, is +nevertheless not the process of progress. + + And, too, they come at length to see that the Stars and Stripes and +the Free Republic are better far than the Red Star and Soviet +sordidness. + + When a Supreme Court Justice addressed one of the greater American +universities, a student came to him after a lecture and said: “It gave +me so much pleasure to hear your lectures, for they were _the first +kindly words I have heard said about our government since the +commencement of my university career_.” + +For years the secular magazines have been carrying articles on the +question, “_What Is Wrong With the Colleges?_” The answer is perfectly +clear to those who can discern Jewish influence in American life. + +The trouble with the colleges has progressed along precisely the same +lines that have been described above in connection with the churches. +First, Jewish higher criticism in the destruction of young men’s sense +of respect for the ancient foundations; second, Jewish revolutionary +social doctrines. The two always go together. They cannot live apart. +They are the fulfillment of the Protocol’s program to split non-Jewish +society by means of ideas. + +It is idle to attack the “unbelief” of college students, idle to attack +their “radicalism”—these are always the qualities of immaturity. But it +is not idle to show that social radicalism (“radicalism” being a very +good word very sadly misused) and antagonism to the religious sanctions +of the moral law, both come from the same source. Over the fountain of +Revolutionism and Anti-Christian belief place the descriptive and +definitive term “Jewish,” and let the sons of the Anglo-Saxons learn +from what waters they are drinking. That source is not Mosaic, but +Jewish—there is a world of difference between them. + +The central groups of Red philosophers in every university is a Jewish +group, with often enough a “Gentile front” in the shape of a deluded +professor. _Some of these professors are in the pay of outside Red +organizations._ There are Intercollegiate Socialist Societies, swarming +with Jews and Jewish influences, and toting Jewish professors around the +country, addressing medics and lits and even the Divinity schools, under +the patronage of the best civic and university auspices. Student lecture +courses are fine pasture for this propaganda. Intercollegiate Liberal +Leagues are established everywhere, the purpose evidently being to give +students the thrill of believing that they are taking part in the +beginning of a great new movement, comparable to the winning of +Independence or the Abolition of slavery. As stein parties gradually +cease as a college diversion, Red conferences will come in; it is part +of the effervescence of youth. + +The revolutionary forces which head up in Jewry rely very heavily on the +respectability which is given their movement by the adhesion of students +and a few professors. It was so in Russia—everyone knows what the name +“student” eventually came to signify in that country. And as a result, +while Sovietists are glorifying the “success” of the Revolution, men +like Maxim Gorky are sending out appeals for food to prevent the +intelligentsia from starving to death. + +The Jewish Chautauqua, which works almost exclusively in colleges and +universities, together with Bolshevism in art, science, religion, +economics and sociology, are driving straight through the Anglo-Saxon +traditions and landmarks of our race of students. And these are ably +assisted by professors and clergymen whose thinking has been dislocated +and poisoned by Jewish subversive influences in theology and sociology. +’ + +What to do about it? Simply identify the source and nature of the +influence which has overrun our colleges. Let the students know that +their choice is between the Anglo-Saxons and the Tribe of Judah. Let the +students decide, in making up their allegiance, whether they will follow +the Builders or those who seek to tear down. + +It is not a case for argument. Radicalism and religious indifferentism +are states of mind. Normal men usually grow out of them in good time. +Others are caught and held to the end. But the treatment is not +argument. + +The only absolute antidote to the Jewish influence is to call college +students back to a pride of race. We often speak of the Fathers as if +they were the few who happened to affix their signatures to a great +document which marked a new era of liberty; The Fathers were the men of +the Anglo-Saxon-Celtic race. The men who came across Europe with +civilization in their blood and in their destiny; the men who crossed +the Atlantic and set up civilization on a bleak and rock-bound coast; +the men who drove west to California and north to Alaska; the men who +peopled Australia and seized the gates of the world at Suez, Gibraltar +and Panama; the men who opened the tropics and subdued the +arctics—Anglo-Saxon men, who have given form to every government and a +livelihood to every people and an ideal to every century. They got +neither their God nor their religion from Judah, nor yet their speech +nor their creative genius—they are the Ruling People, Chosen throughout +the centuries to Master the world, by Building it ever better and better +and not by breaking it down. + +Into the camp of this race, among the sons of the rulers, comes a people +that has no civilization to point to, no aspiring religion, no universal +speech, no great achievement in any realm but the realm of “get,” cast +out of every land that gave them hospitality, and these people endeavor +to tell the sons of the Saxons what is needed to make the world what it +ought to be. + +If our sons in college follow this counsel of dark rebellion and +destruction, it is because they do not know whose sons they are, of what +race they are the scions. + +Let there be free speech to the limit in our universities and free +intercourse of ideas, but let Jewish thought be labeled Jewish, and let +our sons know the racial secret. + +The warning has already gone out through the colleges. The system of +procedure is already fully known. And how simple it is: + +First, you secularize the public schools—“secularize” is the precise +word the Jews use for the process. You prepare the mind of the public +school child by enforcing the rule that no mention shall ever be made to +indicate that culture or patriotism is in any way connected with the +deeper principles of the Anglo-Saxon religion. Keep it out, every sight +and sound of it! Keep out also every word that will aid any child to +identify the Jewish race. + +Then, when you have thus prepared the soil, you can go into the +universities and colleges and enter upon the double program of pouring +contempt on all the Christian landmarks, at the same time filling the +void with Jewish revolutionary ideas. + +The influence of the common people is driven out of the public schools, +where common people’s influence can go; but Jewish influence is allowed +to run rampant in the higher institutions where the common people’s +influence cannot go. + +Secularize the public schools, and you can then Judaize the +universities. + +This is the “liberalism” which Jewish spokesmen so much applaud. In +labor unions, in church, in university, it has tinctured the principles +of work, faith and society. This will not be denied, because the proof +of it is too thickly written over Jewish activities and utterances. +Indeed, it is in exerting these very influences that Jewry convinces +itself it is fulfilling its “mission” to the world. The capitalism +attacked is non-Jewish capitalism; the orthodoxy attacked is Christian +orthodoxy; the society attacked is the Anglo-Saxon form of society, all +of which by their destruction would redound to the glory of Judaism. + +The list could be extended—the influence of the Jewish idea on +Anglo-Saxon sports and pleasure, on the Anglo-Saxon-Celtic idea of +patriotism, on the Anglo-Saxon-Celtic conception of the learned +professions; the influence of the Jewish idea runs down through every +department of life. + +“Well,” one very badly deluded Anglo-Saxon editor, wrapped up in Jewish +advertising contracts, was heard to say, “if the Jews can get away with +it, then they have a right to.” It is a variant of the “answer” of +Jewish origin, which runs thus: “How can a paltry 3,000,000 run the +100,000,000 of the rest of us? Nonsense!” + +Yes, let it be agreed; if the Jewish idea is the stronger, if the Jewish +ability is the greater, let them conquer; let Anglo-Saxon principles and +Anglo-Saxon power go down in ruins before the Tribe of Judah. _But first +let the two ideas struggle under their own banners; let it be a fair +struggle._ It is not a fair fight when in the movies, in the public +schools, in the Judaized churches, in the universities, the Anglo-Saxon +idea is kept away from Anglo-Saxons on the plea that it is “sectarian” +or “clannish” or “obsolete” or something else. It is not a fair fight +when Jewish ideas are offered as Anglo-Saxon ideas, because offered +under Anglo-Saxon auspices. Let the heritage of our Anglo-Saxon-Celtic +fathers have free course among their Anglo-Saxon-Celtic sons, and the +Jewish idea can never triumph over it, in university forum or in the +marts of trade. The Jewish idea never triumphs until first the people +over whom it triumphs are denied the nurture of their native culture. + +Judah has begun the struggle. Judah has made the invasion. Let it come. +Let no man fear it. But let every man insist that the fight be fair. Let +college students and leaders of thought know that the objective is the +regnancy of the ideas and the race that have built all the civilization +we see and that promise all the civilization of the future; let them +also know that the attacking force is Jewish. + +That is all that will be necessary. And it is against this that the Jews +protest. “You must not identify us,” they say, “You must not use the +term ‘Jew.’” Why? Because unless the Jewish idea can creep in under the +assumption of other than Jewish origin, it is doomed. Anglo-Saxon ideas +dare proclaim themselves and their origin. A proper proclamation is all +that is necessary today. Compel every invading idea to run up its flag! + + +—— + +Issue of May 21, 1931. + + + + + LXVI. + The Jews’ Complaint Against “Americanism” + + +From the earliest record of the Jews’ contact with other nations, no +long period of years has ever passed without the charge arising that the +Jews constitute “a people within a people, a nation within a nation.” +When this charge is made today it is vehemently denied by men who pose +as the defenders of their people, and the denial is more or less +countenanced by all the Jews of every class. + +And yet there is nothing more clearly stated in Jewish teaching, nor +more clearly indicated in Jewish life, than that the charge is true. +_But whether the truth should be used against the Jews_ is quite another +question. If the Jews are a nation, their nationality founded upon the +double ground of race and religion, it is certainly outside the bounds +of reason that they should be asked or expected to de-racialize, +de-nationalize and de-religionize themselves; but neither is it to be +expected that they should bitterly denounce those who state the facts. +It is only upon a basis of facts that a solution of any problem can +come. Where blame attaches is here: that the evident facts are denied, +as if no one but the Jews themselves knew that there are such facts. + +If the Jews are to be continuously a nation, as they teach, and if the +condition of “a nation within a nation” becomes more and more +intolerable, then the solution must come through one of two things: a +separation of the “nation” from the rest of the nations, or an +exaltation of the “nation” above the rest of the nations. There is a +mass of evidence in Jewish writings that the leaders expect _both_ of +these conditions to come—a _separate_ nation and a _super-nation_; +indeed the heart of Jewish teaching is, as quite fully illustrated in +the last article, that Jewry is _a separate nation now_, and on the way +to becoming a _super_-nation. It is only those appointed to address the +Gentiles who deny this: the real rabbinate of Israel does not deny. + +Now, in any investigation of the Jewish Question, the student is struck +over and over again by the fact that what the Jews most complain of, +they themselves began. They complain of what they call anti-Semitism; +but it must be apparent to the dullest mind that there could never have +been such a thing as anti-Semitism were there not first such a thing as +Semitism. J + +And then take the complaint about the Jews having to live in ghettos. +The ghetto is a Jewish invention. In the beginning of the invasion of +European and American cities the Jews always lived by themselves because +they wanted to, because they believed the presence of Gentiles +contaminated them. Jewish writers, writing for Jews, freely admit this; +but in writing for Gentiles, they refer to the ghetto as a surviving +illustration of Gentile cruelty. The idea of contamination originated +with the Jews; it spread by suggestion to the Gentiles. + +And so with this fact of the separate “nation”; it was the Jews who +first recognized it, first insisted upon it and have always sought to +realize that separateness both in thought and action. + +Nay, more, the true and normal type of Jew today believes that the +influence of Americanism, or of any civilized Gentile state, is harmful +to Judaism. + +That is a serious statement and no amount of Gentile assertion will be +sufficient to confirm it. Indeed, it is such a statement as the Gentile +mind could not have evolved, because the trend of Gentile feeling is all +in the opposite direction, namely, that Americanization is a good thing +for the Jew. It is from authoritative Jewish sources that we learn this +fact, that what we call civilizing influences are looked upon as being +at enmity with Judaism. + +It is not the Gentile who says that Jewish ideals, as ideals, are +incompatible with life in our country; it is the Jew who says so. It is +he who inveighs against Americanism, not the American who inveighs +against Judaism. + +As this article is one with the last, the same method of impassive +presentation of the testimony will be followed. Readers of this study of +the Jewish Question should know that neither rhetoric nor emotion will +contribute a single element to the solution of the Question. We prefer +to leave rhetoric and emotion to the anti-Semites who call names and to +the pro-Semites who are apparently reduced to the same necessitous +level. + +Now, the first thing to know is this: that though Americanism is yet +unfinished, Judaism has been complete for centuries; and while no +American would think of pointing to any part of the country or to any +group as representing the true and final type of Americanism, the Jews +quite unhesitatingly point to parts of the world and to certain groups +as representing the true type of Judaism. + +Where is the type to be found which Jewish writers recognize as the true +one? + +The Jew of the ghetto is held up in Jewish treatises as the norm of +Judaism. + +The visitor in New York has perhaps seen on Central Park west the +massive synagogue of the Spanish and Portuguese Jews. Its famous rabbi +was the Rev. Dr. D. de Sola Pool. He is the author of the following +words: + +“In the ghetto the observance of Judaism was natural and almost +inevitable. The regimen of Jewish life was the atmosphere that was +breathed * * * Not only did public opinion make it possible for men to +go bearded, to keep the head covered at all times, to carry the palm +branch in the public street, or to walk the street in stockinged feet on +fast days, but public opinion made it almost impossible for a Jew to +profane the Sabbath or the Passover regulations, or openly to transgress +any of the main observances”—and, as we shall later see, the learned +rabbi considers these conditions more preservative of Judaism than are +American conditions. + +Rev. Dr. M. H. Segal expresses the view that Jewry in the more modern +portions of Europe and America was really kept alive by the infusions of +immigrants from Poland and Lithuania. Asserting, in agreement with other +Jewish leaders, that the Jewish center of the world has been, until now, +in Russia and Poland, Dr. Segal says: + + “The war has destroyed the last traces of the declining Jewish + society which had dragged out its feeble existence in the + semi-medieval ghettos of Poland and Lithuania. With all their + growing feebleness, these communities were yet the last refuge of + Judaism in the Dispersion. In them there had still survived + something of the old Jewish life, some of the old Jewish + institutions, practices and traditions. _These communities also + supplied such vitality as they could afford to the attenuated and + atrophied Judaism in the communities of the more modern states of + Europe and America._” + +The idea is not at all uncommon—that large infusions of “real Jews” from +the Old World ghettos are desirable and necessary in order to keep +Judaism alive in countries like the United States. + +Israel Friedlaender, whose name just at present is held in peculiar +honor by the Jews, and justly so, was a man of most enlightened +intellect, and he too recognized the service of the ghetto stream to +Judaism. In his lecture, “The Problem of Judaism in America,” he speaks +about the de-Judaizing tendency of absolute freedom, such as the Jew has +always enjoyed in the United States. This tendency, he says, is +corrected in two ways—by anti-Semitic influences, and “by the large +stream of Jewish emigration, on the other hand, which, proceeding from +the lands of oppression to the lands of freedom, _carries with it, on or +under the surface, the preserving and reviving influences of the +ghetto_.” + +The same authority, in an article entitled “The Americanization of the +Jewish Immigrant,” frankly prefers the Jew fresh from the ghetto to the +Jew who has been influenced by American life. + +He says that he “prefers the kaftan-clad, old-fashioned Jew, with his +unattractive appearance and ungainly manners, whose whole life is +dominated by the ideals and mandates of an ancient religion and +civilization * * * to that modernized, amphibious creature, the gaudily +attired, slang-using, gum-chewing, movie-visiting, dollar-hunting, +vulgar and uncultured, quasi-Americanized ‘dzentleman.’” + +The “kaftan-clad, old-fashioned Jew” of whom Mr. Friedlaender writes, is +the Polish Jew, 250,000 of whom are coming to the United States as “a +preserving and reviving influence” upon Judaism in the United States. + +Not to use more space, however, on the identity of the normal type of +Jew as precisely stated by those who have expressed themselves on this +subject, it is possible to preserve the idea and add its logical +complement, by quoting some testimony on the Jewish view of +Americanization. + +What now follows is of special interest because it is so generally +stated and received throughout Jewish circles, that the center of Jewry +has shifted to America. That is the form in which Jewish spokesmen make +the statement: they say “America,” not the United States. + +A little story—a true one—may be worth while here. It may throw a +sidelight on the use of the word “American” as used in the testimony. A +certain editor of an American newspaper gave a trifling bit of publicity +to this series of articles. Jewish advertising was withdrawn from his +columns by the chairman of the Anti-Defamation Committee of the local +Lodge of B’nai B’rith, which chairman was also an advertising agent who +handled all the Jewish advertising in that city. The editor, not being a +wise man, yielded to the bulldozing methods used upon him, and in a +half-hearted bit of editorial praise for the Jews used the word +“Americanism.” The advertising agent toyed with the word in the manner +of one who, having a weak Gentile in his power, would make the best of +it. + +“Why did you say, ‘Americanism’? Why did you not say ‘civilization’?” he +asked. + +The editor to this day thinks it was a bit of captiousness. It was not. +There is meaning in it. + +To “Americanize” means, in our ordinary speech, to bring into sympathy +with the traditions and institutions of the United States, but the Jews +do not mean only the United States when they say “America.” They mean +also South and Central America—where so many revolutions have occurred. +There are large numbers of Jews in Argentina, and many are found in +other countries. The next place to be extensively colonized will be +Mexico. If the people of the United States see a Jewish ambassador sent +to represent them in Mexico, they must know that the invasion of that +country is about to begin. If the ambassador is not himself a Jew, it +will be well to scrutinize his connections; there may be reasons which +will make it necessary to employ a “Gentile front” for a time. + +Now, it would probably give a wrong twist to the fact to say that the +Jewish leaders are anti-American, but it is true that they are against +the “Americanization” of the Jewish immigrant stream. That is, the trend +of “Americanism” is so different from the trend of “Judaism” that the +two are in conflict. This does not indicate treason toward American +nationalism, perhaps, so much as it indicates loyalty toward Jewish +nationalism. + +But the reader must himself be the judge as to how far the difference +goes. The testimony which will now be given divided itself into two +parts: first, that relating to the American state in particular; second, +that relating to any Gentile state. + +After he had spoken in praise of the old type of Jew, as seen in the +foreign ghettos, Dr. D. de Sola Pool added: + +“To a large extent the adult Jewish population of the United States has +been reared in Jewish communities of this type of Jewish inevitableness. +To a large extent the young generation is being reared in an atmosphere +in which this type of Jewishness is unknown, or at least strange and +impossible. _Jewish religious observance in the United States is +becoming increasingly difficult and increasingly rare._” + +Describing the antagonism between the American and the Jewish +tendencies, he continues with this reference to the effect of +“Americanism” on Jewish modes of worship: + +“On the platform officiate a cantor and a preacher, who turn their backs +to the ark and address themselves to their congregation. The tallith and +similar externals are un-American, and have consequently been +sacrificed. The ‘American’ worships with bare head; therefore the +American of Jewish persuasion must also doff his headgear when at +worship. Hebrew, an Oriental language, is not an American tongue. The +American prays in English, which all understand, and accordingly the +American of Jewish faith has Anglicized his ritual. Such a ritual is not +susceptible of being chanted with traditional Jewish Chazzanuth, and the +music of the temple has therefore been brought up to date by the +introduction of an organ, sacred music borrowed from non-Jewish +neighbors, and mixed choirs in which non-Jewish singers are almost the +rule * * * The Jewish Sabbath is out of keeping with the environment, +and the only way in which it seemed to be possible to save it was by +celebrating it with a Friday evening temple service after supper, and +resting, and sometimes also attending temple on Sunday.” + +It is not difficult to detect underneath these words the tone of +criticism for such “Americanization.” It is a criticism which is fully +justified by conditions. And it must be remembered that it was not +uttered by a “kaftan-clad, old-fashioned Jew,” but by a learned rabbi +with a magnificent temple on Central Park west, a man whom our +government has seen fit to honor. + +But that is not all that Dr. de Sola Pool objects to. Nor does he mince +words in making his objection known: “If so far, Reform has avoided the +logical end of the process and has stopped short of identifying itself +with Christianity, it has Americanized Judaism by dropping the elements +that are characteristically Jewish and un-American, and has thereby +created an almost non-sectarian Judaism housed in an almost +non-sectarian Temple.” + +It will be noticed that the learned doctor uses the word “American” as +one accustomed to quite another atmosphere. A further illustration is +found in this: + +“Neglect of the un-American dietary laws is usually the first step that +the Americanizing Jew takes in asserting his Americanism.” + +The “un-American dietary laws” are, of course, the Jewish dietary laws. +But if any Gentile writer had so referred to them, he would have been +abused as a hostile witness. + +It is very curious indeed to read the long list of complaints against +modern conditions in their power to bring about the “decay of Judaism.” +The ghetto, which makes for separateness, is frequently heralded as the +true safeguard of Judaism. Intercourse with the world is dangerous. +“Americanizing” influences are distrusted. + +No doubt many and many a Gentile parent in New York, Boston, Louisville, +Dallas and other American cities has witnessed the spectacle of Jewish +teachers and “welfare workers” instructing Gentile children in the +principles of Americanism, but did anyone ever see a Gentile teacher +instructing Jewish children in Americanism? + +Recently when the American Legion asked permission of the government to +establish Americanization classes at Ellis Island, where tens of +thousands of Polish Jews gain entry into the United States, the reply +was a refusal, and the reason was that all the space for charitable +institutions was already taken. What charitable institutions? How many +of them were Jewish? + +“The beginning of this decay,” says Israel Friedlaender, referring to +the effect of modern life on Judaism, “is obviously coincident with the +beginning of Jewish emancipation, that is to say, with _the moment when +the Jews left the ghetto to join the life and culture of the nations +around them_.” + +Mr. Friedlaender even went so far as to say that pogroms against the +Jews were “fortunate” in that they drove the Jews back to their +Judaism—“_Fortunately_, however, Russian Jewry was halted on its +downward rush toward national self-annihilation. The process of +assimilation was cut short by the pogroms, and ever since then the Jews +of Russia have stood firmly their ground * * *” + +That may be the reason why some Jewish spokesmen of the Jews in America +are trying to make this series of articles appear as a “pogrom.” There +is plenty of evidence to indicate that Jewish leaders have regarded +“pogroms,” in modern times at least, as very useful in preserving the +solidarity of Jewry. However, those who are responsible for the present +series of articles, much as they hope to benefit the general situation +of the humbler Jews by showing the use which the leading Jews are making +of them, must decline to be counted among those who justify “pogroms” on +any ground whatsoever. + +Justice Brandeis, of the United States Supreme Court, is also an +exponent of the idea that, released from ghetto influences, the Jew +becomes less of a Jew. He says: + +“We must protect America and ourselves from _demoralisation_, which has +to some extent _already set in among American Jews_. The _cause of this +demoralisation is clear_. It results, in large part, from the fact that +_in our land of liberty all the restraints by which the Jews were +protected in their ghettos were removed_ and a new generation left +without necessary moral and spiritual support.” + +Justice Brandeis is a Zionist on these very grounds. He wants the land +of Palestine because there the Jews, as he says, “may live together and +_lead a Jewish life_.” + +Not the United States, but Palestine, is Justice Brandeis’ hope for the +Jews; he says of Palestine that “_there only can Jewish life be fully +protected from the forces of disintegration_.” + +Arguing the same question, the Rev. Mr. S. Levy says: “I shall probably +be told that the re-establishment of Jews as a nation would mean the +recreation of the ghetto. I am frankly prepared to admit the force of +the criticism, but with an important qualification dependent on the +interpretation of the word ‘ghetto.’ + +“In so far as the national center will insure the existence of this +Jewish environment, Jewish atmosphere, and Jewish culture, there _will_ +be a recreation of the ghetto.” (The italics are Mr. Levy’s.) + +“The continuance of Judaism, then, is dependent on the existence of an +area with an aggregation of Jews living in a Jewish environment, +breathing a Jewish atmosphere and fostering a Jewish culture, and these +factors must predominate over all other influences.” + +It is therefore plain that, however startling and improbable the +statement may seem when made by a Gentile, the Jews themselves regard +the influences of modern lands as inimical to Judaism. + +But there is still a further consideration, which is distinctly set +forth in Jewish writings, namely, that the trend of the modern State is +harmful to all that Judaism holds to be essential to its moral and +spiritual welfare. + +The modern State is changing, and Jewish observers sense the fact more +readily than do the rest of the people, because Jews see in the change +both an opportunity and a menace. If the State continues to change +according to the trend of the general mind of the world, Jewish ideas of +supremacy will find less and less opportunity to be realized—that is the +menace. If the change, or the spirit of change, can be seized and +twisted to Jewish purposes, as was done in Russia, and a Jewish type of +State erected on the ruins of the old—that is the opportunity. Readers +of these articles know that stimulation of “the spirit of change” is one +of the clearest planks in the World Program. + +As Cyril M. Picciotto points out in his “Conceptions of the State and +the Jewish Question,” there is a tendency to “increase the control of +the State over the individual.” This, of course, has nowhere been done +so thoroughly as in Russia under the Jewish Bolshevik régime, but it is +not of this that Mr. Picciotto speaks, it is of the tendency observed in +the Gentile states; and he asks: “In the face of such a tendency in +political development (which it is not rash to assume will be more +pronounced in the future than in the past) _how does the Jew stand_?” + +He adds: “The time is not far distant when the development of the State +will continue on organic and collectivist lines. The central authority +will embrace an ever wider area, and will make such a penetration into +the recesses of individual freedom as would have been thought +inconceivable thirty or forty years ago. Compulsory military service, +compulsory education, compulsory insurance are but milestones on the +road which logically leads to the adoption of a State morality, a State +creed, and of a common way of life. To say this is merely to indicate +the probable trend, not to approve it.” + +“How, then, is the State of the future going to deal with a people in +its midst which largely preserves its separateness of blood, which in +its fasts, its festivals, its day of rest, its dietary laws, its +marriage ceremony, suggests a distinct historic entity?” + +The question is a disturbing one to Jews, as is shown by Rabbi Segal’s +words in “The Future of Judaism.” He even says that “the medieval State, +with all its tyranny and obscurantism” was more favorable to the Jews +than the modern type of State. “Its defective organization permitted +both individuals and whole classes to live their life in their own way. +Hence the medieval State enabled the Jews to organize themselves on +semi-national lines, and, as far as circumstances permitted, to create +afresh in their dispersion the national institutions and practices of +their ancient commonwealth.” + +They did this, of course, by establishing the ghetto. + +“But this has become _an absolute impossibility in the modern State_,” +continues the rabbi. “The rise of democracy and the transference of the +ultimate power of government from the oligarchy to the majority involves +the practical suppression of weak minorities. The identification of the +State with the culture and aspiration of a particular nationality leads +inevitably to the crippling of and gradual extinction of those classes +_who do not share that particular culture and those aspirations_. The +State, moreover, enforces a system of education which is purposely +designed to fashion and to mold all the inhabitants * * * It also +maintains a thorough-going organization which embraces all the +departments of the public and private life of all its inhabitants, +irrespective of class, race or tradition. _There is thus no room in the +modern State for Jewish_ culture, for Jewish national life, or for a +specifically Jewish society, with its own specific institutions, customs +and practices * * * + +“Therefore, Judaism can live and work only with a specifically Jewish +society and within a Jewish national organization. The medieval ghetto, +with all its narrowness, with all the unhealthy and abnormal conditions +of its existence, yet contained such a semi-national society; therefore, +_Judaism flourished in the medieval ghetto. The modern State, on the +other hand, has broken up that specifically Jewish society_ * * *” + +Now, there are the reactions of leading Jewish minds to conditions in +America particularly, and to conditions in the modern Gentile State +generally. The statement of the antagonism which exists between the two +is clear and complete. The Gentiles do not notice that antagonism, but +the Jews are always and everywhere keenly aware of it. This throws a +light, a very strong light, on all the revolutionary programs to break +up the present control of society, by sowing dissensions between capital +and labor so-called, by cheapening the dignity of government through +corrupt politics, by trivializing the mind of the people through +theaters and movies and similar agencies, and by weakening the appeal of +distinctively Christian religion. A breakdown of Gentile seriousness is +the opportunity of the Jew. A colossal war is also his opportunity, as +witness his seizure of the United States Government during the recent +war. Judaism says that Americanism and Gentile nationalism generally, +are harmful to it. Judaism has therefore the alternative of changing and +controlling Gentile nationalism, or of constructing a nationalism of its +own in Palestine. It is trying both. + +This all harks back to what Lord Eustace Percy is quoted in the Jewish +press as saying: that the Jew participates in revolutions “not because +the Jew cares for the positive side of radical philosophy, not because +he desires to be a partaker in Gentile nationalism or Gentile democracy, +but _because no existing Gentile system of government is ever anything +but distasteful to him_.” + +And the same author—“In a world of completely organized territorial +sovereignties, he (the Jew) has only two possible cities of refuge: _he +must either pull down the pillars of the whole national state system or +he must create a territorial sovereignty of his own_. In this perhaps +lies _the explanation both of Jewish Bolshevism and of Zionism_, for at +this moment Eastern Jewry seems to hover uncertainly between the two.” + + +—— + +Issue of October 23, 1920. + + + + + LXVII. + The Jewish Associates of Benedict Arnold + + +As the Jewish propagandists in the United States cannot be trusted to +give the people all the facts—even though these propagandists have the +facts in their possession—it devolves upon some impartial agency to do +so. The Jewish propagandists are accorded the utmost freedom of the +newspapers of the United States—by reason of Jewish advertising being +more than 75 per cent of all the advertising done in this country—and +thus a wide web of false impressions is constantly being woven around +the Jewish Question. The most recent is the widespread publication of a +new “exposure” of the origin of the Protocols. This makes the sixth +“final” and “complete” exposure that the Jews have put forth for public +consumption. The Jews have still time to repent and tell the truth. +Suppose they make the seventh the whole truth with a true repudiation of +the Protocols. + +It is THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT’S purpose to open up from time to time +new angles of the Jewish Question, so that the candid reader who would +be informed of the extensive character of Jewish influence may obtain a +general view of it. + +The part taken by Jews in the wars of the United States has been a +subject of considerable boasting by Jewish publicists. It is a most +interesting subject. It deserves the fullest possible treatment. It is +not THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT’S present purpose to challenge the Jewish +boast; it is, however, our purpose to fill in the omitted parts of the +story, and supply the missing links in several of the most interesting +episodes in American history. This will be done on the basis of +unquestioned historical authority, mostly of a Jewish character, and +solely in the interests of a complete understanding of a matter which +Jewish leaders have brought to the front. + +The first subject which will be treated in this series is _the part of +Jews in the treason of Benedict Arnold_. + +Benedict Arnold, the most conspicuous traitor in American history, has +been the subject of considerable comment of late. Among the commentators +have been American Jews who have failed to make known to the American +public the information which may be found in Jewish archives concerning +Benedict Arnold and his associates. + +To begin with, the propensity of the Jews to engage in the business of +supplying the needs of armies and to avail themselves as far as possible +of war contracts, is of long standing and notice. + +An authority on this matter, Werner Sombart, says in his “Jews and +Modern Capitalism” (pp. 50–53): + +“The Jews throughout the sixteenth, seventeenth and eighteenth centuries +were most influential as army-purveyors and as the moneyed men to whom +the princes looked for financial backing ... we cannot attempt to +mention every possible example. We can only point the way; it will be +for subsequent research to follow. + +“Although there are numerous cases on record of Jews acting in the +capacity of army-contractors in Spain previous to 1492, I shall not +refer to this period, because it lies outside the scope of our present +considerations. We shall confine ourselves to the centuries that +followed, and begin with England. + +“In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries the Jews had already +achieved renown as army-purveyors. Under the Commonwealth the most +famous army-contractor was Antonio Fernandez Carvajal, ‘the great Jew,’ +who came to London some time between 1630 and 1635, and was very soon +accounted among the most prominent traders in the land. In 1649 he was +one of the five London merchants intrusted by the council of state with +the army contract for corn. It is said that he annually imported into +England silver to the value of £100,000. In the period that ensued, +especially in the wars of William III, Sir Solomon Medina (‘the Jew +Medina’) was ‘the great contractor,’ and for his services he was +knighted, being the first professing Jew to receive that honor. + +“It was the same in the wars of the Spanish Succession; here, too, Jews +were the principal army-contractors. In 1716 the Jews of Strassburg +recall the services they rendered the armies of Louis XIV by furnishing +information and supplying provisions. Indeed, Louis XIV’s +army-contractor-in-chief was a Jew, Jacob Worms by name; and in the +eighteenth century Jews gradually took a more and more prominent part in +this work. In 1727 the Jews of Metz brought into the city in the space +of six weeks, 2,000 horses for food and more than 5,000 for remounts. +Field Marshal Maurice, of Saxony, the victor of Fontenoy, expressed the +opinion that his armies were never better served with supplies than when +the Jews were the contractors. One of the best known of the +army-contractors in the time of the last two Louises was Cerf Beer, in +whose patent of naturalization it is recorded that ‘... in the wars +which raged in Alsace in 1770 and 1771 he found the opportunity of +proving his zeal in our service and in that of the state.’ + +“Similarly the house of Gradis, of Bordeaux, was an establishment of +international repute in the eighteenth century. Abraham Gradis set up +large store-houses in Quebec to supply the needs of the French troops +there. Under the Revolutionary Government, under the Directory, in the +Napoleonic wars it was always the Jews who acted as purveyors. In this +connection a public notice displayed in the streets of Paris is +significant. There was a famine in the city and the Jews were called +upon to show their gratitude for the rights bestowed upon them by the +Revolution by bringing in corn. ‘They alone,’ says the author of the +notice, ‘can successfully accomplish this enterprise, thanks to their +business relations, of which their fellow citizens ought to have full +benefit.’ A parallel story comes from Dresden. In 1720 the Court Jew, +Jonas Meyer, saved the town from starvation by supplying it with large +quantities of corn. (The Chronicler mentions 40,000 bushels.) + +“All over Germany, the Jews from an early date were found in the ranks +of the army-contractors. Let us enumerate a few of them. There was Isaac +Meyer in the sixteenth century, who, when admitted by Cardinal Albrecht +as a resident of Halberstadt in 1537, was enjoined by him, in view of +the dangerous times, ‘to supply our monastery with good weapons and +armour.’ There was Joselman von Rosheim, who in 1548 received an +imperial letter of protection because he had supplied both money and +provisions for the army. In 1546 there is a record of Bohemian Jews who +provided great-coats and blankets for the army. In the next century +another Bohemian Jew, Lazarus by name, received an official declaration +that he ‘obtained either in person or at his own expense, valuable +information for the imperial troops, and that he made it his business to +see that the army had a good supply of ammunition and clothing.’ The +Great Elector also had recourse to Jews for his military needs. Leimann +Gompertz and Solomon Elias were his contractors for cannon, powder and +so forth. There were numerous others: Samuel Julius, remount contractor +under the Elector Frederick Augustus of Saxony; the Model family, +court-purveyors and army-contractors in the Duchy of Aensbach in the +seventeenth and eighteenth centuries are well known in history. In +short, as one writer of the time pithily expresses it, ‘all the +contractors are Jews and all the Jews are contractors.’ + +“Austria does not differ in this respect from Germany, France and +England. The wealthy Jews, who in the reign of the Emperor Leopold +received permission to resettle in Vienna (1670)—the Oppenheimers, +Wertheimers, Mayer Herschel and the rest—were all army-contractors. And +we find the same thing in all the countries under the Austrian Crown. + +“Lastly, we must mention the Jewish army-contractors who provisioned the +American troops in the Revolutionary and Civil wars.” + +Sombart’s record ceases there. He does not go on to mention “the Jewish +contractors who provisioned the American troops in the Revolutionary and +Civil wars.” That task shall be THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT’S from time to +time in the future. + +It is in the study of Jewish money-making out of war that the clues are +found to most of the great abuses of which Jews have been guilty. In the +present instance, it was in the matter of profiteering in war goods, +that the Jewish connections of Benedict Arnold were discovered. + +“Wars are the Jews’ harvests” is an ancient saying. Their predilection +for the quartermaster’s department has been observed anciently and +modernly. Their interest being mostly in profits and not in national +issues; their traditional loyalty being to the Jewish nation, rather +than to any other nation; it is only natural that they should be found +to be the merchants of goods and information in times of war—that is, +the war profiteers and the spies. As the unbroken program is traced +through the Revolutionary War, through the American Civil War, and +through the Great War of recent occurrence, the only change observable +is the increasing power and profit of the Jews. + +Although the number of Jews resident in the American colonies was very +small, there were enough to make a mark on the Revolutionary War; and +while there was no wholesale legislation against Jews as there was in +the Civil War, there were actions against individuals for the same +causes which in 1861–5 obtained more extensively. + +The Journals of the Continental Congress contain numerous entries of +payments made to Jews, as well as the records of various dealings with +them on other scores. For drums, for blankets, for rifles, for +provisions, for clothing—these are the usual entries. Most of the Jewish +commissars were Indian traders (the extent to which the Jews dealt with +the American Indians has not as yet been made a subject of research it +deserves). The Gratz family of Pennsylvania carried on a very extensive +Indian trade and amassed a vast fortune out of it. A most curious lot of +information concerning the dealings of the Colonies with the Jews is +obtainable by a search through the old records. + +The Jews of Colonial New York were both loyalists and rebels, as the +tide turned. They profited under loyalism by the contracts which they +secured, and by buying in the confiscated property of those who were +loyal to the American cause. It is interesting to note that some of the +purchasers of the extensive Delancey properties were Jews. Delancey was +a patriot whom New York City afterward honored by giving his name to an +important thoroughfare. That same New York has recently by official +action separated the name of Delancey from that thoroughfare, and +substituted the name of Jacob H. Schiff, a Jew, native of +Frankfort-on-the-Main. + +We enter immediately into the limits of the Benedict Arnold narrative by +making mention of the Franks family of Philadelphia, of which family +several members will claim our attention. + +The Franks were Jews from England who settled in America, retaining +their English connections. They were in the business of public +contracts, principally army contracts. They were holders of the British +army contracts for the French and Indian wars, and for the succeeding +Revolutionary War. + +To get the picture, conceive it thus, as it is taken from Jewish +sources: + +_Moses Franks_ lived in England, doing business with the British +Government direct. He had the contract for supplying all the British +forces in America before military trouble between the Colonies and the +Home Government was thought of. He was the principal purveyor of the +British Army in Quebec, Montreal, Massachusetts, New York and in the +country of the Illinois Indians. It was all British territory then. + +_Jacob Franks_ lived in New York. He was American representative of +Moses Franks of England. He was the American agent of the Franks Army +Purveyors Syndicate—for that is what it was. + +In Philadelphia was _David Franks_, son of Jacob, of New York. David was +the Franks’ agent for the state or colony of Pennsylvania. He was at the +seat of the colonial government, the center of American politics. He was +hand in glove with many of the fathers of the American Government. He +was an immensely rich man (although but an agent) and carried a high +hand at Philadelphia. + +At Montreal was another Franks—_David Solesbury Franks_—also in the +business of army-contractor. He was a gay young man, described as “a +blooded buck,” who knew all the arts of turning an honest penny out of +the needs of armies and the distress of nations. This young man was a +grandson or grand nephew of the Moses Franks of England, as he was a +nephew of the David Franks of Philadelphia. + +Here and there were other Franks, all intent on business with the +non-Jewish government, but the four here mentioned carry along the main +parts of the tale. + +A moment’s digression will give us at once a view of the looseness of +the liberalism of some of the Fathers of the Country, and a view of the +equanimity with which David Franks, of Philadelphia, could pass from one +role to another—a facility which cost him dearly when war came on. + +John Trumbull, an artist of considerable note at the time, whose +paintings still adorn the National Capitol, was invited to dine at +Thomas Jefferson’s home, among the guests being Senator Giles, from +Virginia. Trumbull tells the story: + +“I was scarcely seated when Giles began to rally me on the Puritanical +ancestry and character of New England. I saw there was no other person +from New England present, and, therefore, although conscious that I was +in no degree qualified to manage a religious discussion, I felt myself +bound to defend my country on this delicate point as well as I could. +Whether it had been prearranged that a debate on the Christian religion, +in which it should be powerfully ridiculed on the one side and weakly +defended on the other, was to be brought forward as promising amusement +to a rather free-thinking dinner party, I will not presume to say, but +it had that appearance, and Mr. Giles pushed his raillery, to my no +small annoyance, if not to my discomfiture, until dinner was announced. + +“That I hoped would relieve me by giving a new turn to the conversation, +but the company was hardly seated at table when he renewed the assault +with increased asperity, and proceeded so far at last as to ridicule the +character, conduct and doctrines of the Divine Founder of our religion; +Mr. Jefferson in the meantime smiling and nodding approval on Mr. Giles, +while the rest of the company silently left me and my defense to our +fate, until at length my friend David Franks took up the argument on my +side. Thinking this a fair opportunity for avoiding further conversation +on the subject, I turned to Mr. Jefferson and said, ‘Sir, this is a +strange situation in which I find myself; in a country professing +Christianity and at a table with Christians, as I supposed, I find my +religion and myself attacked with severe and almost irresistible wit and +raillery, and not a person to aid in my defense but my friend Mr. +Franks, who is himself a Jew.’” + +This episode throws a curious light on the character of Thomas +Jefferson’s “philosophical unbelief,” the unlovely fashion of that day; +it also illustrates a certain facility in David Franks. + +Relations between the Colonies and the Mother Country became strained. +Political feelings ran high. The lines of division between “American” +and “British” began to appear for the first time. At first there was a +degree of agreement among all the population, except the government +officials, that a protest against governmental abuses was justified and +that strong representations should be made in behalf of the Colonists. +Even loyalists and imperialists agreed with that. It was a question of +domestic politics. But when presently the idea of protest began to +develop into the idea of rebellion and independence, a cleavage came. It +was one thing to correct the Empire, another thing to desert it. Here is +where the people of the Colonies split. + +Mr. Jacob Franks in royalist and loyalist New York, was, of course, +royalist and loyalist. As army-contractor for the British Government, he +had no choice. + +Mr. David Franks, down in Philadelphia, was a little nearer the heart of +the new American sentiment, and could not be so royal and loyal as was +his kinsman north. In fact, David Franks tried to do what is modernly +called “the straddle,” attempting to side with the Empire and with the +Colonies, too. + +It was natural. His business was in Philadelphia. He may also have +wished to remain as long as possible in the position of a spy, and send +information of the state of public feeling to the royalists. Moreover, +he was received in good society and his reputation for wealth and +shrewdness won him attentions he could not otherwise have commanded. + +So, in 1765 we find him joining the merchants of Philadelphia in the +pact not to import articles from England while the hated Stamp Act was +in force. In 1775 he favors the continuance of the colonial currency. + +He was enjoying his accustomed life in the city—and his acquaintance +with the Shippen family into which the dashing young Benedict Arnold +married. + +There is a strange intermingling of all the tragic figures of the play: +Benedict Arnold marries the girl for whom Major André wrote a parlor +play. Major André, during his period of captivity as an American +prisoner of war and before his exchange, was often at the home of David +Franks. And David Solesbury Franks, at his post as agent of the Franks +syndicate at Montreal, is placed by a strange turn of the wheel of +destiny in the military family of Benedict Arnold for a considerable +period preceding and including the great treason. + +So, for the moment let us leave the Jewish family of Franks—all of them +still stationed as we first described them: Moses in England, Jacob at +New York, David at Philadelphia, David S. at Montreal—and let us +scrutinize the young American officer, Benedict Arnold. + +These facts would most of them be lost, had they not been preserved in +the Jewish archives, by the American Jewish Historical Society. You will +read any history of Benedict Arnold without perceiving the Jews around +him. The authors of the accepted histories were blind. + +The principal defect in Benedict Arnold’s character was his love of +money. All of the trouble which led up to the situation in which he +found himself with reference to the American Government and Army, was +due to the suspicion which hung like a cloud over many of his business +transactions. There have been attempts to paint Arnold as a dashing +martyr, as one who was discouraged by the unmerited slights of the +Continental Congress, as a victim of the jealousy of lesser men, as one +from whom confidence was unjustly withheld. Nothing could be further +from the fact. He was a man to whom men were instinctively drawn to be +generous, but so general was the knowledge of his looseness in money +matters that, while admiring him, his brother officers acted upon the +protective instinct and held aloof from him. He was tainted by a low +form of dishonesty before he was tainted with treason, and the chief +explanation of his treason was in the hard bargain he drove as to the +amount of money he was to receive for his guilty act. + +Arnold’s own record makes this clear. Let us then take up his career at +a certain point and see how the Franks strand and the money strand weave +themselves through it like colored threads. + +Extraordinary efforts have been made in recent years to extenuate +Arnold’s treason by the recital of his daring services. These services +need not be minimized. Indeed, it was his great achievement of the +winter march to Montreal and Quebec in 1775–6 that seems to begin the +chapter of his troubles. To rehearse this feat of courage and endurance +would be to tell a tale that has thrilled the American schoolboy. + +It was at Montreal that Benedict Arnold came into contact with the young +Jew, David Solesbury Franks, the Canadian agent of the Franks +army-purveying syndicate. And the next thing known about young Franks is +that he returns to the American Colonies in the train of Benedict Arnold +as an officer of the American Army. + +How this change was effected is not explained in any of the records. +There is a moment of darkness, as it were, in which the “quick change” +was made, which transformed the young Montreal Jew from an +army-contractor for the British into an officer of Benedict Arnold’s +staff. + +But as it is impossible for every fact to be suppressed, there are here +and there indications of what might have been, what indeed most probably +was, the basis of the attraction and relation between the two. It was +very probably—almost certainly—the opportunities for graft which could +be capitalized by a combination of General Arnold’s authority and young +Franks’ ability in the handling of goods. + +From the day they met in Montreal until the hour when General Arnold +fled, a traitor, from the fort on the Hudson, young David Solesbury +Franks was his companion. + +In one of the numerous court-martials which tried General Arnold for +questionable dealings in matters pertaining to army supplies, Franks, +who was aid-de-camp to Arnold, and by rank of major, testified thus: + +“I had, by being in the army, injured my private affairs very +considerably, and meant to leave it, if a proper opportunity of entering +into business should happen. I had several conversations on the subject +with General Arnold, who promised me all the assistance in his power; +_he was to participate in the profits of the business I was to enter +in_.” + +This testimony was given by Major Franks in 1779; the two men had met in +the winter of 1775–1776, but, as the records will show, Major Franks was +always General Arnold’s reliance on getting out of scrapes caused by +questionable business methods in which Arnold’s military authority was +used quite freely. Major Franks admits that he was to enter business and +General Arnold was to share the profits. On what basis this arrangement +could exist, is another point not known. Arnold had no capital. He had +no credit. He was a spendthrift, a borrower, notorious for his constant +need of money. The only credible inducement for Franks to accept a +partnership with him was on the understanding that Arnold should use his +military authority to throw business to Franks. Or, to state it more +bluntly, the “profits” which Benedict Arnold was to receive were +payments for his misuse of authority for his own gain. + +A complete opening of the records will show this to be the most +reasonable view of the case. + +It was at Montreal that Benedict Arnold’s name first became attainted +with rumors of shady dealing in private and public property. General +George Washington had laid down the most explicit instructions on these +matters, with a view to having the Canadians treated as fellow-Americans +and not as enemies. General Washington had cashiered officers, and +whipped soldiers who had previously disobeyed the order against looting +and theft. + +General Arnold had seized large quantities of goods at Montreal and had +hurried them away without making proper account of them. This he admits +in his letter to General Schuyler: “Our hurry and confusion was so great +when the goods were received, it was impossible to take a particular +account of them.” This means only that Arnold seized the goods without +giving the Canadian citizens proper receipts for them, so that he had in +his hands a large amount of wealth for which he was under no compulsion +to account to anybody. This mass of goods he sent to a Colonel Hazen at +Chambley, and Colonel Hazen, evidently aware of the conditions under +which the goods were taken, refused to receive them. This disobedience +of Colonel Hazen to his superior officer, especially in a question +relating to goods, made it necessary for Arnold to take some +self-protective action, which he did in his letter to General Schuyler. +Meantime, a very ugly rumor ran through the American Army that General +Benedict Arnold had tried to pull a scurvy trick of graft, but had been +held up by the strict conduct of Colonel Hazen. Moreover, it was rumored +(and the fact was admitted by Arnold in his letter) that in the transfer +the goods were well sorted over so that when they finally arrived a +great part of them was missing. All the principal facts were admitted by +Arnold, who used them, however, to throw blame on Colonel Hazen. He even +went so far as to prefer charges against Colonel Hazen, forcing the +matter into a court-martial. The court was called and refused to hear +the witnesses chosen by General Arnold in his behalf, on the ground that +the witnesses were not entitled to credibility. Whereupon General Arnold +flouted the court, who ordered him arrested. General Gates, to preserve +the useful services of Arnold to the United States Army, dissolved the +court-martial, to that extent condoning the conduct of Arnold. Before +the court-martial dissolved, however, it informally acquitted Colonel +Hazen with honor. + +Here, then, almost immediately, as it would seem, upon his new +connection with David Solesbury Franks, Benedict Arnold is involved in a +bad tangle concerning property which had come into his possession +irregularly and which disappeared soon after. His attempt to throw the +blame on an officer whose disobedience was the factor that disclosed the +true state of affairs, failed. It was his bold scheme to forestall an +exposure which must inevitably have come. + +While it is true that on this Montreal case, no verdict stands recorded +against Benedict Arnold, for the theft of goods, it is also true that +the American Army became suspicious of him from that day. + +Had Benedict Arnold been innocent then and had he kept his hands clean +thereafter, the Montreal episode would have been forgotten. But as a +matter of fact such affairs came with increasing frequency thereafter, +all of them, strangely enough, involving also the Jew whom he associated +with himself at the time of that first exposure. + +The story of this Jew’s relations with Benedict Arnold all through the +period ending with the great treason, may now be taken up with greater +consecutiveness, for now their formerly separate courses run together. +In another article this relationship and all that it meant will be +illustrated from the government records. + + +—— + +Issue of October 8, 1921. + + + + + LXVIII. + Benedict Arnold and Jewish Aid in Shady Deal + + +While Benedict Arnold was in Canada and David Solesbury Franks, the Jew +of Montreal and a British subject, was serving as quartermaster to the +American troops, David Franks, of Philadelphia, a member of the same +Jewish family and of the same Jewish syndicate of army-contractors, was +also engaged in an interesting business. + +It has already been shown that this David Franks, the Philadelphia Jew, +had gone part way with the colonists in their protests against British +colonial rule. That this was not sincerity on his part, his subsequent +actions proved. He first comes into the purview of this narrative in +1775, the year in which Benedict Arnold performed the remarkable feat of +marching into Canada, whence he was sending back into the colonies +numerous Canadian prisoners. These prisoners were kept in the New +England colonies for a time, but were later collected into Pennsylvania, +some of them being quartered in the city of Philadelphia. + +How inspired it is impossible now to tell, but presently a committee of +the Continental Congress proposes that Mr. David Franks be commissioned +to feed and otherwise care for these British prisoners, and be allowed +to sell his bills for as much money as may be necessary for the purpose. +Of course, in accepting this proposal, Franks was only pursuing the +course for which he and his numerous relatives had come to America. He +was really doing business with and for Moses Franks, the head of the +family syndicate in London. Shortly afterward we read of David under the +mouth-filling title of “Agent to the Contractors for Victualing the +Troops of the King of Great Britain,” and to check him up, a British +officer was allowed to pass the lines once a month and spend a few hours +with David. That this was a dangerous practice may be deduced from his +further story. + +In the records of the Continental Congress is a request from Franks that +he be permitted to go to New York, then the British headquarters; and +such was the power of the man that his request was granted on condition +that he pledged his word “not to give any intelligence to the enemy” and +to return to Philadelphia. + +In January, 1778, six months before Benedict Arnold took command of +Philadelphia, David Franks got himself into trouble. A letter of his was +intercepted on its way to England. The letter was intended for Moses +Franks, of London, and was concealed under cover of a letter to a +captain in a regiment commanded by a British general who had married +Franks’ sister. It appears on the record of the American Congress “that +the contents of the letter manifest a disposition and intentions +inimical to the safety and liberty of the United States.” + +Whereupon it was “Resolved, that Major General Arnold be directed to +cause the said David Franks forthwith to be arrested, and conveyed to +the new gaol in this city (Philadelphia), there to be confined until the +further order of Congress.” + +Thus Benedict Arnold comes into contact with another member of the +Franks family, whose name was to be so closely associated with the great +treason. + +And now begins a serpentine course of twistings and turnings which are +so delightfully Jewish as to be worth restating if only to show how true +the race remains to its character through the centuries. It is in +October, about the eleventh day of the month. Franks is imprisoned and +remains a week. Then by strange reasoning it is discovered that the +United States has no jurisdiction over the charge of treason against the +United States (!) and that the prisoner should be handed over to the +Supreme Executive Council of the state of Pennsylvania. It follows that +the state of Pennsylvania has nothing to do with the crime of treason +against the United States either, and in spite of the contents of the +letters and the findings of the Congressional Committee thereon, David +Franks smiles pleasantly and goes free! It was a time, of course, when +much money was lent by Jews to public officials. The Jew, Haym Salomon, +was credited with having most of the “fathers” on his books, but he did +not charge them interest nor principal. He grew immensely wealthy, +however, and was the recipient, in lieu of interest and repayment, of +many official favors. David Franks, likewise a wealthy man, charged with +treason, has his case transferred and finally dismissed. It is a trick +not unknown today. + +The Jewish records give much credit to Mr. Franks for not being daunted +by this experience. Whether he is entitled to particular credit for his +courage when he was master of so much influence, is a matter for the +reader to decide, but that he was undaunted his subsequent actions show. +He is very soon on the records again with an appeal for permission for +his secretary to go again to New York within the British lines. He +appeals to the Council of Pennsylvania. The Council refers him to +Congress. Congress says it has no objection, if the secretary will be +governed by General George Washington’s orders in the matter. +Washington’s aid-de-camp gives permission, and the secretary gives +sufficient bonds and sets out for New York. + +Arrived in New York, the secretary discovers that Mr. Franks’ presence +is necessary and has made all arrangements for his master to go to New +York, having even secured British permission to pass the lines. It was +made very easy for Congress, it had only to say yes. But this time +Congress said “no.” The former escape of Franks made people aware of an +un-American influence at work. After his first arrest he was regarded as +dangerous to the American cause. He apparently succeeds in living well +in Philadelphia in spite of his difficulties, living even gayly with the +society of the city. + +Up to this time, David Franks had come into contact with the two +principal figures in Arnold’s treason. As purveyor to the captured +troops, Franks had met and entertained, in 1776, the young and engaging +Major André, who in 1780 was to become the tragic victim of Arnold’s +perfidy. And in 1778 Franks had been the subject of an order of arrest +given to General Benedict Arnold. Jacob Mordecai “mentions that it was +at Mr. Franks’ house that he met Major André, then a paroled prisoner, +who was passing his idle hours and exercising his talents in the most +agreeable ways by taking a miniature likeness of the beautiful Miss +Franks.” (American Jewish Historical Society, Vol. 6, page 41.) + +In the meantime, Benedict Arnold was pursuing his career, a career +strangely checkered with brilliant bravery and subtle knavery, a career +sustained by the confidence of noble friends who believed in Arnold even +against himself. Except for this strange power of holding friends in +spite of what they knew of him, Arnold’s career would have terminated +before it did. That psychic gift of his, and the desperate need of the +Continental cause for military leaders, held him on until his moral +turpitude matured for the final collapse. As before stated, there is no +intention to minimize Arnold’s services to his country, but there is a +determination to show what were his associations during the period of +his moral decline, and thus fill in the gaps of history and account for +the distrust with which the American Congress regarded the young +general. + +David Solesbury Franks, the Montreal Jew, who was an agent of the Franks +army-contractor syndicate in Canada, came south to the American colonies +with Arnold when the American Army retreated. In his own account of +himself, written in 1789—eight years after the treason—he makes so +little of his association with Arnold that were it not for the reports +of certain courts-martial it would be impossible to determine how close +the two men had been. In his record of himself, as preserved in the +tenth volume of the American Jewish Historical Society’s publications, +he admits leaving Canada with the Americans in 1776 and remaining +attached to the American Army until the surrender of Burgoyne, which +occurred late in 1777. He then lightly passes over an important period +which saw the command of Philadelphia bestowed on General Arnold. He +mentions simply that he was “in Arnold’s military family at West Point +until his desertion,” which was in 1780. Reference to the first +court-martial of Arnold, in which Colonel David Solesbury Franks was +Arnold’s chief witness, will show, however, that Franks and Arnold were +more closely associated than the former would care to admit after +Arnold’s name had become anathema. Indeed, as the Jewish Historical +Society’s note correctly observes, the account of this court-martial “is +of much interest, as it bears directly upon the relations of General +Arnold and his aid, Major David S. Franks, before the traitor’s final +flight in September, 1780.” + +There were in all eight charges preferred against Arnold, the second one +being—“In having shut up the shops and stores on his arrival in the city +(Philadelphia), so as even to prevent officers of the army from +purchasing, while he privately made considerable purchases for his own +benefit, as is alleged and believed.” + +Follows a supporting affidavit, printed in the style of the original, +with emphatic italics added: + +“On the seventh day of May, A. D. 1779, before me, Plunket Fleeson, +Esq., one of the justices, etc., for the city of Philadelphia, comes +colonel John Fitzgerald, late aid-de-camp to his excellency general +Washington, and being duly sworn according to law, deposeth and saith: +That on the evening of the day on which the British forces left +Philadelphia, he and Major David S. Franks, aid-de-camp to major Arnold, +went to the house of miss Brackenberry, and lodged there that night; and +_the next morning, major Franks having gone down stairs, the deponent +going into the front room of the said house_, to view colonel Jackson’s +regiment then marching into the city, _saw lying in the window two open +papers_; that on casting his eye on one of them, he was surprised _it +contained instructions to the said major Franks to purchase European and +East Indian goods in the city of Philadelphia, to any amount, for the +payment of which the writer would furnish major Franks with the money, +and the same paper contained also a strict charge to the said Franks not +to make known to his most intimate acquaintance that the writer was +concerned in the proposed purchase_; that _these instructions were not +signed_, but appeared to the deponent to be in the handwriting of major +general Arnold, whether or not there was a date to it the deponent doth +not recollect; that the other paper contained instructions signed by +major general Arnold, directing major Franks to purchase for the said +general Arnold some necessaries for the use of his table; that _the +deponent compared the writing of the two papers and verily believes that +they were both written by major general Arnold’s own hand; and soon +afterward major Franks came into the room and took the papers away_, as +the deponent supposes. And further the deponent saith not. + + “Sworn, etc. John Fitzgerald.” + +That such a charge involved as much the trial of Major Franks as General +Arnold, will at once appear. The statements in the charge argue close +association between Arnold and Franks. Yet in Franks’ written record of +himself in 1789 he passes over this Philadelphia period thus lightly: +“In 1778, after the evacuation of Philadelphia by the British Army & on +the arrival of Count D’Estaing I procured Letters of recommendation from +the Board of War ... and joined him off Sandy Hook, I continued with +that Admiral until he arrived at Rhode Island, where on the failure of +the Expedition I returned to Philadelphia where my military duty called +me.” + +No reference here, nor anywhere in his record, to a closeness of bond +between the two which his testimony, now offered from the records, amply +proves to have existed. + + “The judge-advocate produced major Franks, aid-de-camp to major + General Arnold, who was sworn. + + “Q. On General Arnold’s arrival in Philadelphia, do you know whether + himself or any person on his account, made any considerable + purchases of goods? + + “A. I do not. + + “Q. At or before general Arnold’s arrival in Philadelphia did you + receive orders from general Arnold to purchase goods, or do you know + of general Arnold’s having given orders to any other person to make + purchases of goods? + + “A. _I did receive from general Arnold that paper which colonel + Fitzgerald has mentioned in his deposition_. There are circumstances + leading to it which I must explain. I had, by being in the army, + injured my private affairs very considerably, and meant to leave it, + if a proper opportunity to _enter into business_ should happen. _I + had several conversations on the subject with General Arnold_, who + promised me all the assistance in his power; _he was to participate + in the profits of the business I was to enter into_. At that time, + _previous to our going to Philadelphia, I had several particular + conversations with him, and thought that the period in which I might + leave the army with honor and enter into business_ (_had come_). _I + received at that time, or about that time, I think several days + before the enemy evacuated the city, the paper mentioned in colonel + Fitzgerald’s deposition that was not signed, as well as the other_. + Upon our coming into town we had a variety of military business to + do. I did not purchase any goods, neither did I leave the army. That + paper was entirely neglected, neither did I think anything + concerning it until I heard of colonel Fitzgerald’s deposition. + General Arnold has told me since, which is since I came from + Carolina some time in August last, that the reason for his not + supporting me in business was, supposing that I had left the army, + it was incompatible with his excellency’s instructions and the + resolution of Congress.” + +This testimony, seemingly straightforward in form, is rather damning to +the characters of both the men involved. Arnold, upon taking command of +Philadelphia, ordered the stores and shops to be closed and no goods +sold. He stopped business outright. It was a most unpopular order, +because it prevented the merchants profiting by the new order of things, +the return of the Americans. + +The very first day the closing law is in force, Arnold writes an order +to Franks to make large purchases of European and East Indian goods “to +any amount” and to keep the transaction secret from his most intimate +acquaintance. That is, Benedict Arnold and the Jewish major on his +staff, have an understanding that under cover of the military closing, +they will loot the city of its most profitable goods at the enforced low +selling prices—for the obvious purpose of selling at higher prices when +the military order was rescinded. + +These are the undisputed facts. Colonel Fitzgerald saw the papers and +knew the unsigned one to be in Arnold’s handwriting, even as the signed +one was. They were both addressed to the Jewish Major Franks. In his +testimony, Major Franks admits the existence of the unsigned order as +Colonel Fitzgerald saw it, and admits also its character. + +Even Benedict Arnold admitted the order, but he endeavored to show that +having exhibited General Washington’s orders to him (Arnold) to command +Philadelphia, that fact would be a sufficient countermand to the order +given to Franks to load up on valuable goods. + + “General Arnold to Major Franks. Did you not suppose my showing you + the instructions from general Washington to me, previous to your + going into the city, a sufficient countermand of the order I had + given you to purchase goods? + + “Major Franks. I did not form any supposition on the subject.” + +This admission that he wrote the order, and the fact that no large +purchases of goods could be shown, constituted Arnold’s defense. It +requires no keen legal mind to show its weakness. If the order was +countermanded several days before they entered the city, what was it +doing in Miss Brackenberry’s house in Philadelphia on the first morning +of Arnold’s command and the first morning of the operation of his order +to close the stores? And why did Franks come in search of it? Discarded +orders are not thus carried around and preserved. + +Probably no purchases were made. Probably the order was not carried out. +When Colonel Fitzgerald walked into the room early in the morning and +saw the papers, and when soon thereafter Major Franks walked into the +room and saw both Colonel Fitzgerald and the papers, there was nothing +else to do than to call the plan off. It had become _known_. Colonel +Fitzgerald waited in the room to see what became of the papers. He saw +the Jew Franks come and get them. He saw him go out with them. He knew +what those papers directed the Jew to do, and he knew that the directing +hand was Benedict Arnold’s. Doubtless with this clue he kept his eyes +open in Philadelphia during the operation of the closing order. And +doubtless Franks lost no time in transmitting to General Arnold the fact +that he found Colonel Fitzgerald in the room where the papers had been +left. The inadvertent visit of Colonel Fitzgerald is the key-fact in +that phase of the matter. + +But the Jewish major becomes talkative in his effort to explain the +situation. “There are circumstances which I must explain,” he says. And +then, in words that were frequently in the mouth of Arnold, he +represents that his service in the army was injuring his private affairs +very seriously, and that he was contemplating retiring from the army and +going into business. + +It is worth noting at this point that numerous opportunities were given +Franks to retire, both before and after the Arnold treason, but he +developed into a persistent clamorer after official jobs. In spite of +his testimony, he could not be shaken loose from public employment. + +And then Franks revealed the whole secret of his relations with Arnold. +They were in close association in profiteering matters. “I had several +conversations on the subject with general Arnold ... he was to +participate in the profits of the business I was to enter into.” Arnold +was to remain a general in the army; his aide was to get out of the army +and work with him privately, sharing the profits. + +But what had all this to do with the orders to close the stores at +Philadelphia? What had this to do with the papers found by Colonel +Fitzgerald? For after all, this was the “circumstance” which Major +Franks had set out to explain. At last he reaches it: “At that time, +previous to our going into Philadelphia, I had several particular +conversations with him ... I received at that time, or about that time, +the paper mentioned in Colonel Fitzgerald’s deposition which was not +signed, as well as the other.” + +The paper authorized him to get the most merchantable goods out of the +closed stores. It followed upon “several particular conversations” about +the business of which Arnold was to “participate in the profits.” But, +apparently, the deal did not go through. Colonel Fitzgerald’s untimely +appearance, and the carelessness of some one in leaving the papers +about, were most unfavorable to the Arnold-Franks project. + +There can be no question of the intimacy of the relations between the +Jew and Arnold and the use that both made of their relationship. There +can be no question, either, that these relationships must have been the +result of continuous acquaintance and testing. + +Merely to show that a Jew once crossed the path of Benedict Arnold and +was implicated with him in a discreditable scheme that probably did not +fully mature, means nothing. But that this Jew was involved in Arnold’s +fortunes from the time the two first met in Canada until the day that +Arnold betrayed his country, may mean something. And that is the case. +From the time of their first meeting, their lines run along +together—Franks always being relied upon by Arnold as the credible +witness who extricates him from his scrapes, and Franks usually doing it +with a sort of clumsy success, as in the instance just cited. + +The reader may refer now to the reference made above to Franks’ record +of himself in which he mentions having joined Count d’Estaing, the +French admiral, at Sandy Hook. This was just a month after Arnold took +command at Philadelphia, just a month after the events on which the +above charge was based. Evidently Franks got out of town for a little +while. He would notice the coolness of his fellow officers among whom +reports of Colonel Fitzgerald’s discovery must have circulated. There +would be no prejudice against him because he was a Jew, it would be +solely due to the suspicions concerning him. Indeed, readers of the +ordinary history will never learn that Arnold had Jews around him. There +were David Franks, moneyed man and merchant in the city, and David +Solesbury Franks on Arnold’s staff—both outstanding figures, yet wholly +passed over by the historians, with one or two exceptions, and even +these have never caught the Jewish clue. In that day there was no +prejudice against Jews as Jews, even as there is none now. + +Franks, then, easily gains letters which permit him to join the French +fleet of d’Estaing, within a month after the Philadelphia business. And +strange to relate, at precisely the same time, Benedict Arnold conceived +the notion that he too should go into the navy, and a month after his +appointment to Philadelphia he writes to General Washington suggesting +nothing less than that he be given command of the American Navy!—at +precisely the time Major Franks takes to the water. + +“... being obliged entirely to neglect my private affairs since I have +been in the service,” Arnold writes to General Washington, “has induced +me to wish to retire from public business, unless an offer, _which my +friends have, mentioned_, should be made to me of the command of the +navy.... I must beg leave to request your sentiments respecting a +command in the navy.” + +So far as the historians have been able to discover, no one ever +proposed such a thing as making Arnold the admiral of the American Navy. +But, then, the historians did not know David S. Franks. He, a landsman, +had gone for a few weeks with the French ships. Perhaps he was the +friend who “mentioned” the matter. At any rate, when Franks came off the +ships again, it was to serve as witness once more for Benedict Arnold. + +The charges against Arnold were such as these: Permitting an enemy ship +to land, and buying a share in her cargo; imposing menial service on +soldiers (a charge brought about by an action of Major Franks); issuing +passes unlawfully—the case in point being that of a Jewess, named Levy; +the use of army wagons for his private affairs, and so forth. + +This is Major Franks’ testimony concerning Arnold’s permitting “The +Charming Nancy” to land at a United States port, contrary to law: + +“Q. (by the court) Do you know whether general Arnold purchased any part +of the Charming Nancy or her cargo? + +“A. I do not know of my own knowledge, but I have heard general Arnold +say he did, and I have also heard Mr. Seagrove say he did. + +“Q. Was it previous or subsequent to general Arnold’s granting the pass? + +“A. It was subsequent.” + +Here is a complete admission of all the facts, but the defense consisted +in laboriously showing, by means of quite leading questions addressed to +Franks, that the owners of “The Charming Nancy” were indeed good +Americans, though residing and doing business in enemy territory. Franks +was rather useful in this part of the business, and the court, +overlooking the other elements, simply found that the permission which +Arnold gave to “The Charming Nancy” was illegal. The fact that a major +general of the United States Army speculated in the cargo of the ship +which had come into port in violation of law and on his military +permission, was not considered at all. Neither was the fact, stated in +the charge, that he gave his permission while he was in camp with +General Washington at Valley Forge, whom he did not consult in any way. + +But here again the fact is established that Major Franks was privy to +the whole matter, and was the chief witness for Arnold’s defense. + +If it had occurred but once, as at Montreal, that Arnold had been +charged with irregularities involving profitable goods; or if it had +occurred but once, as at Philadelphia, that Major Franks happened to be +the chief available witness, no serious notice could be taken of it. + +But time and again Arnold is caught in shady acts involving profitable +goods, and time and again the Jewish Major Franks is his accomplice and +chief witness. And this partnership in shady transactions, extending +from the time Arnold first met Franks till the time Arnold betrayed his +country, is significant, at least as a contribution to history, and +possibly as a side light on the gradual degeneration of Benedict Arnold. + +Arnold could no longer wholly escape. But still the good fortune that +seemed patiently to accompany him, as if waiting for his better nature +to recover from some dark spell, remained with him; the court could not +exonerate him entirely, but neither could they punish him as he +deserved; and so it was given as a verdict that General Arnold should be +reprimanded by General Washington, his best friend. + +Washington’s reprimand is one of the finest utterances in human record. +It would have saved a man in whom a shred of moral determination +remained: + + “Our profession is the chastest of all; even the shadow of a fault + tarnishes the luster of our finest achievements. The least + inadvertence may rob us of the public favor, so hard to be acquired. + I reprimand you for having forgotten that in proportion as you have + rendered yourself formidable to our enemies, you should have been + guarded and temperate in your deportment toward your fellow + citizens. Exhibit anew those noble qualities which have placed you + on the list of our most valued commanders. I will myself furnish + you, as far as it may be in my power, with opportunities of + regaining the esteem of your country.” + +It was a bad day for Benedict Arnold when he got into touch with the +Jewish syndicate of army-contractors. There was hope for him even yet, +if he would cast off the evil spell. But time pressed; events were +culminating; the alien, having gripped him, was about to make the best +of the baleful opportunity. The closing chapter was about to be written +in glory or in shame. + + +—— + +Issue of October 15, 1921 + + + + + LXIX. + Arnold and His Jewish Aids at West Point + + +After General Washington had delivered the reprimand to Benedict Arnold, +he proceeded at once to make good the intimation which he had given the +unhappy officer—“I will myself furnish you, as far as may be in my +power, with opportunities of regaining the esteem of your country.” It +was late in July, 1780, that General Washington had learned of the +British plan to march to Newport and attack re-enforcements of the +American cause before they could land and entrench themselves. +Washington therefore decided to harry the British and perhaps prevent +the attack by crossing the Hudson and marching down the east shore to +menace New York, the British headquarters. + +It was the last day of July, and General Washington was personally +seeing the last division over at King’s Ferry, when Benedict Arnold +appeared. It is true that he had been wounded, it is also true that his +accounts had not been allowed by Congress; but his wound was the fortune +of war, and the delay in allowing his accounts was due to his already +acquired reputation for shady dealing in money matters, neither of which +justified him in betraying his country, but both of which might have +stimulated him to recover the status he had so early lost. + +It was thus that Benedict Arnold appeared before George Washington, that +last day of July, 1780—a man whom Congress rightly distrusted, a man who +had just been rightly reprimanded, a man whose fellow officers looked at +him askance. + +Yet it was to such a man that Washington made good his word. The army +was on the way to New York to attack the British. As Arnold rode up, +General Washington said to him, “You are to command the left wing, the +post of honor.” + +Those who were present report that, at Washington’s words, Arnold’s +countenance fell. The magnanimity of the First American meant nothing to +him. The opportunity to retrieve his good name had somehow lost its +value. + +So patent was Arnold’s disappointment, that Washington asked him to ride +to headquarters and await him there. At headquarters Arnold disclosed to +Washington’s aid, Colonel Tilghman, that his desire was not for a +command in the army, but for the command of West Point. West Point was +then but a post up the Hudson River, far outside the zone of important +fighting, and certainly the last place it was thought the intrepid +Arnold would desire to be. The inconsistency between Arnold’s desire for +action and West Point’s lack of action, struck General Washington very +forcibly. He had offered Arnold a chance to rehabilitate his reputation; +Arnold hung back, asking for a place where no distinctive service could +then be rendered. + +Now let the reader take note of this fact: it may be important, it may +be unimportant; it may have some bearing on Benedict Arnold’s action, it +may have none; but the fact nevertheless is this: The Forage Master, +that is, the quartermaster at West Point, was Colonel Isaac Franks, a +member of the same family which we have been considering in these +articles. This Colonel Isaac Franks, we are informed by the Jewish +records which make a great deal of the fact, was once confidential +aide-de-camp to General Washington, though for what reason the +relationship was dissolved we are not informed. + +The reader will recall that the narrative of Benedict Arnold has already +included two members of the Franks family—David, of Philadelphia, and +David Solesbury Franks, who came down from Montreal. + +The third Franks is now in view—Colonel Isaac Franks. He is in charge of +supplies at the post of West Point. It is to West Point that Benedict +Arnold wishes to go, even though General Washington is offering him the +post of honor in the forward movement which the Continental Army is +about to make. It is the last day of July, 1780. + +On August 3, General Washington gave Arnold his orders and allowed him +to proceed to take command of West Point. Accompanying him, of course, +was Colonel David Solesbury Franks, his aide-de-camp, whose testimony +had been so useful at the court-martial. There were then two Franks at +West Point—Colonel D. S. Franks, aid to the commandant, and Colonel +Isaac Franks, in charge of supplying the post. + +It appears that Arnold had already been in communication with the enemy +and had asked for the command at West Point, not for any of the reasons +he alleged to General Washington, but because he had already chosen it +as the gateway through which he was to let the British through into the +weakened American territory. For two months Arnold had been writing to +“Anderson,” or John André. He had been reaching out toward the enemy for +a longer time than that, and had at length requested that a man equal to +himself be appointed to negotiate with him. Major John André, adjutant +general of the British Army in America, was chosen as one of rank +sufficiently high to deal with Arnold. They had already come into touch +with each other before Arnold asked General Washington for the post at +West Point. And André, as we have previously seen, knew the Franks. + +Apologists for Arnold have said that the reason he showed so deep a +disappointment when General Washington offered him the command of the +left wing of the army, was that he had never expected such magnanimous +treatment, and for the moment was conscience-stricken that he had gone +so far with the enemy when his own country offered him such fine +prospects. If that were the true state of Arnold’s mind, he need only +have taken command of the left wing, or, having been committed to take +West Point, be need only have gone there and performed his soldierly +duty. + +The history and personality of Major John André, who completed the +negotiations with Arnold, and lost his life as a spy, while Arnold lived +long as a traitor, have been the object of much interest and research. +His descent is obscure. His parentage was known as “Swiss-French.” It is +thought that the first André came into England in the train of a Jewish +family. André himself had those accomplishments which were most highly +prized in the society of the day. In any event, of Jewish or non-Jewish +descent, he was a far finer character than Benedict Arnold. + +On Arnold’s staff at West Point, besides the two Jewish Franks—Isaac and +David—there was Lieutenant Colonel Richard Varick. This Varick was a +wise young fellow who preferred to have as little as possible to do with +Arnold’s affairs. He refused to take any responsibility connected with +Arnold’s dealings with money or goods. For some apparently good reason, +which will not be difficult for the reader to surmise, Varick adopted +the strict policy of keeping his hands off all supplies. Thus it was +left to Major Franks to attend all such matters, to which he was +apparently nothing loath. In fact, Major Franks even looked after +General Arnold’s private cupboard. + +Not to delay longer over details, suffice it to say that on September +22, 1780, less than two months after assuming command at West Point, the +treason of Benedict Arnold was accomplished. One more day, and it was +discovered and foiled. + +Instant inquiry was made to detect accomplices. Major Franks is placed +under arrest. David Franks, of Philadelphia, is arrested. It may or may +not be significant, but it is nevertheless a fact, that upon the +accomplishment of Arnold’s treason the authorities ordered that the two +Jews, David Franks and David Solesbury Franks, be put under arrest. + +The experience of David Franks adds a bit of Jewish comedy to this +serious scene. It appears that he still has influence to save him from +severe treatment and to gain him time. On the occasion of his previous +arrest in 1778, Benedict Arnold was commander of the city of +Philadelphia and David Solesbury Franks was on Arnold’s staff, and if +Arnold and Franks could concoct a scheme of profiteering off the closed +stores of the city, it was probably not beyond them to see that the +elder David Franks received favor in his case. At least, as the reader +of previous articles knows, David Franks went free, although caught in +the act of communicating with the enemy. + +But this time there is no Benedict Arnold to help him, and his nephew, +like himself, is under arrest because of Arnold’s treason. Yet the +Philadelphia Jew discloses a marvelous facility of playing horse with +the law. + +He remained in jail until October 6, and then, strange to relate, he is +given two weeks to get within the enemy’s lines. Investigation somehow +has been stopped; prosecution has been sidetracked. But David found 14 +days too brief a time to wind up his affairs, and he petitions for an +extension of time. It is denied. Then when one week of the time had +passed, Franks asks for a pass to New York for himself, daughter, +man-servant and two maid-servants; this is refused and passes are +authorized for himself, daughter, and one maid-servant, “provided she be +an indented servant.” But David does not use these passes. He applies +again for an extension of time on account of an “indisposition of body.” +Thus, by keeping officials busy with his evasions and his +counter-suggestions the record finds him still in Philadelphia on +November 18, a month after he was supposed to be out of the country. + +He makes application for another pass. The Council obediently sends him +one, the secretary making this observation in his note: “The Council are +much surprised that you still remain in this city, and hope that you +will immediately depart this state, agreeable to their late order, +otherwise measures will be taken to compel you to comply with the same.” + +Does David go? He does not. He writes an extremely polite letter. +Incidentally he gives a hint of what may be keeping him. In his letter +to the Council he says: + +“Being apprehensive that a report raised and circulated that I had +_depreciated the currency by purchase of specie_ may have given rise to +prejudice against me with the Honorable Council....” + +More than likely this is precisely what David was doing. It was done +later by another Jew in American history, Judah P. Benjamin, and it was +done everywhere by Jews during the recent war. With David’s racial itch +for money and his disloyalty to the American cause, there was probably +sound foundation for the report. + +And then, in the last line of his letter, he finds fault with his pass, +and asks for another. All this time, of course, he is gaining time, and +is fulfilling his purpose with regard to the specie. + +This, by the way, is a common Jewish strategem. It is very much observed +in lawsuits. The non-Jew can always be depended on to desire justice and +humanity, and these traits are systematically played upon. The non-Jew +is also inclined to take men’s word at its face value, which is also a +trait which can be used to his hurt. If, for example, in a business +transaction which is to be consummated a week hence, the non-Jew could +absolutely fortify himself if he had the slightest suspicion of sharp +dealing, it is to the advantage of the Jew who tries to “do” him to give +him his word as to exactly what steps will be taken a week hence at the +final settlement. If the non-Jew believes that word, he is quieted for a +week. He does nothing. He rests implicitly on the given word. Then the +morning comes, and the dishonest Jew steps up without warning and drives +through ruthlessly to a tricky gain. This is so common that thousands +who have been tricked by it have told the full details. Keep the Gentile +so busy, or satisfy him so fully, that he will not bother—that’s the +strategy. David knew it even in his day, and it was ancient then. + +His request for a new pass is refused. But still he does not go. +Finally, an aroused Council sends him notice to be gone by the next day. +And then he goes, but not, we may well believe, until he had done all he +intended to do. David is delightfully Jewish and the Council are naïvely +Gentile. + +Up at West Point other matters are proceeding. When General Washington +arrived and heard the startling news, he asked Colonel Varick to walk +with him. He spoke to the young officer most considerately, told him he +did not question his loyalty, but under the circumstances he would ask +him to consider himself under arrest. It was very like Washington to do +this, to make the arrest himself, gently. There is no record, however, +that a like courtesy was shown the Jewish Major David Solesbury Franks. +Washington probably remembered him as the witness for Arnold in the case +which led to Arnold’s court-martial and reprimand. + +On that frontier post (as West Point then was) there were no witnesses. +Franks and Varick were confronted with the necessity of testifying for +each other. That is, the Jewish major was his own representative in +court and practically his own witness. Franks put Varick on the stand to +testify for him, and Varick put Franks on the stand to testify for him. +The resulting testimony shows that Franks knew much and was eager to +tell how much he knew of Arnold’s traitorous intentions—but he did not +tell it until Arnold’s treason was exposed and he himself under arrest. + +The purpose of this article being merely to fill up the gaps which are +left in the Jewish propagandist boasting of the part they have played in +public affairs in the United States, the reader must himself be a judge +as to how far Major David Solesbury Franks was in Arnold’s secret. (The +“Smith” mentioned in the testimony was Joshua Hett Smith, who did secret +work for Arnold and rowed André ashore for the night conference with +Arnold.) Following are vital extracts from the testimony: + +Major Franks—“What was my opinion of Joshua H. Smith’s character and +conduct, and of his visits at Arnold’s headquarters...?” + +Colonel Varick—“When I first joined Arnold’s family ... Arnold and +yourself thought well of him as a man, but I soon prevailed on you to +think him a Liar and a Rascal; and you ever after spoke of him in a +manner his real character merited....” + +Arnold, of course, knew what Smith was. Arnold and Smith were already +partners in treason. But Varick did not know of this partnership. All +that Varick knew was that both Arnold and Franks appeared to hold the +same opinion, that Smith was all right. Here Arnold and Franks appear as +agreed again. Varick regarded them as holding the same opinion. Varick +says so to Franks’ face in answer to Franks’ question. He does it, +however, from a friendly purpose. But the fact is significant that +Franks and Arnold are found holding the same front—“Arnold and yourself +thought well of him as a man.” + +Now, Arnold _knew_ what Smith was, knew enough about Smith to hang him. +Smith was one of the tools of his long extended treason. The question +is, did Franks also know? Was Franks kept in ignorance of Arnold’s real +knowledge of Smith, or was Franks actually deceived as regards Smith? It +may be, but let this be observed, that Varick, who was not at all in +Arnold’s confidence, nevertheless was not deceived about Smith, but saw +through him at once. Did not Franks see through him, too? Until the time +that Varick dared speak about the matter, Franks and Arnold were +preserving the same appearance of opinion—they “thought well of him as a +man.” + +Then Varick honestly spoke out. He got hold of the Jewish Franks and +told him all that he knew and suspected about Smith. The evidence was +too overwhelming for Franks to scoff at. Any man scoffing at Varick’s +tale would himself be under suspicion. Varick was given to understand +that he had changed Franks’ opinion of Smith. Thereafter Franks +comported himself in a manner to convince Varick that he regarded Smith +as a “Liar and a Rascal.” + +It is permissible to ask, was this pretense or reality? If Varick knew +things, Varick was a man to handle wisely. If Varick knew things, it +would be foolish to lose touch with him and thus lose the benefit of +knowing how much was known or surmised outside. These, of course, are +the arguments of suspicion, but they are made concerning the same Jewish +officer who, on finding that Colonel Fitzgerald had discovered the +profiteering venture in which Franks and Arnold were partners, was wise +enough to inform Arnold and permit the plan to drop. Major Franks’ +previous behavior, like Benedict Arnold’s, arouses the suspicion. +Benedict Arnold appeared to Varick to regard Smith as a good man; Franks +appeared to Varick to share Arnold’s opinion; but whether Franks really +_knew_, as Arnold knew, and only pretended to change his opinion that he +might keep the confidence of Varick, is a point on which Franks’ +previous conduct compels the mind to waver. + +How well Franks knew Arnold may be gathered from other points brought +out in this testimony: + + Major Franks—“How often did Arnold go down the river in his barge, + whilst I was at Robinson’s House (Arnold’s headquarters)? Did I ever + attend him, and what were our opinions and conduct on his going down + and remaining absent the night of the twenty-first of September?” + (This was the night of his meeting André.) + + Colonel Varick—(answers that Franks, to his knowledge, never + accompanied Arnold) “But when I was informed by you or Mrs. Arnold, + on the twenty-first, that he was not to return that evening, I + suggested to you that I supposed he had gone to Smith’s, and that I + considered Arnold’s treatment of me in keeping up his connection + with Smith, in opposition to the warning I had given him, as very + ungenteel, and that I was resolved to quit his family” (meaning his + staff). “We did thereupon concert the plan of preventing their + further intimacy by alarming Mrs. Arnold’s fears.... + + “You did at the same time inform me that you could not account for + his connections with Smith—that you knew him to be an avaricious man + and suspected he meant to open trade with some person in New York, + under sanction of his command, and by means of flags and the + unprincipled rascal Smith; and that you were induced to suspect it + from the letter he wrote to Anderson in a commercial style as + related to you by me. We thereupon pledged to each our word of honor + that if our suspicions should prove to be founded in fact, we would + instantly quit him.” + +It is the honest Varick talking, Franks questioning him. It will be +observed that it is Franks who tells Varick of Arnold’s absence and that +he will not return that night. Franks knew, but Varick did not. It will +be observed also, that it was Varick who protested and threatened to +quit Arnold. It was indeed the second time he had threatened to quit, +but the Jewish major seems never to have had a similar thought. But most +important to observe is Varick’s statement in answer to Franks, and in +Franks’ presence, that it was Franks who opened up with information +regarding Arnold’s character—that Arnold was an avaricious man, that +Franks suspected him of opening up trade with the enemy “under sanction +of his command” (just as he had planned to misuse his authority at +Philadelphia) and that Smith was to be the go-between. Then he mentions +a letter to “Anderson in a commercial style”—this “Anderson” being none +other than Major John André of the British Army. + +Here we find Major Franks intimate with every element of the +conspiracy—every element of it!—and giving a certain explanation of it +to Varick. Did Franks know more than he told, and was he quieting Varick +with an explanation which seemed to cover all the facts, and yet did not +divulge the truth? It is a question that occurs, directly we recall the +close collusion of Arnold and Franks at Philadelphia. + +There is other testimony, that it was Varick, not Franks, who prevented +Arnold selling supplies of the government for his own profit. Time and +again this occurred, but never with Franks, the long-time aid and +confidant of Arnold, in the role of actor. But every time Varick did it, +Franks knew of it, as he testified. + +Now we approach the “Day of his Desertion,” as the records call the day +of Arnold’s treason. + + Major Franks—“What was Arnold’s, as well as my conduct and + deportment on the Day of his Desertion, and had you the slightest + reason to think I had been or was party or privy to any of his + villainous practices and correspondence with the enemy, or to his + flight? Pray relate the whole of our conduct on that day to your + knowledge.” + + Colonel Varick—“I was sick and a greater part of the time in my bed + in the morning of his flight. Before breakfast he came into my room” + (and talked about certain letters) “and I never saw him after it but + betook myself to my bed. I think it was about an hour thereafter + when you came to me and told me Arnold was gone to West Point—also a + considerable time thereafter you came to the window of my room near + my bed and, shoving it up hastily told me with a degree of apparent + surprise that you believed Arnold was a villain or rascal, and added + you had heard a report that one Anderson was taken as a spy on the + lines and that a militia officer had brought a letter to Arnold and + that he was enjoined secrecy by Arnold. I made some warm reply, but + instantly reflecting that I was injuring a gentleman and friend of + high reputation in a tender point, I told you it was uncharitable + and unwarrantable even to suppose it. You concurred in opinion with + me and I lay down secure in the high idea I entertained of Arnold’s + integrity and patriotism....” + +Here is a record of Major Franks’ conduct, told at his own solicitation +before a court of inquiry. It reveals that Arnold told Franks, but did +not tell Varick, where he was going. It reveals also that Franks knew of +the message which came to Arnold, the bearer of which had been bound by +Arnold to secrecy. (For the reader’s benefit it is recalled that +Arnold’s treason was prematurely exposed by André being lost in the +woods at night after his interview with Arnold, and his consequent +inability to get back to the British ship. He was sighted and halted in +daylight, and discovery was made of the West Point plans in his +stockings. The innocent soldiers sent word to Benedict Arnold, their +commanding officer, that they had captured a spy named Anderson. This +gave Arnold information that the plot had fallen through. Enjoining +absolute secrecy on the messenger, Arnold made off hastily as if to +investigate, but really to rush to the ship to which André had failed to +return.) But, observe: the messenger arrived and immediately Franks +appears to be informed what the message contains. He is informed also +that Arnold is going to West Point. He is informed of “Anderson’s” +capture. Once again _Franks is in instant touch with all the points of +the matter_, but this time he goes further and accuses Arnold. In the +peculiar phraseology of Varick, which may or may not be significant, +Franks “hastily told me with a degree of apparent surprise” that he +believed Arnold to be a villain or rascal. + +Then the difference between these two men appeared again; it shines out +luminously. When it was possible to save Arnold, it was Varick who was +most concerned, while Franks appeared to be hand in glove with the +traitor. But when it was apparent that something irrevocable had +happened, it was the Jew who was first and bitterest to denounce, while +Varick remembered the conduct expected of gentlemen. Likewise, as at +first, the Jewish major changed his opinion of Smith to agree with +Varick’s opinion, so now he “concurred in opinion” with Varick, although +he had just violently uttered the opposite opinion concerning Arnold. + +Varick was charitable because he did not have the facts. Was Franks as +outspoken as he was because he had all the facts? If so, where did he +get them? From Arnold? + +How much did Franks know? That question will probably never be answered. +There is, however, this additional testimony of his on record: + + “I told you that I thought Arnold had corresponded with Anderson or + some such name before from Philadelphia, and had got intelligence of + consequence from him.” + +David Solesbury Franks was implicated in every major crime of Benedict +Arnold and in the great treason he gave evidence of knowing every +movement of the game, from its far beginning in Philadelphia. + +Franks was exonerated by the court. + +From his safe retreat on the British man-of-war, Benedict Arnold wrote a +letter in which he exculpated Smith, Franks and Varick, writing that +they were “totally ignorant of any transactions of mine, that they had +reason to believe were injurious to the public.” + +Smith was neither ignorant nor innocent. He had rowed out to the British +ship and brought André ashore for his conference with Arnold. He had +been a go-between on many shady missions. Yet Arnold in his letter +exonerates Smith. That fact seriously affects his exoneration of Franks. +If Arnold can lie about Smith’s innocence, why cannot he lie about +Franks’ innocence? As to Varick, he is the only one of the three who can +do without Arnold’s exoneration; to Varick it is an insult to have +Benedict Arnold vouch for him. Franks, however, was always afterward +inclined to lean upon Arnold’s letter. An impartial study of the +testimony, upon the background of a knowledge of Franks’ history, leaves +grave doubts as to the unimpeachability of his relations with Benedict +Arnold. So much so, indeed, that in the study of Arnold’s treason it is +a grave omission to pass over Franks’ name. + +The reader who will make a complete study of Franks’ character as +revealed in the records will testify to this: the present study has been +exceedingly charitable to his character; he could easily have been +prejudiced in the reader’s mind by the presentation of a series of facts +omitted here; the object has been to judge him solely on his acts with +relation to Benedict Arnold. + +Rightly or wrongly, Franks was suspected ever afterward. It was the +Philadelphia incident that stamped his reputation. The suspicion of +perjury on that occasion never left him. Franks insisted on having +himself vindicated all round, but he was never satisfied with his +vindications, he always wanted more. Jewish propagandists have +misrepresented his subsequent work as a diplomatist. It was of the +merest messenger-boy character, and he was intrusted with it only after +the most obsequious appeals. He peddled petitions reciting his services +and asking for government favor. The man who asserted in his defense at +Philadelphia that he was eager to leave the army and enter business, +could not be induced to leave the public service, until the allotment to +him of 400 acres of land seems to have effectually weaned him from +public life. What his end was, no one appears to know. His present-day +use, however, is to furnish Jewish and pro-Jewish propagandists with a +peg on which to hang extravagant praise of the Jew in Revolutionary +times. + +There can be no objection whatever to Jewish propagandists making the +most of their material, but there is strong objection to the policy of +concealment and misrepresentation. These impositions on public +confidence will be exposed as regularly as they occur. + + +—— + +Issue of October 23, 1921. + + + + + LXX. + The Gentle Art of Changing Jewish Names + + +The Madansky brothers—Max, Solomon, Benjamin, and Jacob—have written +that their names henceforth will be May. It is a good old Anglo-Saxon +name, but the Madanskys are of Asiatic origin. + +Elmo Lincoln, a movie actor, comes into a Los Angeles court on the +motion of his wife, and it is discovered that he is only Otto Linknhelt. + +A large department store owner was born with the name Levy. He is now +known as Lytton. It is quite possible he did not like Levy as a name; +but why did he not change it for another Jewish name? Or perhaps it was +the Jewishness of “Levy” that displeased him. + +A popular tenor star recently brought suit against his wife, who married +him after allowing him to believe that she was of Spanish origin. “I +understood from her misleading stage name that she was Spanish when I +married her. Later I found that she was Jewish and that her real name +was Bergenstein.” + +One of the biggest and best known stores in the United States goes under +an honored Christian name, though every one of the owners is Jewish. The +public still carries a mental picture of the good old merchant who +established the store, which picture would speedily change if the public +could get a glimpse of the real owners. + +Take the name Belmont, for example, and trace its history. Prior to the +nineteenth century the Jews resident in Germany did not use family +names. It was “Joseph the son of Jacob,” “Isaac ben Abraham,” the son +being designated as the son of his father. But the Napoleonic era, +especially following upon the assembly of the Great Sanhedrin under +Napoleon’s command, caused a distinct change in Jewish customs in +Europe. + +In 1808 Napoleon sent out a decree commanding all Jews to adopt family +names. In Austria a list of surnames was assigned to the Jews, and if a +Jew was unable to choose, the state chose for him. The names were +devised from precious stones, as Rubenstein; precious metals, such as +Goldstein, Silberberg; plants, trees and animals, such as Mandelbaum, +Lilienthal, Ochs, Wolf, and Loewe. + +The German Jews created surnames by the simple method of affixing the +syllable “son” to the father’s name, thus making Jacobson, Isaacson; +while others adopted the names of the localities in which they lived, +the Jew resident in Berlin becoming Berliner, and the Jew resident in +Oppenheim becoming Oppenheimer. + +Now, in the region of Schoenberg, in the German Rhine country, a +settlement of Jews had lived for several generations. When the order to +adopt surnames went forth, Isaac Simon, the head of the settlement, +chose the name of Schoenberg. It signifies in German, “beautiful hill.” +It is very easily Frenchified into Belmont, which also means beautiful +hill or mountain. A Columbia University professor once tried to make it +appear that the Belmonts originated in the Belmontes family of Portugal, +but found it impossible to harmonize this theory with the Schoenberg +facts. + +It is noteworthy that a Belmont became American agent of the +Rothschilds, and that the name of Rothschild is derived from the red +shield on a house in the Jewish quarter of Frankfort-on-the-Main. What +the original family name is has never been divulged. + +The Jewish habit of changing names is responsible for the immense +camouflage that has concealed the true character of Russian events. When +Leon Bronstein becomes Leo Trotsky, and when the Jewish Apfelbaum +becomes the “Russian” Zinoviev; and when the Jewish Cohen becomes the +“Russian” Volodarsky, and so on down through the list of the controllers +of Russia—Goldman becoming Izgoev, and Feldman becoming Vladimirov—it is +a little difficult for people who think that names do not lie, to see +just what is transpiring. + +Indeed, there is any amount of evidence that in numberless cases this +change of names—or the adoption of “cover names,” as the Jewish +description is—is for purposes of concealment. There is an immense +difference in the state of mind in which a customer enters the store of +Isadore Levy and the state of mind in which he enters the store of Alex +May. And what would be his feeling to learn that Isadore Levy painted up +the name of Alex May with that state of mind in view? When Rosenbluth +and Schlesinger becomes “The American Mercantile Company,” there is +justification for the feeling that the name “American” is being used to +conceal the Jewish character of the firm. + +The tendency of Jews to change their names dates back very far. There +was and is a superstition that to give a sick person another name is to +“change his luck,” and save him from the misfortune destined upon his +old name. There was also the Biblical example of a change of nature +being followed by a change of name, as when Abram became Abraham and +Jacob became Israel. + +There have been justifiable grounds, however, for Jews changing their +names in Europe. The nationalism of that continent is, of course, +intense, and the Jews are an international nation, scattered among all +the nations, with an unenviable reputation of being ready to exploit for +Jewish purposes the nationalistic intensity of the Gentiles. To mollify +a suspicion held against them wherever they have lived (a suspicion so +general and so persistent as to be explainable only on the assumption +that it was abundantly justified) the Jews have been quick to adopt the +names and colors of whatever country they may be living in. It is no +trouble at all to change a flag, since none of the flags is the insignia +of Judah. This was seen throughout the war zone; the Jews hoisted +whatever flag was expedient at the moment, and changed it as often as +the shifting tide of battle required. + +A Polish Jew named Zuckermandle, emigrating to Hungary, would be anxious +to show that he had shuffled off the Polish allegiance which his name +proclaimed; and the only way he could do this would be to change his +name, which would very likely become Zukor, a perfectly good Hungarian +name. Originally the Zukors were not Jews; now the usual guess would be +that they are. In the United States it would be almost a certainty. Such +a change as Mr. Zuckermandle would make, however, would not be for the +purpose of concealing the fact that he was a Jew, but only to conceal +the fact that he was a foreign Jew. + +In the United States it has been found that Jews change their names for +three reasons: first, for the same reason that many other foreigners +change their names, namely, to minimize as much as possible the “foreign +look” and the difficulty of pronunciation which many of those names +carry with them; second, for business reasons, to prevent the knowledge +becoming current that So-and-So is “a Jew store”; third, for social +reasons. + +The desire not to appear singular among one’s neighbors, when stated in +just these words, very easily passes muster as being a natural desire, +until you apply it to yourself. If you were going abroad to Italy, +Germany, Russia, there to live and engage in business, would you cast +about for a changed name immediately? Of course not. Your name is part +of you, and you have your own opinion of an alias. The Jew, however, has +his own name among his own people, regardless of what “cover name” the +world may know him by, and, therefore, he changes his outside name quite +coolly. The only likeness we have to that in America is the changing of +men’s pay numbers as they move their employment from place to place. +John Smith may be No. 49 in Black’s shop and No. 375 in White’s shop, +but he is always John Smith. So the Jew may be Simon son of Benjamin in +the privacy of the Jewish circle, while to the world he may be Mortimer +Alexander. + +In the United States it is hardly to be doubted that business and social +reasons are mostly responsible for the changes in Jewish names. The +designation “American” is itself much coveted, as may be gathered by its +frequent use in firm names, the members of which are not American in any +sense that entitles them to blazon that name throughout the world. + +When Moses is changed to Mortimer, and Nathan to Norton, and Isadore to +Irving (as for example, Irving Berlin, whose relatives, however, still +know him as “Izzy”), the concealment of Jewishness in a country where so +much is done by print, must be regarded as a probable motive. + +When “Mr. Lee Jackson” is proposed for the club there would seem to be +no reason, as far as reading goes, why anything unusual about Mr. +Jackson should be surmised, until you know that Mr. Jackson is really +Mr. Jacobs. Jackson happens to be the name of a President of the United +States, which names are quite in favor with the name-changers, but in +this case it happens also to be one of the “derivatives” of an old +Jewish name. + +The Jewish Encyclopedia contains interesting information on this matter +of derivatives. + +Asher is shaded off into Archer, Ansell, Asherson. + +Baruch is touched up into Benedict, Beniton, Berthold. + +Benjamin becomes Lopez, Seef, Wolf (this is translation). + +David becomes Davis, Davison, Davies, Davidson. + +Isaac becomes Sachs, Saxe, Sace, Seckel. + +Jacob becomes Jackson, Jacobi, Jacobus, Jacof, Kaplan, Kauffmann, +Marchant, Merchant. + +Jonah becomes by quite simple changes, Jones and Joseph, Jonas. + +Judah (the true Jewish name) becomes Jewell, Leo, Leon, Lionel, Lyon, +Leoni, Judith. + +Levi becomes Leopold, Levine, Lewis, Loewe, Low, Lowy. + +Moses becomes Moritz, Moss, Mortimer, Max, Mack, Moskin, Mosse. + +Solomon becomes Salmon, Salome, Sloman, Salmuth. + +And so on through the list of Jewish “changelings”—Barnett, Barnard, +Beer, Hirschel, Mann, Mendel, Mandell, Mendelsohn, with various others +which are not even adaptations but sheer appropriations. + +The millinery business, which is one of the principal Jewish grafts off +American women, shows the liking of the Jews for names which do not +name, but which stand as impressive insignia—“Lucile,” “Mme. Grande,” +and the like. Reuben Abraham Cohen is a perfectly good name, and a good +citizen could make it immensely respected in his neighborhood, but +Reuben thinks that the first round in the battle of minds should be his, +and he does not scruple at a little deceit to obtain it, so he painted +on the window of his store, R. A. Le Cán, which, when set off with a +borrowed coat of arms, looks sufficiently Frenchified for even observant +boobs among the Gentiles. Similarly a Mr. Barondesky may blossom out as +Barondes or La Baron. + +Commonly Mr. Abraham becomes Miller. Why Miller should have been picked +on for Judaization is not clear, but the Millers of the white race may +yet be compelled to adopt some method of indicating that their name is +not Jewish. It is conceivable that a Yiddish and an American form of the +same name may some time be deemed necessary. Aarons becomes Arnold—there +are a number of Jewish Arnolds. Aarons became Allingham. One Cohen +became Druce, another Cohen became Freeman. Still another Cohen became a +Montagu; a fourth Cohen became a Rothbury and a fifth Cohen became a +Cooke. + +The Cohens have an excuse, however. In one ghetto there are so many +Cohens that some distinction must be observed. There is Cohen the rag +gatherer, and Cohen the schacet (ritual meat killer), and Cohen the +rising lawyer, as well as Cohen the physician. To make the matter more +difficult their first names (otherwise their “Christian” names) are +Louis. It is not to be wondered at, therefore, that the young lawyer +should become Attorney Cohane (which does all the better if thereby +certain Irish clients are attracted), and that the young doctor should +become Doctor Kahn, or Kohn. These are some of the many forms that the +priestly name of Cohen takes. + +The same may be said with reference to Kaplan, a very common name. +Charlie Chaplin’s name was, in all probability, Caplan, or Kaplan. At +any rate, this is what the Jews believe about their great “star.” +Non-Jews have read of Charlie as a “poor English boy.” + +There is the Rev. Stephen S. Wise, for another example. He booms his way +across the country from one platform to the other, a wonder in his way, +that such pomposity of sound should convey such paucity of sense. He is +an actor, the less effective because he essays a part in which sincerity +is requisite. This Rabbi, whose vocal exercise exhausts his other +powers, was born in Hungary, his family name being Weisz. Sometimes this +name is Germanized to Weiss. When S. S. Weisz became S. S. Wise, we do +not know. If he had merely Americanized his Hungarian name it would have +given him the name of White. Apparently “Wise” looked better. Truly it +is better to be white than to be wise, but Dr. Stephen S. is a fresh +point in the query of “what’s in a name?” + +The list of Jews in public life whose names are not Jewish would be a +long one. Louis Marshall, head of the American Jewish Committee, for +example—what could his old family name have been before it was changed +for the name of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United +States? + +Mr. Selwyn’s name, now so widely known in motion pictures, was +originally Schlesinger. Some of the Schlesingers become Sinclairs, but +Selwyn made a really good choice for a man in the show business. A rabbi +whose real name was Posnansky became Posner. The name Kalen is usually +an abbreviation of Kalensky. A true story is told of an East Side +tinsmith whose name was very decidedly foreign-Jewish. It is withheld +here, because THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT prefers in this connection to +mention only the names of those who can take care of themselves. But the +tinsmith moved to a non-Jewish section and opened a new shop under the +name of Perkins, and his luck really did change! He is doing well and, +being an industrious, honest workman, deserves his prosperity. + +Of course, there are lower uses of the name-changing practice, as every +employer of labor knows. A man contracts a debt under one name, and to +avoid a garnishee, quits his job, collects his pay, and in a day or two +attempts to hire out under another name. This was once quite a +successful trick, and is not wholly unknown now. + +There is also much complaint among the stricter observers of the Jewish +ritual requirements that the word “Kosher” is greatly misused, that +indeed it covers a multitude of sins. “Kosher” has come to signify, in +some places, little more than a commercial advertisement designed to +attract Jewish trade. For all it means of what it says, it might just as +well be “The Best Place in Town to Eat”—which it isn’t, of course; and +neither is it always “strictly” Kosher. + +It must be conceded, however, that the tendency to mislabel men and +things is deep set in Jewish character. Jews are great coiners of +catchwords that are not true, inventors of slogans that do not move. +There is a considerable decrease in the power they wielded by such +methods; their brilliancy in this respect is running to seed. This may +be explained by the fact that there are so many song titles to write for +the Jewish jazz factories, and so much “snappy” matter for screen +descriptions. Their come-back is painfully thin and forced. Without +peers in dealing with a superficial situation like a dispute over the +beauty of two rival “stars,” or the amount and method of distributing +confetti, they are the veriest dubs in dealing with a situation like +that which has arisen in this country. + +Immediately upon the appearance of the Jewish Question in the United +States the Jews reverted naturally to their habit of mislabeling. They +were going to fool the people once more with a pat phrase. They are +still seeking for that phrase. Slowly they are recognizing that they are +up against the Truth, and truth is neither a jazzy jade nor a movie +motto, which can be recostumed and changed at will. + +This passion for misleading people by names is deep and varied in its +expression. Chiefly due to Jewish influences, we are giving the name of +“liberalism” to looseness. We are dignifying with names that do not +correctly name, many subversive movements. We are living in an era of +false labels, whose danger is recognized by all who observe the various +underground currents which move through all sections of society. +Socialism itself is no longer what its name signifies; the name has been +seized and used to label anarchy. Judaistic influence creeping into the +Christian church has kept the apostolic labels, but thoroughly destroyed +the apostolic content; the disruptive work has gone on quietly and +unhindered, because often as the people looked, the same label was +there—as the same old merchant’s name stays on the store the Jews have +bought and cheapened. Thus there are “reverends” who are both unreverend +and irreverent, and there are shepherds who flock with the wolves. + +Zionism is another misnomer. Modern Zionism is not what its label would +indicate it to be. The managers of the new money collection—millions of +it, badly used, badly accounted for—are about as much interested in +Zionism as an Ohio Baptist is in Meccaism. For the leading so-called +“Zionists,” Mt. Zion and all that it stands for has next to no meaning; +they see only the political and real estate aspects of Palestine, +another people’s country just at present. The present movement is not +religious, although it plays upon the religions sentiments of the lower +class of Jews; it is certainly not what Judaized orators among the +Christians want the Christians to think it is; Zionism is at present a +most mischievous thing, potentially a most dangerous thing, as several +governments could confidentially tell you. + +But it is all a part of the Jewish practice of setting up a label +pretending one thing, while quite another thing really exists. + +Take anti-Semitism. That is a label which the Jews have industriously +pasted up everywhere. If ever it was an effective label its uses are +over now. It doesn’t mean anything. Anti-Semitism does not exist, since +the thing so named is found among the Semites, too. Semites cannot be +anti-Semitic. When the world holds up a warning finger against a race +that is the moving spirit of the corruptive, subversive and destructive +influences abroad in the world today, that race cannot nullify the +warning by sticking up a false label of “Anti-Semitism,” any more than +it can justify the sign of gold on a $1.50 watch or the sign of “pure +wool” on a $11.50 suit of clothes. + +So with the whole group of labels which the Jews have trotted out like +talismen to work some magic spell upon the aroused mind of America. They +are lies. And when one lie fails, how quickly they hitch their hopes to +another. If “Anti-Semitism” fails, then try “Anti-Catholic”—that might +do something. If that fails, try “Anti-American”—get the biggest talent +that can be hired for a night on the B’nai B’rith platform to shout it. +And when that fails, as it has—? + +The American Jewish Committee is itself a misnomer. The committee is not +exclusively American, and its work is not to Americanize the Jews nor +even to encourage real Americanization among them. It is a committee +composed of Jews representing that class which profits most by keeping +the mass of the Jews segregated from Americans and in bondage to the +“higher-ups” among the Jews. They are the “big Jews,” as Norman Hapgood +used to call them, who say to the “little Jews,” “You hang closely +together; we will be your representatives to these foreign peoples, the +Americans and others.” If the American Jewish Committee would change its +name to this: “The Jewish Commission for America,” it might be nearer +the truth. It has dealt with America in the recent past very much as the +Allied Commissions deal with Germany. There are certain things we may +do, and certain things we may not do, and the Jewish Commission for +America tells us what we may and may not do. One of the things we may +not do is to declare that this is a Christian country. + +There is one absolutely safe rule in dealing with anything emanating +from the American Jewish Committee. Don’t rely on the label, open the +matter up. You will, find that the Kehillah is not what it pretends to +be; that the Jewish labor union is not what it pretends to be; that +Zionism is a camouflage for something entirely different; that the name +and the nature are nearly always different, which is the reason for a +particular name being chosen. It runs all the way through Jewish +practice, and presents another little job for the Jewish reformer. + + +—— + +Issue of November 12, 1921. + + + + + _“What the American Jew needs to develop is the habit of + self-criticism. If the spokesmen of the Jewish people would + devote one-half the energy they now expend in answering attacks + to attacking the evils that stare everyone in the face, they + would make a real contribution to American life. But judged by + their public utterances, they seem to be supersensitive to + trivial prejudice in non-Jews and extraordinarily insensitive to + the faults of the Jews. They are hypochondriac and morbidly + defensive about their critics, and indulgent and complacent + about what the Jewish people is and does. Races, not cursed with + a sense of inferiority, do not shrink from criticism. They + initiate it.”—Walter Lippmann, in The American Hebrew._ + + + + + LXXI. + Jewish “Kol Nidre” and “Eli, Eli” Explained + + + + + “I have looked this year and last for something in your paper + about the prayer which the Jews say at their New Year. But you + say nothing. Can it be you have not heard of the Kol Nidre?” + + “Lately in three cities I have heard a Jewish religious hymn + sung in the public theaters. This was in New York, Detroit and + Chicago. Each time the program said ‘by request.’ Who makes the + request? What is the meaning of this kind of propaganda? The + name of the hymn is ‘Eli.’” + +The Jewish year just passed has been described by a Jewish writer in the +_Jewish Daily News_ as the Year of Chaos. The writer is apparently +intelligent enough to ascribe this condition to something besides +“anti-Semitism.” He says, “the thought that there is something wrong in +Jewish life will not down,” and when he describes the situation in the +Near East, he says, “The Jew himself is stirring the mess.” He indicts +the Jewish year 5681 on 12 counts, among them being, “mismanagement in +Palestine,” “engaging in internal warfare,” “treason to the Jewish +people,” “selfishness,” “self-delusion.” “The Jewish people is a sick +people,” cries the writer, and when he utters a comfortable prophecy for +the year 5682, it is not in the terms of Judah but in terms of “Kol +Yisroel”—All Israel—the terms of a larger and more inclusive unity which +gives Judah its own place, and its own place only, in the world. The +Jewish people are sick, to be sure, and the disease is the fallacy of +superiority, with its consequent “foreign policy” against the world. + +When Jewish writers describe the year 5681 as the Year of Chaos, it is +an unconscious admission that the Jewish people are ripening for a +change of attitude. The “chaos” is among the leaders; it involves the +plans which are based on the old false assumptions. The Jewish people +are waiting for leaders who can emancipate them from the thralldom of +their self-seeking masters in the religious and political fields. The +enemies of the emancipation of Judah are those who profit by Judah’s +bondage, and these are the groups that follow the American Jewish +Committee and the political rabbis. When a true Jewish prophet +arises—and he should arise in the United States—there will be a great +sweeping away of the selfish, scheming, heartless Jewish leaders, a +general desertion of the Jewish idea of “getting” instead of “making,” +and an emergence of the true idea submerged so long. + +There will also be a separation among the Jews themselves. They are not +all Jews who call themselves so today. There is a Tartar strain in +so-called Jewry that is absolutely incompatible with true Israelitish +raciality; there are other alien strains which utterly differ from the +true Jewish; but until now these strains have been held because the +Jewish leaders needed vast hordes of low-type people to carry out their +world designs. But the Jew himself is recognizing the presence of an +alien element; and that is the first step in a movement which will place +the Jewish Question on quite another basis. + +What the Jews of the United States are coming to think is indicated by +this letter—one among many (the writer is a Jew): + + “Gentlemen: + + “‘Because you believe in a good cause,’ said Dr. Johnson, ‘is no + reason why you should feel called upon to defend it, for by your + manner of defense you may do your cause much harm.’ + + “The above applying to me I will only say that I have received the + books you sent me and read both with much interest. + + “You are rendering the Jews a very great service, that of saving + them _from themselves_. + + “It takes courage, and nerve, and intelligence to do and pursue such + a work, and I admire you for it.” + +The letter was accompanied by a check which ordered THE DEARBORN +INDEPENDENT sent to the address of another who bears a distinctively +Jewish name. + +It is very clear that unity is not to be won by the truth-teller +soft-pedaling or suppressing his truth, nor by the truth-hearer +strenuously denying that the truth is true, but by both together +honoring the truth in telling and in acknowledging it. When the Jews see +this, they can take over the work of truth-telling and carry it on +themselves. These articles have as their only purpose: First, that the +Jews may see the truth for themselves about themselves; second, that +non-Jews may see the fallacy of the present Jewish idea and use enough +common sense to cease falling victims to it. With both Jews and non-Jews +seeing their error, the way is opened for cooperation instead of the +kind of competition (not commercial, but moral) which has resulted so +disastrously to Jewish false ambitions these long centuries. + +Now, as to the questions at the beginning of this article: THE DEARBORN +INDEPENDENT has heretofore scrupulously avoided even the appearance of +criticising the Jew for his religion. The Jew’s religion, as most people +think of it, is unobjectionable. But when he has carried on campaigns +against the Christian religion, and when in every conceivable manner he +thrusts his own religion upon the public from the stage of theaters and +in other public places, he has himself to blame if the public asks +questions. + +It is quite impossible to select the largest theater in the United +States, place the Star of David high in a beautiful stage heavens above +all flags and other symbols, apostrophize it for a week with all sorts +of wild prophecy and all sorts of silly defiance of the world, sing +hymns to it and otherwise adore it, without arousing curiosity. Yet the +Jewish theatrical managers, with no protest from the Anti-Defamation +Committee, have done this on a greater or smaller scale in many cities. +To say it is meaningless is to use words lightly. + +The “Kol Nidre” is a Jewish prayer, named from its opening words, “All +vows,” (kol nidre). It is based on the declaration of the Talmud: + + “_He who wishes that his vows and oaths shall have no value, stand + up at the beginning of the year and say: ‘All vows which I shall + make during the year shall be of no value.’_” + +It would be pleasant to be able to declare that this is merely one of +the curiosities of the darkness which covers the Talmud, but the fact is +that “Kol Nidre” is not only an ancient curiosity; it is also a modern +practice. In the volume of _revised_ “Festival Prayers,” published in +1919 by the Hebrew Publishing Company, New York, the prayer appears in +its fullness: + + “_All vows, obligations, oaths or anathemas, pledges of all names, + which we have vowed, sworn, devoted, or bound ourselves to, from + this day of atonement, until the next day of atonement (whose + arrival we hope for in happiness) we repent, aforehand, of them all, + they shall all be deemed absolved, forgiven, annulled, void and made + of no effect; they shall not be binding, nor have any power; the + vows shall not be reckoned vows, the obligations shall not be + obligatory, nor the oaths considered as oaths._” + +If this strange statement were something dug out of the misty past, it +would scarcely merit serious attention, but as being part of a _revised_ +Jewish prayer book printed in the United States in 1919, and as being +one of the high points of the Jewish religious celebration of the New +Year, it cannot be lightly dismissed after attention has once been +called to it. + +Indeed, the Jews do not deny it. Early in the year, when a famous Jewish +violinist landed in New York after a triumphant tour abroad, he was +besieged by thousands of his East Side admirers, and was able to quiet +their cries only when he took his violin and played the “Kol Nidre.” +Then the people wept as exiles do at the sound of the songs of the +homeland. + +In that incident the reader will see that (hard as it is for the non-Jew +to understand it!) there is a deep-rooted, sentimental regard for the +“Kol Nidre” which makes it one of the most sacred of possessions to the +Jew. Indefensibly immoral as the “Kol Nidre” is, utterly destructive of +all social confidence, yet the most earnest efforts of a few really +spiritual Jews have utterly failed to remove it from the prayer books, +save in a few isolated instances. The music of the “Kol Nidre” is famous +and ancient. One has only to refer to the article “Kol Nidre” in the +Jewish Encyclopedia to see the predicament of the modern Jew: he cannot +deny; he cannot defend; he cannot renounce. The “Kol Nidre” is here, and +remains. + +If the prayer were a request for forgiveness for the broken vows of the +past, normal human beings could quite understand it. Vows, promises, +obligations and pledges are broken, sometimes by weakness of will to +perform them, sometimes by reason of forgetfulness, sometimes by sheer +inability to do the thing we thought we could do. Human experience is +neither Jew nor Gentile in that respect. + +But the prayer is a holy advance notice, given in the secrecy of the +synagogue, that no promise whatever shall be binding, and more than not +being binding is there and then violated before it is ever made. + +The scope of the prayer is “from this day of atonement, until the next +day of atonement.” + +The prayer looks wholly to the future, “we repent, aforehand, of them +all.” + +The prayer breaks down the common ground of confidence between men—“the +vows shall not be reckoned vows; the obligations shall not be +obligatory, nor the oaths considered as oaths.” + +It requires no argument to show that if this prayer be really the rule +of faith and conduct for the Jews who utter it, the ordinary social and +business relations are impossible to maintain with them. + +It should be observed that there is no likeness here with Christian +“hypocrisy,” so-called. Christian “hypocrisy” arises mostly from men +holding higher ideals than they are able to attain to, and verbally +extolling higher principles than their conduct illustrates. That is, to +use Browning’s figure, the man’s reach exceeds his grasp; as it always +does, where the man is more than a clod. + +But the “Kol Nidre” is in the opposite direction. It recognizes by +inference that in the common world of men, in the common morality of the +street and the mart, a promise passes current as a promise, a pledge as +a pledge, an obligation as an obligation—that there is a certain social +currency given to the individual’s mere word on the assumption that its +quality is kept good by straight moral intention. And it makes provision +to drop below that level. + +How did the “Kol Nidre” come into existence? Is it the cause or the +effect of that untrustworthiness with which the Jew has been charged for +centuries? + +Its origin is not from the Bible but from Babylon, and the mark of +Babylon is more strongly impressed on the Jew than is the mark of the +Bible. “Kol Nidre” is Talmudic and finds its place among many other dark +things in that many-volumed and burdensome invention. If the “Kol Nidre” +ever was a backward look over the failures of the previous year, it very +early became a forward look to the deliberate deceptions of the coming +year. + +Many explanations have been made in an attempt to account for this. Each +explanation is denied and disproved by those who favor some other +explanation. The commonest of all is this, and it rings in the +over-worked note of “persecution”: The Jews were so hounded and harried +by the bloodthirsty Christians, and so brutally and viciously treated in +the name of the loving Jesus (the terms are borrowed from Jewish +writers) that they were compelled by wounds and starvation and the fear +of death to renounce their religion and to vow that thereafter they +would take the once despised Jesus for their Messiah. Therefore, say the +Jewish apologists, knowing that during the ensuing year the terrible, +bloodthirsty Christians would force the poor Jews to take Christian +vows, the Jews in advance announced to God that all the promises they +would make on that score would be lies. They would say what the +Christians forced them to say, but they would not mean or intend one +word of it. + +That is the best explanation of all. Its weakness is that it assumes the +“Kol Nidre” to have been coincident with times of “persecution,” +especially in Spain. Unfortunately for this explanation, the “Kol Nidre” +is found centuries before that, when the Jews were under no pressure. + +In a refreshingly frank article in the Cleveland _Jewish World_ for +October 11, the insufficiency of the above explanation is so clearly set +forth that a quotation is made: + +“Many learned men want to have it understood that the Kol Nidre dates +from the Spanish Inquisition, it having become necessary on account of +all sorts of persecution and inflictions to adopt the Christian religion +for appearances’ sake. Then the Jews in Spain, gathering in cellars to +celebrate the Day of Atonement and pardon, composed a prayer that +declared of no value all vows and oaths that they would be forced to +make during the year.... + +“The learned men say, moreover, that in remembrance of those days when +hundreds and thousands of Maranos (secret Jews) were dragged out of the +cellars and were tortured with all kinds of torment, the Jews in all +parts of the world have adopted the Kol Nidre as a token of faithfulness +to the faith and as self-sacrifice for the faith. + +“_These assertions are not correct._ The fact is that the formula of Kol +Nidre was composed and said on the night of Yom Kippur quite a time +earlier than the period of the Spanish Inquisition. We find, for +instance, a formula to invalidate vows on Yom Kippur in the prayer book +of the Rabbi Amram Goun who lived in the ninth century, about five +hundred years before the Spanish Inquisition; although Rabbi Amram’s +formula is not ‘Kol Nidre’ but ‘Kol Nidrim’ (‘All vows and oaths which +we shall swear from Yom Kippurim to Yom Kippurim will return to us +void.’)....” + +The form of the prayer in the matter of its age may be in dispute; but +back in the ancient and modern Talmud is the authorization of the +practice: “He who wishes that his vows and oaths shall have no value, +stand up at the beginning of the year and say: ‘All vows which I shall +make during the year shall be of no value.’” + +That answers our reader’s question. This article does not say that all +Jews thus deliberately assassinate their pledged word. It does say that +both the Talmud and the prayer book permit them to do so, and tell them +how it may be accomplished. + +Now, as to the Jewish religious hymn which is being sung “by request” +throughout the country: the story of it is soon told. + +The name of the hymn is “Eli, Eli”; its base is the first verse of the +Twenty-second Psalm, known best in Christian countries as the Cry of +Christ on the Cross. + +It is being used by Jewish vaudeville managers as their contribution to +the pro-Jewish campaign which the Jew-controlled theater is flinging +into the faces of the public, from stage and motion picture screen. It +is an incantation designed to inflame the lower classes of Jews against +the people, and intensify the racial consciousness of those hordes of +Eastern Jews who have flocked here. + +At the instigation of the New York Kehillah, “Eli, Eli” has for a long +time been sung at the ordinary run of performances in vaudeville and +motion picture houses, and the notice “By Request” is usually a bald +lie. It should be “By Order.” The “request” is from Jewish headquarters +which has ordered the speeding up of Jewish propaganda. The situation of +the theater now is that American audiences are paying at the box office +for the privilege of hearing Jews advertise the things they want +non-Jews to think about them. + +If even a vestige of decency, or the slightest appreciation of good +taste remained, the Jews who control the theaters would see that the +American public must eventually gag on such things. When two Jewish +comedians who have been indulging in always vulgar and often indecent +antics, appear before the drop curtain and sing the Yiddish incantation +“Eli, Eli,” which, of course, is incomprehensible to the major part of +the audience, the Jewish element always betrays a high pitch of +excitement. They understand the game that is being played: the +“Gentiles” are being flayed to their face, and they don’t know it; as +when a Yiddish comedian pours out shocking invectives on the name of +Jesus Christ, and “gets away with it,” the Jewish portion of his +audience howling with delight, and the “boob Gentiles” looking serenely +on and feeling it to be polite to laugh and applaud too! + +This Yiddish chant is the rallying cry of race hatred which is being +spread abroad by orders of the Jewish leaders. You, if you are a +theatergoer, help to pay the expense of getting yourself roundly damned. +The Kehillah and the American Jewish Committee which for more than ten +years have been driving all mention of Christianity out of public life, +under their slogan “This Is Not a Christian Country,” are spreading +their own type of Judaism everywhere with insolence unparalleled. + +“Eli, Eli” is not a religious hymn! It is a racial war cry. In the low +cafés of New York, where Bolshevik Jews hang out, “Eli, Eli” is their +song. It is the Marseillaise of Jewish solidarity. It has become the +fanatical chant of all Jewish Bolshevik clubs; it is constantly heard in +Jewish coffee houses and cabarets where emotional Russian and Polish +Jews—all enemies to all government—shout the words amid torrential +excitement. When you see the hymn in point you are utterly puzzled to +understand the excitement it rouses. + +And this rallying cry has now been obtruded into the midst of the +theatrical world. + +The term “incantation” here used is used advisedly. The term is used by +Kurt Schindler, who adapted the Yiddish hymn to American use. And its +effect is that of an incantation. + +In translation it is as follows: + + “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? + With fire and flame they have burnt us, + Everywhere they have shamed and derided us + Yet none amongst us has dared depart + From our Holy Scriptures, from our Law. + + “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? + By day and night I only yearn and pray, + Anxiously keeping our Holy Scriptures + And praying, Save us, save us once again! + For the sake of our fathers and our father’s fathers! + + “Listen to my prayer and to my lamenting, + For only Thou canst help, Thou, God, alone, + For it is said, ‘Hear, O Israel, the Lord is Our God, + The Lord is One!’” + +The words of the hymn are so much resembling a lament that they +strangely contrast with the spirit which the hymn itself seems to +arouse; its mournful melody inspires a very different spirit among the +Jewish hearers than the same sort of melody would inspire among other +people. Those who have heard its public rendition can better understand +how a hymn of such utterly quiet and resigned tone could be the wild +rage of the anarchists of the East Side coffee houses. + +The motive, of course, for the singing of the hymn is the reference to +non-Jewish people. + +“With fire and flame _THEY_ have burnt us everywhere _THEY_ have shamed +and derided us?” Who are “they”? Who but the goyim, the Christians who +all unsuspectingly sit near by and who are so affected by the Jewish +applause that they applaud too! Truly, in one way of looking at it, Jews +have a right to despise the “gentiles.” + +“_THEY_ have burnt us; _THEY_ have shamed us,” but we, the poor Jews, +have been harmless all the while, none among us daring to depart from +the Law! That is the meaning of “Eli, Eli.” That is why, in spite of its +words of religious resignation, it becomes a rallying cry. “They” are +all wrong; “we” are all right. + +It is possible, of course, that right-minded Jews do not approve all +this. They may disapprove of “Kol Nidre” and they may resent the use +which the Jewish leaders are making of “Eli, Eli.” Let us at least +credit some Jews with both these attitudes. But they do nothing about +it. These same Jews, however, will go to the public library of their +town and put the fear of political or business reprisal in the hearts of +the Library Board if they do not instantly remove THE DEARBORN +INDEPENDENT from the library; these same Jews will form committees to +coerce mayors of cities into issuing illegal orders which cannot be +enforced; these same Jews will give commands to the newspapers under +their patronage or control—they are indeed mighty and active in the +affairs of the non-Jews. But when it is a matter of keeping “Eli, Eli” +out of the theater, or the “Kol Nidre” out of the mouths of those who +thus plan a whole year of deception “aforehand,” these same Jews are +very inactive and apparently very powerless. + +The Anti-Defamation Committee would better shut up shop until it can +show either the will or the ability to bring pressure to bear on its own +people. Coercion of the rest of the people is rapidly growing less and +less possible. + +The “Kol Nidre” is far from being the worst counsel in the Talmud; “Eli, +Eli” is far from being the worst anti-social misuse of apparently holy +things. But it will remain the policy of THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT, for +the present at least, to let all such matters alone except, as in the +present case, where the number of the inquiries indicates that a +knowledge of the facts has been had at other sources. In many instances, +what our inquirers heard was much worse than is stated here, so that +this article is by way of being a service to the inquirer to prevent his +being misled, and to the Jew to prevent misrepresentation. + + +—— + +Issue of November 5, 1921. + + + + + LXXII. + Jews as New York Magistrates See Them + + +THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT has been frequently importuned to make exposure +of the Jewish crime record in New York and other cities, but up to this +time has chosen not to do so. The material is mountainous and the facts +are damaging, but THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT will continue to assume that +the majority of the Jewish people do not approve of criminal acts, even +against non-Jewish life and property. This paper prefers to confine its +attention to those matters which are plainly within the purpose and +approval of the Jewish leaders. There is a decided criminal element in +the Jewish Question, and no small part of the criminality flows directly +or indirectly from the attitude of the Jewish leaders, but the Great +Crime is the introduction of corruptive and anti-American ideas into +American life, and Jewish leaders cannot escape responsibility for that. + +The magistrates of every city with a considerable Jewish population know +the facts. In practically every state in the Union there is today a +celebrated case where some Jew, through money or influence, is playing +horse with American law. It is locally known, but not generally, except +in two or three instances. The local press—deriving 80 per cent of its +support from Jewish advertising—is usually very discreet, preferring to +leave the matter to the courts. Strange things occur in the courts, such +as judges being taken into very lucrative partnerships after giving +decisions favorable to wealthy Jewish defendants. * + +The following extracts of opinions given THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT by +magistrates of the City of New York are offered in the hope that the +Jewish leaders will read and digest them, and see, if possible, what a +hopeless game they are playing. The Jewish Question of today is turning +about in the direction of the Jewish Question of tomorrow—which is, When +are the Jewish Leaders going to admit that their game is a losing one? +They _see_ it now; but they must _admit_ it and _quit_ it. And it will +not be surprising if a mass movement of the Jewish people compels them +to do so. + +“The Jewish race,” said one of the magistrates, “seems deliberately +blind to its own faults. Some twelve years ago General Bingham, then +police commissioner, found it necessary to call attention to certain +criminal tendencies of the East Side Jews. His criticisms were bitterly +resented. I venture to say, however, that there are few men who preside +in our inferior courts who will not readily indorse those views of +General Bingham in their application to the conditions of the present +day.” + +(It was because of General Bingham’s criticisms that the New York +Kehillah was increased in power—not to clean up conditions, but to shut +up the critics.) + +“The different groups, racial or religious, of New York City, have +always each supported institutions for the care of its fallen women. We +have the Magdalen Home, the Protestant Episcopal House of Mercy and the +Catholic House of the Good Shepherd. The Jews alone are the exception. +Yet it does not require more than a short experience in the Magistrates’ +Courts to convince one that more than two-thirds of the fallen women in +the metropolis are of the Jewish race. This fact and the urgent +necessity of caring for these unfortunates was laid before some +prominent Jews. They gave the assurance that ample provision was being +made by a group of wealthy Jewish families to endow an institution of +the kind. However, nothing was done or even contemplated. The Jews +absolutely ignored the issue. And today we magistrates are compelled, as +usual, to commit such Jewish women to the Protestant Episcopal and +Catholic homes. + +“This is indicative of a strange refusal to look facts in the face, if +the facts reflect on the Jews. A lawyer, once highly prominent in Jewish +circles here, became involved in a blackmailing scandal with a notorious +member of his race known as the ‘Wolf of Wall Street.’ The ‘Wolf’ was +convicted and sent to a Federal prison. The lawyer was scathingly +denounced by the Appellate Court and only escaped disbarment because of +his age. The Jews of New York deliberately refused to condemn this man’s +nefarious acts. Only the other day they ‘honored’ him by dedicating a +library to him in one of their charitable institutions, and hanging his +portrait on the wall. An action such as this smacks a great deal of an +absence of moral sense.” + +One magistrate prefaced his remarks by stating that he had no desire to +dwell upon any special misdemeanors or crimes that might be considered +peculiar to the Jewish race. But he pointed out that a more serious +situation than one caused by sporadic criminality had been created by +reason of a persistent class movement among the Jews. + +“Any law,” he said, “which appears to be obnoxious to the self-centered +Jewish element, is deliberately ignored by them, or opposed with a +stubborn resistance which neither time nor education seems to mitigate. +The result is that our Magistrates’ Courts and the Court of Special +Sessions are crowded with cases of violations of that character. The +newly arrived Jews especially are apparently determined to subordinate +this country to their own desires, rather than to accommodate themselves +to the conditions here as other races do. + +“The most blatant, example of this attitude is in connection with the +law relating to Sabbath breaking. Our Penal Law is plain and specific on +this matter. It states: + + The first day of the week, being by general consent set apart for + rest and religious uses, the law prohibits the doing on that day of + certain acts hereinafter specified, which are serious interruptions + of the repose and religious liberty of the community. + + A violation of the foregoing prohibition is Sabbath breaking. + +“Sabbath breaking is a misdemeanor, punishable by a fine or by +imprisonment in a county jail, and where the offense is aggravated by a +previous conviction, the fine and jail sentence are doubled. Yet the +various acts specified as Sabbath breaking are violated openly and with +insolent impunity by thousands of Jews every Sunday in New York. Their +race has much to say about its own religious liberty, but it thinks +nothing of outraging the religious liberties of other races. If any +serious attempt were made to enforce this statute in the Jewish +districts, the police would be compelled to arrest the larger part of +the population. + +“These Jews are determined to trade and traffic and to keep their +factories and workshops going on the American Sunday. They impose their +will upon the greatest city in the United States, through silent +resistance and the sheer force of numbers. + +“The Jews of whom I am speaking are mostly from Eastern Europe—Russia, +Galicia, and Poland. They are of the first or second generation of +immigrants. They generally speak and read only the Yiddish tongue. _But +it is a deplorable fact that Americanized Jews of prominence, openly +encourage these ignorant people in their defiance of the law._ Whenever +Yiddish tradesmen and manufacturers are arrested for Sabbath breaking, +hosts of Jewish lawyers spring to their defense, and powerful Jewish +societies intervene to protect them. The Jewish Sabbath Alliance, with +offices on Fifth Avenue, _conducts a constant propaganda among the +ghetto people, urging them to insist upon their alleged legal right_ to +pursue their ordinary vocations on the American Sunday. And it provides +them with legal counsel when they get into trouble. + +“Jewish lawyers set up the specious claim that these people from Eastern +Europe observe another day as ‘holy time,’ and therefore have a right to +labor and traffic on Sunday. Some of the Jewish magistrates encourage +this contention by discharging such lawbreakers. But there is no +question of religion in these Sunday violations. It is merely money +greed. These Jews are so hot after money that they are afraid of losing +some if they close their shops on Sunday. This is easily proved by the +fact that _when the Jews find it to their interest or convenience to +observe Sunday closing, they do it by agreement among themselves_. + +“This was demonstrated during last summer. In Rivington and Delancey +streets, and in fact throughout the ghetto, there were signs posted in +the shop windows of Jews, authorized by an organization calling itself +‘The Independent Ladies’ Garment Merchants Association, Incorporated.’ +The notices read: + + This Store will be + closed on + SUNDAYS + from + JUNE 26th until the end of AUGUST + The Independent Ladies’ Garment + Merchants Association, Incorporated. + +“In other words _these shopkeepers were spending week-ends at the +Yiddish summer resorts. They didn’t want any of their competitors to +steal the trade of customers during their absence. So they all agreed to +close up. The question of religion did not enter their minds_. + +“Jews of the more intelligent and well-to-do class are also constantly +attempting to break the Sabbath laws in sections of the city where their +race does not predominate. Non-Jewish merchants have had to organize +associations to protect themselves against this unfair competition. If a +non-Jew is arrested for Sabbath breaking, he suffers. The Jewish +Sabbath-breaker goes free. This gives the Jew an unfair advantage. + +“Not long ago there was a large advertising sign posted conspicuously on +the platforms of the elevated railroad. _A Jewish wholesale house on +Fifth Avenue_ notified buyers that its salesrooms would be open from 2 +p. m. to 5 p. m. every Sunday afternoon. I thought this was going a +little too far, and I called the attention of several of the protective +associations to the methods practiced by this firm. The signs soon +afterward disappeared. However, such tactics are continually being +attempted by Jewish merchants and manufacturers in the Bronx and on the +West Side of the city, in an effort to gain a business advantage over +their non-Jewish competitors. + +“But there are means of putting an immediate and effective stop to all +this rascality. This would be by enforcing Section 2149 of the Penal +Law, which provides for the forfeiture of commodities exposed for sale +on Sunday. The section reads: + + In addition to the penalty imposed by Section 2142, all property and + commodities exposed for sale on the first day of the week in + violation of the provisions of this article shall be forfeited. Upon + conviction of the offender by the justice of the peace of a county, + or by a police justice or magistrate, such officer shall issue a + warrant for the seizure of the forfeited articles, which when seized + shall be sold on one day’s notice, and the proceeds paid to the + overseers of the poor, for the use of the poor of the town or city. + +“This statute is not enforced. But I believe we shall yet be compelled +to enforce it in New York. The seizure of the stocks of some of these +Jewish shopkeepers would be the most effective lesson one could +administer in teaching them to respect the law.” + +Another magistrate expressed himself still more forcibly on the Jewish +question. “These people from Eastern Europe,” he said, “are tending to +destroy all American conceptions of right and justice. Day after day my +court is crowded with Jewish people. I am compelled to fine and warn +them. The attitude of the women is especially truculent. They have +adopted a misconception of woman’s suffrage. They say to me: ‘This is a +woman’s country. Woman can do what she likes—men can’t.’ + +“There is no denying the fact that New York is falling more and more +under the dominance of Jews. Americans are gradually being driven from +public life. It will not be long before we shall have a Jewish mayor and +a Jewish board of aldermen. This in itself should be no great misfortune +were it not for _the tendency of the Jew to abuse his power_. He is +ambitious and restless to obtain authority. But the moment he gets it, +_he becomes oppressive. This is evident already_ wherever the Jews are +obtaining monopolies. A friend, a young man, came to me the other day, +complaining bitterly that he was deliberately being driven out of +business by the Jews. He was the owner of a prosperous laundry. But the +large machine laundries of the city are now mostly in the hands of Jews. +They refuse to do his work for him, saying: ‘You are not a member of our +syndicate.’ + +(This is one of the new phases of the Jewish invasion—the almost +complete absorption of the laundry business.) + +“We all remember the time when the Jews began to clamor for special news +stand privileges. They formed Jewish organizations of news dealers, +until the business was entirely in their hands. While they still had +non-Jewish competition they were obliging and attentive enough. They did +anything to curry favor. But today they carry themselves like lords. _No +Jewish news dealer in New York will deliver newspapers to his non-Jewish +customers on Jewish holidays._ + +“In the New York postoffice, where there are now some 11,000 employes, +about one-half of whom are Jews, the same conditions exist. The Jewish +postal employes complained that they were being deprived of their +constitutional rights if they were compelled to work on Rosh Hashana, +the Jewish New Year, and on Yom Kippur, the Jewish Day of Atonement. The +postmaster was compelled to grant their demands, _at the same time +pointing out that leaves of absence could not be granted to Christian +employes on Christmas, New Year’s and Good Fri__day, otherwise the +postoffice would be swamped with mail_.” + +Another phase of this Jewish insistence upon special rights was +emphasized by one of the magistrates. “I have often observed,” he said, +“that there is generally a good result when a Jew settles in a small New +England town where there are only three or four stores. The situation +develops social stimulus and competitive spirit. Too often there is a +tendency toward dry-rot among the native population. They stagnate. + +“But where Jews assemble in large numbers, as they do in New York City +and the industrial towns of New Jersey, they immediately develop a class +and racial consciousness that is unfortunate. It is not surprising that +Jews should cling to their traditional customs. _But it is a peculiar +fact that of the forty different nationalities in New York, it is only +one race, the Jewish, which persistently tries to impose its own modes +of life upon the mass of the people._ + +“One dangerous feature of this tendency is a constant effort to put upon +the statute books laws which favor the Jewish race, and placing weapons +into the hands of the mischievous and litigious. + +“In the Penal Law of the state of New York there is a statute which is +outrageous in its import and should be stricken from the code. In effect +it renders a man guilty of a misdemeanor if he ventures to have a +process served upon a Jew on Saturday. He is equally guilty if he dares +to serve a process which is made returnable on Saturday. It is a +notorious fact that a large percentage of Jews deliberately alter their +names in order to conceal their race. Yet if a man should induce his +lawyer to procure a civil action to which such a Jew is a party to be +adjourned to Saturday for trial, in ignorance of the fact that the +borrowed American name conceals a Jew, that man renders himself liable +to fine or imprisonment. + +“This is Section 2150 of the Penal Law. Its exact wording is as follows: + + Maliciously serving process on Saturday on person who keeps Saturday + as holy time—Whoever maliciously procures any process in a civil + action to be served on Saturday, upon any person who keeps Saturday + as holy time, and does not labor on that day, or serves upon him any + process returnable on that day, or maliciously procures any civil + action to which such person is a party to be adjourned to that day + for trial, is guilty of a misdemeanor. + +“Advantage was taken of this statute by a Jew in the city of Rochester +to evade the payment of goods which had been delivered to him. The +summons which had been served upon him was made returnable upon a +Saturday, and upon the return day the Jewish defendant, evidently at the +instigation of his Jewish lawyer, appeared in the action for the sole +purpose of objecting to the jurisdiction of the court upon several +grounds, but more especially for the reason that the defendant was a +Jew, and that as such he uniformly observed Saturday of each week as +‘holy time.’ + +“This case was used to tie up the business of two courts until it was +finally taken to the appellate division of the Supreme Court, where +Judge Adams rendered a decision in which he said: + +“‘In order to give to this section the construction claimed by the +defendant’s counsel, we must hold that the legislature has not only +utterly ignored this elementary principle (that to constitute a crime +there must be not only the act itself, but a criminal intent must +accompany the act), but, in violation thereof, has declared that, while +in the case specified, malice or intent must exist in order to +constitute the crime of procuring a process to be served on Saturday or +of procuring a civil action to be adjourned to that day, the crime of +serving a process which is returnable on Saturday may be committed +without any intent accompanying the act. + +“‘This proposition, it seems to us, has only to be stated to render its +absurdity manifest; for the person who served the summons in this +action, as is generally the case, was a public officer; and it is fair +to assume that he performed his official duty in this instance without +knowing, or having any reason to suppose, that the party served regarded +one day of the week as more sacred than another. + +“‘It is true that the defendant is a Jew, and certain racial +characteristics may have manifested themselves to such an extent as to +acquaint the officer with that fact, but there are other religions than +the Jewish which require the observance of the seventh day of the week +as “holy time,” and, consequently, if the rule contended for is to +obtain, an officer must somehow ascertain, in every instance before +serving a process, that the party upon whom it is to be served does not +come within the favored class; otherwise he renders himself amenable to +the statute. + +“‘It is inconceivable that the legislature intended that a person thus +serving a process returnable on Saturday, in ignorance of the fact that +he was in any way interfering with the religious liberty of the party +served, should be regarded as a criminal and it is equally certain that +a conviction under such circumstances would be absurd and unjust, if not +impossible. A construction of a statute, therefore, which leads to such +a result should manifestly be avoided if practicable.’ + +“Judge Adams thereupon reversed the judgment of the county court and of +the municipal court, with costs.” + +“Now Jewish politicians and Jewish lawyers are clever enough, as a +rule,” continued this magistrate. “Therefore it seems the more +surprising that they should waste their time and efforts in placing such +laws on the statute books, and trying to establish precedents by means +of them. It is very stupid business. The ultimate effect is calculated +to bring ridicule upon the Jew, and awaken suspicion, dislike and enmity +against his race.” + +Another of the magistrates commented on the fact that in London, Jews +were permitted to trade on Sunday by Act of Parliament, but only within +the circumscribed limits of their ghetto. “When I was in London several +years ago,” he continued, “I was shown one of the Jewish Sunday markets +in full swing. Opposite it was an English church. But trade was confined +to the Yiddish district. + +“But compared with New York, there is only a small Yiddish population in +the British metropolis. Our millions of Jews are scattered throughout +the city, and if we were to relax our Sunday laws in their favor, it +would mean goodby to the Christian Sabbath. I cannot understand the +attitude of the Jews on this question. They cheapen their own status by +their conduct.” + + +—— + +Issue of December 10, 1921. + + + + + LXXIII. + Jews Are Silent, the National Voice Is Heard + + +By order of Louis Marshall, the American Jewish Committee and the B’nai +B’rith, American Jewry has muffled the calculated furioso of its outcry, +and contents itself now with occasional yelps. No longer do the +syndicated sermons of the rabbis take their course across the country, +saying the same old untrue things in the same old insincere way. No +longer do editorial echoes spew villification across pages supported by +advertising blackmail levied upon the community. The outcry has ceased. +Suddenly, on order, orderly as a regiment on parade, American Jewry has +been turned from a termagant in action to a silent mystery. A most +impressive illustration of the inner control exercised by Jewish +leaders. + +The psychology of it all, of course, is false. Jewry decided that it was +the attention which it paid to THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT which gave these +articles vogue. The leaders asserted, indeed, that had the Jews of the +United States paid no attention, no one would have known that they were +under scrutiny. It is a rather flattering criticism to lay upon their +inability to meet the situation, but it lacks the merit of being true. + +The Jews of the United States issued the order of silence, not out of +wisdom but out of fear. And not out of fear of injustice, but out of +fear of the truth. As soon as THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT issued its first +articles on the New York Kehillah (and only the outer edges of the facts +concerning that institution have as yet been set forth) it became +evident to Jewish leaders that something had to be done. They did not +challenge a public investigation; rather they used discretion, refused +to answer even the questions of local reporters, made absurdly untrue +denials, and gave every evidence of panic. Thereafter their safest +course was silence. + +Not that they are inactive. Fearing a sudden investigation by the +authorities, the New York Kehillah has grown extremely busy and has +doubled the guards all round. Why? + +The reason is that _there is a resolution in the United States Senate +which points directly at the New York Kehillah_. + +Prominent Jews have invaded Washington on one pretext or another, but +only to turn their influence against that resolution. Why? + +The reason is that that resolution provides for an investigation by a +Senate Committee into certain matters which have already been set forth +in THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT. + +Senate Resolution No. 60, introduced by Senator George H. Moses, of New +Hampshire, provides that the Amalgamated Clothing Workers (a Jewish +Bolshevik organization that is the feeder of Red activity throughout +this country) be thoroughly investigated. In the official language of +the Resolution: “The purposes, objects, methods and tactics of the +Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America and its relations, if any, with +_other political organizations and quasi-political groups_, and to make +a report to the Senate of such findings.” + +Why has the New York Kehillah closed the portholes and called in +help—“Gentile,” by the way—to face a possible storm? + +Why have the most prominent Jews in the United States hurried to +Washington to hold conferences with Senators, their object being to +bring pressure to bear against the Resolution? + +Why should the American Jewish Committee, or members of it, why should +Jewish clothing manufacturers who are the principal sufferers from the +Amalgamated, why should Jewish members of the Baruch “war government” go +to Washington to interfere with a proposed investigation? Why? + +Because such an investigation of the Amalgamated, honestly conducted, +would lead straight through to the New York Kehillah and the American +Jewish Committee and would rip the Jewish program in the United States +clean open to the public gaze—_if honestly conducted_. + +Next to stopping the investigation, the Jews will try to control it. +That is really the greater danger. The country does not need the +investigation to get the facts. Most of the facts can be given now. The +country does need an investigation that will give the facts a +governmental exposure. But a pro-Jewish investigation, an investigation +conducted by elective office-holders who quake under “the fear of the +Jews,” would simply be an additional crime. + +If the Jews lose their fight to kill the resolution, they have already +started on their plans to control the initiative of, divert the course +of, and defeat the purpose of the investigation. + +If, therefore, the Jews are silent, they are not inactive. + +But, the gain has been general. For instance, the country has been given +quiet and leisure to hear what the non-Jews think. During the Jewish +clamor, which was nothing more nor less than an attempt to stampede the +public opinion of the United States, it was impossible to hear the voice +of the people. Ministers who poured adulation upon the Jews were +reported in the Press; but ministers who seriously handled the Jewish +Question were not reported. Publications which could be induced to act +as Judah’s mouthpieces, were worked to the limit; publications which +desired to preserve the value of their opinions, did not join the +general hue and cry. In the succeeding lull, the still, small voice of +American conviction, both Jewish and non-Jewish, began to be heard. + +In public propaganda, after having felt it inadvisable to print any more +telegraphic news from Palestine, because even the Jews could no longer +juggle the truth, the spotlight was turned on Russia, and now the +newspapers are filled with headlines intended to prepare the public for +a new exodus when the Russian people awake to take back their land from +the Jewish usurpers. + +We are told that 6,000,000 Jews in Russia are in danger of violence. It +is true. Much truer than the miles of telegraphic lies which have been +printed about alleged “pogroms” in Russia and adjacent countries. THE +DEARBORN INDEPENDENT knows that in Eastern Europe the Jew has not been +persecuted, but has consistently acted as persecutor. The proof of it is +in the Jews’ ability to flee; they have taken all the wealth of the +people of those countries. Poles cannot flee, Rumanians cannot flee, +Russians cannot flee; but after having squeezed the life out of those +nations the Jews see the dark clouds of justice rolling toward them, and +they are able to flee, filling the ships of the sea with their hosts. In +fact, their desertion of the Jew-spoiled countries of Europe is as +precipitate as was their desertion of Woodrow Wilson and the Democratic +party last autumn—Barney Baruch ostentatiously staying behind to cover, +if possible, the shamefulness of it. When the Jew has fried the fat and +skimmed the cream, he’s off. Gratitude and loyalty mean nothing to his +people. They are persecutors in Poland. They are persecutors in Russia. +They are persecutors in Palestine. They were the arch religious +persecutors of history, as the best historians testify. They will be +persecutors here as soon as they think they can start it. It is +possible, however, that in the United States their anti-social career +will be rolled back upon itself. + +American magazines have begun to pay attention to the Jewish Question. +It is a good sign. Even magazines cannot long ignore what all the people +know. It is a good sign of the degree of freedom the Press still enjoys. + +It is true, of course, that this freedom is not very great; indeed, not +so great as it was a few years ago. But in so far as the Press is +American it is impossible for Americans to think it will consent to be +permanently gagged even by the Jews. There have been, it is true, some +rather sad instances of editorial weakness. We know that of two oldest +publishing firms, both of New York, one of them published a most +scurrilous Jewish defense by a non-Jewish socialist who, if he has not +deliberately lied, has shown too dark an ignorance of facts to command +the confidence of a great publishing firm; and we know that that +publication was made with a view to the value of the publisher’s imprint +and that Jews would undertake to buy tens of thousands of copies for +gratuitous circulation. + +Of the other old New York firm it is known that an American diplomat was +advised if not compelled by it to eliminate from his forthcoming book +nearly one-third of its material because it dealt in an honest, +straightforward American way with what this diplomat had seen with his +own eyes of the development of the Jewish subjugation of Russia. Had +this diplomat been dealing with his own _opinions_ about the Jews or +Russia, it might have been different; but he dealt with his official +_observations_ on the spot—observations literally invaluable to history. +But this New York firm dared not, even in the interest of history, print +the truth. + +The experience of G. P. Putnam’s Sons, of New York, is familiar to +students of the question in recent months. The name of this firm is used +because it has already appeared in public print with regard to a +controversy it had with the American Jewish Committee. + +The Putnams, acting on the ancient and honorable principle of the +freedom of the Press, nay more, the duty of the Press to inform the +people, reprinted last year “The Cause of World Unrest,” which had first +appeared as a series of articles in the London _Morning Post_ and was +later put into book form by the publishing house of Grant Richards, +London. Both the newspaper and the publishing house are of the highest +respectability and standing, as was also the house of Eyre and +Spottiswoode which brought out the Protocols. Major George Haven Putnam, +head of the firm of G. P. Putnam’s Sons, is an American, a fair man, a +careful publisher, and one who would not stoop to propagate a lie for +any wealth. + +This is not a defense of “The Cause of World Unrest.” In the main the +book is true. But it is not the result of original research. It does not +make those small but important discriminations on which the Jews always +rely to lead the people astray. It too often links in the downfall of +Jewry those things which shall stand independently and gloriously when +freed of their present insidious Jewish connections. On the whole, +however, it maintains a correct view of world affairs. But it was not a +book on which the Putnams could feel obliged to make a final stand, +except as regards their right to print it. + +However, a proper understanding of the book called for the Protocols, to +which the book made frequent reference. So, like serviceable publishers, +the Putnams announced that the Protocols would follow. + +Whereupon the American Jewish Committee—which means Louis Marshall—got +busy, and an interesting correspondence ensued. It is included in the +report of the American Jewish Committee for 1921. Throughout the +correspondence Louis Marshall was the dictator, but Major Putnam’s +position and statement of principles were correctly maintained. However, +there were personal conferences which are not reported in the American +Jewish Committee’s report and there were Jews crowded into those +personal conferences whose names do not appear in the correspondence, +and there were fists banged on the table and loud threats—“boycott,” of +course—and altogether a rather typical scene enacted. The upshot of that +passage was that, upon Major Putnam discovering that the Boston house of +Small, Maynard & Company had published the Protocols, he decided that +there was no call for his firm to do so. And now, in a letter to these +same people, G. P. Putnam’s Sons has decided to discontinue supplying +copies of “The Cause of World Unrest” to the book trade. + +It is a rather interesting story. + +In Britain, of course, publications of the highest standing like +“Blackwood’s” and the “Nineteenth Century Review” can publish articles +on the Jewish Question without regard to dictatorial Jewish attempts at +control of the Press. In this country, however, the spies of Jewry are +on the alert for every printed letter and syllable, and attempt to make +editors feel uncomfortable, as if they were the instigators of pogroms, +whenever they present an intelligent view of the question. Yet editors +have not been able entirely to ignore it. + +The reader is rather impressed with one quality common to all the +articles that have been written, namely, the facts used are always those +that have been given in THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT. Not that they +necessarily have been copied from this magazine, but the facts are so +well established that anyone who attempts even to “defend” the Jews must +necessarily appeal to the same facts. Thus in “New York and the Real +Jew,” by Rollin Lynde Hartt, in the New York _Independent_ for June 25, +1921, this is illustrated. It is pure Jewish publicity, but it must use +the facts that have been used in this series. It must use them in order +to extol the Jews. Mr. Hartt is not to be considered as a contributor to +the Question; the article is mentioned merely as indicating what the +American magazine editor is up against—and perhaps it is not quite fair +to be hard on the editor of the New York _Independent_ just at this +time. The one flash of value in the entire article is this paragraph: + + “Ambassador Page, then editor of the _Atlantic_, once remarked to + me, ‘The most interesting fellow in America is the Jew, but don’t + write about Jews; without intending it, you may precipitate the + calamity America should be most anxious to prevent—I mean + Jew-baiting.’” + +That is a strange assertion. The Jews must not be written about. To +write about them, even with good intent, may bring evil upon them. Not +only a strange assertion, but a strange situation. To mention the Jew +has always been dangerous to the non-Jew; but why also dangerous to the +Jew? The Jewish explanation of anti-Semitism, that it is in the blood of +the other races, that the moment they see a Jew they hate him, cannot be +defended. Most non-Jews can testify that it is untrue of them. But it is +a most amazing condition if even a mention of Jews arouses this feeling. +Why should it? + +However, the statement is of doubtful fact-value. The Jew himself should +be the first to protest against having to go concealed all his days. He +should welcome the use of his definite racial name, and he should not +demand that it always be used in laudatory connections. A Jew should not +be a Jew when he is elected to the United States Senate, and a “Russian” +or a “Pole” when he is caught bootlegging. He should take the luck of +life with the other races, and this would come to him without +discrimination if he did not first arouse the spirit of discrimination +by insisting on discrimination in his own favor. + +It is probably much nearer the truth to say that publicity is a +preventive of “Jew-Baiting.” People should not be confined in a +condition which makes the use of the word “Jew” unusual. It should +attract no more attention than does the use of any other racial name. + +Mr. Page was, before his ambassadorial days, an editor of the _Atlantic +Monthly_, a magazine which is an integral part of American life. To read +the _Atlantic_ is a certificate of character. It is one of the few +publications that preserve the American spirit in literature. It is +still worthy the glory of the group that first made its name known +wherever sound thought expressed in good writing is appreciated. The +_Atlantic_ is not in need of this appraisal, it is too well established +in the regard of the class of minds that give color and sinew to our +intellectual life. In Mr. Page’s day the _Atlantic_ may never have +touched the Jewish Question with even so much as the tip of a discreet +pen. + +Nevertheless the _Atlantic_ has in more recent years done its duty +toward this as toward other questions. As far back as 1917, and that is +very far back in view of the crowded years between, this old Boston +magazine contained an article relating to the Jewish Question. The fact +that the article was written by a Jew does not militate against it, but +rather adds to its value. It contained valuable suggestions which the +New York Kehillah and the American Jewish Committee might well devote +the remaining years of their activity to disseminating and actualizing +among the Jews of this country. Even today its counsel would save them +from much of the folly which marks their attempts to combat what they +call “persecution,” and which is nothing but rather plain and charitable +truth-telling. + +This year the _Atlantic_ has contained three articles of value on the +Jewish Question. The first was by Professor Clay upon the situation in +Palestine. Now, Professor Clay is not an anti-Semite, and certainly the +_Atlantic_ is not, and yet the article was received with a good deal of +abuse from Jewish quarters. It told nothing but the truth, and it was +rather pertinent truth too, which intelligent Jews doubtless welcomed. +Professor Clay knew what he was writing about and his conclusions are +not challenged by any authority on the subject. + +In the May _Atlantic_, Ralph Philip Boas, who is understood to be of +Jewish descent, wrote an article on “Jew-Baiting in America.” He speaks +rather disdainfully of publications which have endeavored to air the +Jewish Question, but after having thus paid his tax to the Jews’ +prejudice, he proceeds in commendable fashion to contribute his thoughts +to the matter. On the whole what he says is true, and the facts he uses +as his foundation are of course the facts with which THE DEARBORN +INDEPENDENT has made its readers familiar. He sets up his straw man of +“Anti-Semitism” and after having valiantly destroyed it, to the applause +of all of us, he gets down to serious business, and says some things +which all could hope would pierce the Jewish consciousness to its +innermost stronghold and set up new vibrations there. + +And in the July _Atlantic_, Paul Scott Mowrer, Paris representative of +the Chicago _Daily News_, has an article on “The Assimilation of +Israel.” Mr. Mowrer has won the respect of students of world affairs by +the conscientious ability with which he has observed and reported big +events in Europe. In his news reports he has not hesitated, when the +facts justified it, to cable a story of Jewish participation in this or +that movement. It was reported at one time that an attempt on his job +had been made by certain Jewish influences, and it is certain that +sections of the Jewish press bitterly attacked him. Yet Mr. Mowrer is +probably no more interested in the Jewish Question than the many other +big problems which have come within his journalistic ken, and it would +be extremely unfair to regard him as in any way a propagandist for +anything. + +Mr. Mowrer talks about Israel when, of course, he means Judah. There is +a deep distinction there. And he talks also about assimilation, which +the Jew will not admit as a solution. He protects himself fore and aft +by attacking the “anti-Semites,” whoever they are, and by expressing his +confidence in the Jews, but on all the decks of his article he gives the +facts—and they are the same facts. It ought to be pretty well settled by +this time that there are facts, not two sets of facts, but only one set +of facts, concerning Jewish influence and activity. + +The _World’s Work_ has taken the liberty of setting before the people +the only real anti-Jewish article that has appeared in the United States +since the present discussion of the Question began, and that article was +written by Henry Morgenthau, a Jew whom the government is accustomed to +honor whenever it would pay a compliment to the Jews. It turns out that +he attacks Jewry in its most tender spot—Zionism. Most people have read +it, for it was immediately turned into propaganda and published in hosts +of newspapers, in many of them as first-column, first-page news. Mr. +Morgenthau said that Zionism was not a solution but a surrender. He +attacks the whole Palestinian plan from every angle, and not only +attacks but belittles it. + +Of course, this is very interesting. But one doesn’t understand the heat +displayed. If the Jews wish to go back to Palestine, why all this +objection? Mr. Morgenthau does not wish to go back, it is true; it is +extremely difficult to find a Jew who does want to go back; but to +desire a national land for the Jews is quite another thing, and most +Jews desire that. The pity is that they carry into Palestine the same +method which puts them upon question here, and they are in danger of +tipping over the apple cart in their imperious disregard of the rights +of men in Palestine. + +Mr. Morgenthau’s motive in writing the article must remain a mystery, +because it would seem to leave him practically outside of American +Jewry, and of course he is not outside. Not at all. Watch and see. His +article was printed in a magazine read and supported by non-Jews and was +intended for non-Jews; it was not a plea to his people, it was a kind of +confidential explanation, whispered from behind the hand, to non-Jews. + +Mr. Morgenthau knows that Zionism is the core of Jewry in this country. +The Zionists rule. The Zionists, and not the Americans, dictate the +policy of American Jewry. The Zionist program was the only program that +went unaltered through the Peace Conference at Versailles. Zionism is +the heart of Jewish aspiration. “Not of American Jews,” Mr. Morgenthau +may retort. But who are the American Jews? Inquire of the recent +convention of Zionists at Cleveland for information. + +That convention is worth a story by itself, but it explains why the +_World’s Work_ stopped its press for the July issue and made an +insertion of eight extra pages for the accommodation of Mr. Morgenthau’s +article. The Jews who call themselves Americans had been thrown down and +out by the Cleveland convention, and Russian Jews proved themselves the +stronger. + +It was an event that called for quick explanation. The humiliation of +the Americans was something to be covered as speedily as possible. Why +the _World’s Work_ should have been chosen as the vehicle is not known. +But the presses were stopped and the Morgenthau backfire started. + +Mr. Morgenthau’s article as a Jewish pronouncement is negligible, but +the Editor’s Note that preceded it has the value of unbiased testimony. +Referring to the world Organization of Zionists, whose chief officer +stepped over here from Europe and simply slammed the American Jewish +leaders out of office, the editor of the _World’s Work_ has this to say: + + “_This world organization has a highly centralized form of + government. This consists of an international committee, including + representatives from all countries that have a local organization. + But the real control is vested in what is known as the ‘Inner + Actions Council.’ This is a compact body of only seven men and it is + dominated by the Jews of Europe._” + +The “Jews of Europe” might be still more definitely described as the +“Jews of Russia.” + +And “Dr. Chaim Weizmann, from London” might more accurately be described +as from Pinsk, Russia. + +The Russian Jews won, as they have always won, for they are the +originators and corruptors of the false political Zionism which is +leading so many Jews to disappointment and distress. + +The point in all this is that in the silence of the Jewish regimented +protest, the voice of the country has had a chance to be heard. The +religious press has not been mentioned here, for it deserves a separate +account, nor have the many newspapers which have reacted from the +previously imposed burden of Jewish propaganda. Editorial speech is +becoming freer. Jews themselves are coming to see that the call is not +for abuse, but for a clean-up. The expression of the press of the +country indicates that there is a Jewish Question and that the Jews used +the worst possible tactics in trying to suppress the knowledge of it. +They behaved in a way to show what bad masters they would be if given +the chance, and what essential cowardice controls their actions. One by +one the holds they gained by force of fear, are being loosened. And if +the Jews would lay up capital on which to draw—the capital of public +confidence in their desire to do the right thing—they would go around +and loosen the holds they still have. This, however, is not expected of +them. It requires too much foresight. + + +—— + +Issue of July 30, 1921. + + + + + LXXIV. + What Jews Attempted Where They Had Power + + +The time of the year has come when Christians implore the tolerance of +Jews while Christmas is being celebrated. If the Jews will only permit +the Christians to celebrate Christmas in their schools, their homes, +their churches—in their city squares and country villages—there will be +more disposition on the part of the public to believe the Jewish boasts +of tolerance. + +It is not yet announced whether the Jews will give their permission or +not. But that there are inquiries being made into the matter is +indicated by this article in the Brooklyn _Eagle_, of October 31: + + “Canon William Sheafe Chase today made public a letter he has sent + to the secretary of the Board of Education asking for a copy of + rules and regulations which, he alleged, forbid the telling of a + Christ story at Christmas time in the public schools. Canon Chase + said that the attention of the Federation of Churches has been + called to a statement of a kindergarten teacher who last year said + she had told such a story and had been notified that ‘she will be + removed from her position if she repeats such an exercise this + Christmas.’ + + “He said that the Supreme Court of the United States has said that + this is a Christian country and ‘the courts in the State of New York + have said that Christianity is the common law of our land.’” Dr. + Chase added: + + “‘This government has treated the Hebrew more generously than any + other nation in the world. I believe that the people generally, + Hebrew as well as Christian, are very glad to enter into the spirit + of Christmas time. Any attempt, therefore, to eliminate Christ from + the hymns of our country, from the reading books, and from the + religious holidays of the Christian people, I believe, is not + instigated by the Hebrews as a whole, but by certain misguided + leaders of Jewish religion.’” + +This is a variation of the Christmas theme. Instead of looking forward +to Christmas, it is a spirit of inquiry as to how far we can go at +Christmas. We are asking whether we dare, as Christians in a Christian +land, whisper the Name that gives Christmas its meaning. That is, the +Christians are doing the Christmas asking early this year. Christian +teachers want to know if they will be discharged if they give their +classes a bit of Christmas flavor, as all our teachers gave us when we +were young. The contrast between the schools which we of the mature +generation attended when we were young, and the schools of today whose +pupils are carefully screened from the fact that Christmas celebrates +Christ, is such a contrast as ought to give mature Americans a pause. + +But, if past experience be the standard of judgment, the appeal to +Jewish tolerance in New York will be futile. If Christians do not take +their rights, it is certain the Jews will never grant them. It would be +un-Jewish to do so; and the ceaseless cry of the leaders is, “Be +Jewish!” + +Any number of instances could be cited of the whip which Jewish leaders +crack across the educational and political systems of the City of New +York, but one or two must serve for the present. + +The first case to be considered is that of Rev. William Carter, D. D., +given in “Who’s Who in America” as pastor of the Throop Avenue +Presbyterian Church, Brooklyn; author of “The Gate of Janus,” an epic +story of the War; also of “Milton and His Masterpiece” and “Studies in +the Pentateuch.” He is an extensive traveler and a lecturer of +reputation, his specialty being history and literature. At an important +Y. M. C. A. center he has lectured for thirty consecutive weeks a year +on “Current Events,” which course was so successful that he was asked by +the New York Board of Education to start a similar one at the Erasmus +High School. For ten years he has been engaged by the New York Board of +Education as special lecturer in the popular evening extension courses. + +The course Dr. Carter undertook was badly run down, but in six weeks the +regular audience had been increased from 35 to 350. The plan of the +lectures was to discuss a major topic selected by the Board, a second +period was devoted to the discussion of current events, and a third +period to questions from the audience. + +Now it happened that for the week of November 15, 1920—just a year +ago—the topic selected by the Board of Education was “The Racial Origins +of the American People,” a study of immigration. That is to say, Dr. +Carter was asked to study that matter and discuss it publicly before his +weekly lecture audience at Erasmus School. He did so, taking time to +make a serious investigation of all phases of the subject. + +He showed that just before the war—thirty days before the war—the +highest peak of immigration was reached; the year ending June 30, 1914, +having seen 1,403,000 aliens enter this country. Analyzing this great +flood, he showed that whereas six per cent came from Great Britain and +two per cent came from Scandinavian countries, over ten per cent were +Jews. The doctor’s subject was “The _Racial_ Origins of the American +People.” + +Again, on the subject, “What Has Immigration Done for America?”—this +subject also scheduled by the Board of Education—Dr. Carter showed that +some parts of Europe had given their worst instead of their best, and +stated that the lowest percentage of immigration came from the best +developed and most desirable countries, while the largest percentage +came from the least desirable. For example, he differentiated between +the desirable Italians and those who form the material for Black Hand +activities. Speaking of Russia and Austro-Hungary, he made a reference +to the Jews. + +But Dr. Carter made a mistake—perhaps two. It is always difficult to +tell just where the line falls between fear of giving offense and fear +of being unfair. In any event, Dr. Carter gave every evidence of, let us +say, fear of being unfair. But it is fear, and a Jew scents fear a long +way; the man who fears even though he fear to be unfair is already +marked by the Jew who may happen to be stationed to watch him. + +So Dr. Carter, to avoid giving offense by this part of his lecture, did +the usual thing which has always drawn sneers from the Jewish press; he +began to pay compliments to the Jews on their good points. He spoke of +their contributions to Art, Science, and Philosophy; to Statesmanship, +Religion, and Philanthropy. He lauded their distinguished men by name, +such as Disraeli, Rubinstein, Schiff, Kahn, even Rabbi Wise! He referred +to his pride in counting many Jews among his personal friends. With all +respect to Dr. Carter, it was the same old stuff usually handed out in +such circumstances. Madison C. Peters made it unjustly famous, and +American clergymen have been spouting it ever since. + +If Dr. Carter will study the alleged contributions of the Jews to the +Arts and Sciences, study this as carefully as he did the immigration +theme, he may omit the praises from future lectures. And he may also +revise his list of great Jews. But that is neither here nor there. + +“As we have found bad elements in these other peoples,” said Dr. Carter +in this portion of his lecture, “so they are to be found in the Jew, and +as the majority of these 143,000 Jews who came here the year before the +war were from Russia, or Russian countries, let us not forget that the +Jews themselves admit the Russian Jew is the worst of his race.” + +Apparently the audience remained unshocked. The question period came +round and two Jews, a woman and a man, asked the lecturer why he had +picked out the Russian Jew in particular for criticism. Dr. Carter +replied that he had only given the evidence of the Jews themselves, that +he was merely quoting what the Jews themselves had alleged time and +again to explain certain matters. He added that the statement was +universally accepted except by some who came from Russia. + +A few days afterward the Board of Education sent word to Dr. Carter that +complaints had been received against him for certain statements against +the Jews, and calling upon him to explain. Dr. Carter is said to have +replied that as only two Jews out of 400 people had objected at the +lecture, he regarded that as evidence that the proprieties had not been +violated. + +Within a week, however, a more insistent communication was sent out by +the Board of Education, stating that more letters of complaint had been +received and citing Dr. Carter to meet his accusers at a special meeting +of investigation. + +Now begins as strange a proceeding as American people may hope to see in +this land of the free. It is really not as rare as some might think. It +can be duplicated in a number of known and proved cases. The way the +Carter case worked out was this: + +Dr. Carter arrived, as summoned. There were seven Jews there before him. +Four of these Jews admitted they had not attended the lecture, and one +had never even heard of Dr. Carter before. The minister was alone. Not +knowing what was afoot, and not having been told to bring witnesses who +had heard his lecture, he was there—a lone Gentile before a Jewish +tribunal. + +The Jewish delegation was headed by a certain Rabbi C. H. Levy, who was +referred to as secretary of the Board of Jewish Ministers, a union of +rabbis in connection with the New York Kehillah, which is part of the +general spy system of American Jewry. Rabbi Levy admitted that he had +not attended the specific lecture complained of, nor any other lecture +in the course, but declared he was there to “represent my people.” + +Well, Rabbi Levy’s “people” were pretty well represented. There was +hardly any other kind of people there except the Christian clergyman who +was on trial for telling the truth as to public opinion, and Jewish +opinion particularly, about the Russian Jew. + +So the Inquisition upon the Gentile began. Six letters were read, most +of them having been addressed to Dr. W. L. Ettinger, Superintendent of +New York Schools. One of these letters asked Dr. Ettinger as a Jew not +to allow his people to be maligned and misrepresented, but to see that +this Gentile was stopped! + +After the reading of the letters, Dr. Carter was permitted to speak. He +called attention to the similarity of the style in all the letters, a +similarity which suggested to him the possibility of their having been +dictated by one person. At which Rabbi Levy flew into a passion—though +no one had mentioned his name. Dr. Carter also observed that as Dr. +Ettinger had been appealed to on racial, religious and prejudiced +grounds, it would be right to permit Dr. Carter time to get witnesses on +his side. This was not permitted. He was on trial! + +Even the Jews admitted, under straight questioning, that what Dr. Carter +had said was not uttered invidiously. They admitted that he had referred +to the undesirable elements of other races as well as of the Jews. It +was admitted that the subject was not of his own choosing, but was +assigned to him by the Board of Education. There was very little left at +the end of the examination except to assume that the Jews were a +sacrosanct race, with special privileges, a race whom no non-Jew should +presume even to mention in anything but awe-filled tones. + +That was the issue as it appeared that day. With half the Jewish +population of the United States centered in the city of New York, they +had assumed control of American education at its source. The group of +Jews sitting in judgment on Dr. Carter were as serene in their control +of the education of the Christians, as if they had been a Soviet court +sitting in Moscow. They had succeeded in driving everything Christian +out of the schools; they had succeeded in introducing the most sickening +praise of their own race; they looked forward to the teaching of Judaism +as the universal morality! + +It was further brought out that this Christian minister had been one of +the men who had preached in favor of the Jews. He had been one of those +public men on whom Jewish leaders could depend to respond with typical +Christian generosity. He had delivered blows at race prejudice. He had +lauded the Jewish race and its leading figures. He had interpreted its +commanding influence as the reward of diligence and ability. He had +thundered against what Jewish reports had led him to believe was “the +Crime at Kishineff.” And for this he had been duly complimented by the +Jewish Publication Society, and others. _BUT_ he had now spoken a word +of truth which the Jews disliked, and he was before them for trial and +condemnation. + +In the course of the examination it developed that he had been a citizen +of the United States for thirty years, having come to this country from +England at the age of 15. Rabbi Levy apparently missed the full fact, +getting only the fact that Dr. Carter was born in England. + +“May I inquire as to whether the gentleman is or is not a citizen of the +United States?” said the rabbi in the air of one who was innocently +uncovering a great exposure. + +“I became a citizen over thirty years ago, as soon as the law allowed—as +I trust you did,” was Dr. Carter’s straight thrust. + +The rabbi dropped the subject. He did not take up the challenge as to +his own citizenship. But that the matter burned in him is evidenced by +his later remark: + +“I’ll see to it, notwithstanding all this, that you shall never speak +again from any platform in New York, you dirty Englishman!” + +Dr. Carter called the attention of the committee to the hatred and +malignity expressed in the face, attitude and words of the enraged +rabbi, and said he did not know whether it was a threat against his +life, his pastorate, or his position as lecturer for the New York Board +of Education. + +The term “dirty” is rather an unusual one to apply to a race that has so +long astonished Semitic countries by its insistence on its “bawth.” That +is to say, the accuracy of Rabbi Levy’s description would draw about the +same degree as would an appraisal of his gentlemanliness. + +There was, fortunately, one other non-Jew present, namely, Ernest L. +Crandall, supervisor of lectures, who was American enough to enter the +fray. He addressed the hysterical little rabbi: + + “I never have seen nor heard such bitterness and hatred expressed by + any human being toward another as you have manifested here. You + ought to be ashamed of yourself, and if I hear another word from you + along such lines, I will have you thrown out!” + +The future of Mr. Crandall should be worth watching. If he is apologetic +for his principles, they will “get” him. If not, he may be the +instrument of “getting” some things that are wrong with New York. + +At any rate, Mr. Crandall acquitted Dr. Carter, and the Jews went out +muttering. + +It is rather an unusual and noteworthy fact, the acquittal of a man +against whom the Jews had moved the charge and against whom the +secretary of the Board of Jewish Ministers had uttered the aforesaid +threat. + +Dr. Carter went back to Erasmus school. He received from the Board of +Education his appointments for the ensuing months. Affairs seemed to be +going along as before. + +Then one day all the lecturers on “Current Events” in New York public +schools received simultaneous notice that they must refrain from +discussing the _Jewish_ and _Irish_ questions. With Zionism crowding the +newspapers, and breeding a war in Mesopotamia, and dictating the policy +of the diplomatic departments of Great Britain and the United States; +with the Irish Question uppermost in the minds of millions and coloring +the politics of the United States as well as challenging the full +ability of the British Government—that is, with the two foremost +“Current Events” seething throughout the world, orders were given +through the New York Board of Education that lecturers must remain mum. + +It was plain to be seen what had happened. Rabbi Levy, and those who +worked with him, having failed in their personal attack, had achieved +what they wanted another way—by an order given to lecturers not to speak +about the Jewish or the Irish question. + +Why lug in the Irish? The Irish were not protesting against discussion +of the Irish Question. The Irish wanted the Irish Question discussed; +they believed that the successful issue of the matter depended on wide +and free discussion. It is beyond the realm of imagination that the +Irish should ever ask, desire or sanction a gag on popular discussion of +Irish affairs. + +As to Dr. Carter, his audiences had been asking him questions about the +Irish Question for three years. In Y. M. C. A., in public school, in +people’s forum, everywhere he had been asked for information about one +or another phase of the Irish Question; and being a well informed man he +was able to give answers. And no one had ever complained before. Indeed, +it is said that at the next lecture he gave at Erasmus School, following +the encounter with Rabbi Levy, the audience had asked questions touching +the Irish Question, and Mr. Crandall was present, and found no ground +for criticism. + +Yet soon thereafter came the order to observe complete silence on the +Irish Question. Why? + +Even the tyro in Jewish policy knows the answer. The Irish Question was +lugged in to camouflage the order regarding the Jewish Question. That is +a very common Jewish practice: any Gentile name will serve for +concealment! + +Imagine an Irishman and his family attending an evening lecture on +“Current Events” and asking a question about the Irish situation. +Imagine the lecturer saying, “I am forbidden to mention Ireland, or the +Irish, or the Irish Question on these premises.” The Irishman, being a +white man, would not be slow to see that somehow he was being +discriminated against. He would demand to be told _why_ the lecturer +dared not mention the matter. And, being forbidden to mention the Jews +either, the lecturer would not be able to say, “Those Jews down at the +Board of Education have put their taboo on both the Jews and the Irish!” +He would be breaking the rules even in giving the explanation. + +But imagine the Irishman being classed with the Jew—the Irishman who +wants publicity, with the Jew who fears it! How long would it take an +Irishman to see that what was intended to be discrimination in _favor +of_ the Jew was discrimination _against_ the Irish. + +Yet that was precisely what the Jews of New York brought about in the +public lecture system to make their point against a Christian clergyman +who had told a very well-known truth about the Jews. + +Of course, there is nothing in such an order that would appear to the +Jew as being subversive. Suppression is his first thought. Suppress the +paper! Suppress the investigation! Suppress the out-and-out speaker! +Suppress the immigration discussion! Suppress the facts about the +theater, about the money system, about the baseball scandal, about the +bootlegging business! Suppress the lecturers of the City of New York! +Fire them from their jobs unless they stand up like phonographs and +recite what men like the sentinel rabbis of New York dictate! + +The order was Jewish in every element of it. And as an American citizen +who did not believe that American free speech should be the plaything of +a crowd of aliens, Dr. Carter resigned his lectureship. It meant serious +inconvenience and financial loss to him to do so at the end of December, +when it was late to make further plans for the winter, but a principle +was at stake, and he resigned. + +Immediately the matter came into the newspapers and there was the usual +ado—the Jewish writers throwing threats about recklessly; a few timid +Americans asking what New York was coming to! One newspaper came out +with an American editorial defending the right of free speech, but +changed its tone somewhat upon receiving a deluge of Jewish protests +threatening the paper with the displeasure of the Jews. + +A man of less ability and of lower standing than Dr. Carter might have +been overwhelmed by the storm. But he had at last struck rock and there +he stood. At that time he was not known to have said anything +detrimental to the Jews, and he is not known to have made subsequent +remarks upon his experience. That is, being attacked by the Jews, he is +not known to have attacked them in return. It is quite possible that he +might be induced to do the Madison C. Peters stunt again and speak in +praise of them, giving them the usual laudation which they themselves +first prepared for our consumption. But nevertheless he has been, +through no fault of his own, the focus of the vindictive policy which +pursues the truth-teller. It may be distasteful to Dr. Carter to have +his story thus told, but if he will begin anew his studies in the +history and character of the International Jew, he will find his own +experience a valuable commentary thereon. + +Dr. Carter is only one of many. There are teachers in New York who could +a tale unfold that would stir indignation to its depths—but there has +never been any one to tell their story or take their side. Many of these +stories are in the possession of THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT. + + +—— + +Issue of November 19, 1921. + + + + + LXXV. + The Jewish Question in Current Testimony + + +The Jewish Question continues to attract more and more attention. In +many quarters a new tendency toward freedom of the press is observed, +and the long-concealed truth is getting itself spoken bit by bit. It has +been thought worth while, before going on to other phases of the study +of the Jewish Question, to present in this article a few of the +informative or confirmatory articles that have appeared in the public +press. It need not be said that, with a single possible exception, none +of the writers or publications here quoted could be called +“anti-Semitic.” Not even the most unreasonable Jew could append that +term to any writer or publication here cited. + +The Associated Press sent out a dispatch which was printed in American +papers of August 24, as follows: + +“Thousands of Russian Jews are crossing the Esthonian, Lithuanian and +Polish borders every month, many sent from Soviet territory under +protection of high Bolsheviki officials, according to travelers in the +border states who recently have returned here. The opinion in +neighboring states is that the exodus is prompted by fear of an +approaching crisis. + +“The fact that no appreciable organized Russian anti-Bolshevik movement +has appeared since Baron Wrangel’s forces were dissipated, leads +observers of the situation here to believe that, should the overthrow of +the Soviets occur this winter, it will take the nature of a popular +uprising, supported by such troops as are not at the front. Many fear it +will result in a widespread anti-Jewish program. + +“For these reasons every Jewish family of means, and many that are +destitute, are attempting to get out of Russia. They have no desire to +tarry in Lithuania or Esthonia, but are seeking to enter Germany, with +the idea of eventually reaching America.” + +To give the reader the background of this fear, we offer part of a +letter from Kishinev which was received by a North Dakotan: + +“My Dear Friend Gutsche: + +“For one month no fugitives arrived, but now again many of them are +coming from the Ukraine to Bessarabia, most of whom are Jews. They are a +different lot than the former fugitives were; for they are wearing +costly clothes, furs, precious stones, jewels, and so on, such as was +seen before the war only by very well-to-do people, landowners and the +like; they have money and money’s worth. There is no doubt that these +fugitives had leading positions in the Bolshevik régime, perhaps they +were commissars, or even ‘judges’ on the ‘Blood and Inquisition courts’ +of the so-called ‘Tschreswytschaika’ or short ‘Tscheka’—their purses and +pockets are filled, not with worthless paper money—for they themselves +have manufactured that, millions and billions of it, which they have +thrown before the Christian brood, the ‘goies’—no, filled with money and +precious jewels which no more show traces of blood and tears, but shine +and glitter the same as in those happy hours of their rightful owners. + +“But the people over there (in Russia.—Ed.) are awakening; they wonder +about the source of all this terror. The children of Judah know the +answer thereto, but they prefer to leave the ground which is becoming +unsafe to stand upon; it is getting too hot for them. The Nemesis is +raising her head from out the blood of innocence which calls to heaven +for revenge. Yes, they fear the result of their actions and wish to save +their skins before it is too late. In this they succeed, but not always +are they allowed to keep their furs, their stones and precious metals; +they overlooked the Rumanians. These people are very vain and greedy for +costly things! The newcomers are on their way to America and the doors +on all borders are willingly opened them, even to the soldier in the +army. Only on again! The faster, the better! I think that some day +America will have so many Semites that they (the Semites) will be looked +upon the same as the colored, the black, yellow and brown races. + +“Imagine for a moment that there were no Semites in Europe. Would the +tragedy be so terrible now? Hardly! They have stirred up the people in +all countries, have incited them to war, revolution and communism. They +believe in the saying that ‘there is good fishing in troubled waters.’ + +“But enough of ‘the chosen people.’ Some day they will reap what they +have sown.... + +“.... Another picture—Every three or four days a ‘razzia’ (domiciliary +search, graze) is being conducted in the city. Terror, fear and +oppression drive the people from the streets, looking for hiding places. +The people do not work, eat or sleep. Only stamping, cursing patronilles +are seen on the streets with their victims. In this manner 200 or 300 +persons are often driven together: former civil and military officials, +teachers, landlords, business men, and so on (only Christians, seldom +Jews); among them also women. This group is then led to the +‘Tschreswytschaika.’ In front of the group are 40 to 50 armed red +guards, infantry and on horses, right and left about the same number of +guards, in the rear several carriages or an automobile with machine gun, +and behind that again infantry and horseback riders. When this group is +seen on the streets, everyone flees terrified; occupants of houses peep +through cracks and press their hands to their hearts to +see—what?—Father, brother, son or other relatives led away from their +once happy homes, perhaps never to return again. This they know, those +behind doors and windows, where occur hysterical spells, heart failures +and deaths. Words cannot express the terror of it all. + +“And then at the ‘Tschreswytschaika’? There are youths, mostly +circumcised, often half or wholly drunk! Should there be personal +enemies among the ‘judges,’ the unfortunate ones are executed either on +the same day or the next one, but are sometimes also ‘tried’ like they +‘tried’ the heretics in the Inquisition chambers. Several of these +creatures of the ‘Tschreswytschaika’ and especially a certain Wichmann—a +Jew, of course—carry on terribly; he is the terror of the city and the +flat land; he even kills Bolshevist Commissars and their wives should +they now and then reveal a more humane feeling. + +“They fear the reprisal and hasten across the borders, laden down with +valuables. + +“More suffering is caused in the cities by hunger and cold. The dead +bodies are buried without coffins and often without clothes. How the +people dwell in houses I shall, perhaps, relate next week. Enough for +today. + + F. Horch.” + +The freedom of the Balkan Jew from the hunger and suffering which +afflict the native peoples is vividly set forth in the words of an +American: + +“Our ship is the first to enter Libau on a peaceful mission since the +war, they say. At any rate, our arrival has caused a great excitement, +on account of the food cargo we have for these people. At present we are +tied up to a quay, in a narrow stream that seems to be also a sewer. +Unloading our flour is a ticklish piece of work, due to the terrible +hunger of the crowd that watches us. Whenever a bag breaks, people fight +to scrape up the loose flour, which they put into cans along with a good +portion of dirt that is mixed into it ... Everyone has a tin can and at +noon there was almost a riot over a bucket of potato peelings that were +tossed into the water. The people tied strings to their cans and went +fishing for the peelings. They stand all day and beg us for food ... It +is not a very pleasant sight—this crowd of emaciated, white-faced men +and women, and big-eyed children. + +“The most damnable thing about it all is the dozen Jews who flit like +magpies through the crowd. They are young, soft, well-groomed and +prosperous. They carry canes, wear new straw hats, and resemble the kind +you see in the States. They have nothing in common with the other +people. They have money, plenty of it, and they seem to think this ship +is a floating pedlar’s cart and tobacco store. They come up to the +gangway and wave British five-pound notes in the air, offering them for +a carton of cigarets. Or, they have gold watches that they will trade +for a few pounds of soap. From the looks that other people favor them +with, I do not wonder that we hear about periodic slaughters of the Jews +in Russia. These fellows look too prosperous in comparison with the rest +of the population to suit me.” + +The peculiar character of Jewish cruelty in Russia is so little in +accord with the character of the Jews as we propagandized Americans have +been taught to conceive it, that even THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT, in its +desire to present a consistent account of Jewish activities as they +relate to the United States, has not opened this special phase of the +study of Jewish psychology. The Sadism displayed throughout the Russian +Terror has been discussed briefly in “The World Significance of the +Russian Revolution,” by George Pitt-Rivers. + +There is, however, American Jewish testimony on the same point. It is +found in the April, 1921, number of the _Hebrew Christian Alliance +Quarterly_. In an article entitled “Persecution Is Not the Monopoly of +Christianity and Is Contrary to Its Principles’,” the Rev. M. Malbert, +B. A., of Ottawa, Ontario, says: + +“We must now proceed to deal with our last point. The Jews blame +Christianity for its persecuting spirit. They consider it a monstrous +thing to persecute another person for his convictions. Now, the question +is, are they themselves free from the persecuting zeal? I am going to +show that real religious persecution is uniquely Jewish, and that they +themselves have been the relentless persecutors. In the year 120 B. C., +John Hyrcanus, son of Simon, the last of the Maccabean brothers, who +fought against the Syrian hosts in defense of their religion, persecuted +other religions. He destroyed the Samaritan Temple on Mount Gerizin. +Next, he conquered the Idumeans and bade them choose between exile or +Judaism. They chose the latter. That he made a mistake in forcing his +religion on an unwilling people, may be seen in the treacherous Herodian +dynasty, Idumean converts, who were a curse to the Jewish nation. + +“_The intolerant religious spirit among the Jews themselves is unique in +history._ In the Maccabean princes the royalty and the high priesthood +were united in one person, King Alexander, third son of John Hyrcanus, +who was a Sadducee. The Pharisees therefore hated him. In the year 95 B. +C., on the Feast of Tabernacles, as he was officiating in his high +priestly capacity in the Temple, instead of pouring the water on the +altar, he spilled it at his feet. The congregation worshiping with the +palm branches and citrons in their hands, noticing the water spilled at +the high priest’s feet, started to pelt him with them. The king’s life +was in danger and he was constrained to summon to his aid the Pisidean +and Cilician mercenaries. Those fell on the people and slew 6,000 within +the precincts of the Temple. The hostility of the Pharisees was more +bitter against the king, and their hatred knew no bounds. But the king +endeavored to make peace with them. He therefore summoned their chief +men and told them that he was tired of the feuds and that he desired +peace. What were their conditions? They replied, the death of the king. +_Then they actually set out to betray their country._ They invited the +Syrian king, Eucaerus, to invade Palestine and treacherously offered him +their aid. Eucaerus advanced upon Judea with 43,000 men. The Pharisees +kept their promise and fought in the camp of their country’s enemy +against their king, who was eventually defeated. The poor king, the +descendant of the heroic Maccabees, wandered about in the mountains of +Ephraim. At last, 6,000 Pharisees, conscience-stricken, returned to him +from the Syrian camp. With these 6,000 penitents, he was able to force +the Syrians from Judea. But the majority still remained hostile and made +war against him, but they were finally defeated and reaped the fruits of +punishment that they deserved. + +“The Jewish king himself was intolerant and he forced many heathen +cities to embrace Judaism; those who refused were destroyed. Simon ben +Shetach, president of the Synhedrion, _condemned 80 women to be +crucified for witchcraft_. The son of Simon ben Shetach was accused by +his enemies of some breach of a religious precept and although the +father himself knew him to be innocent, he nevertheless sentenced him to +death and allowed him to be executed. + +“Between the school of Hillel and Shammai there was constantly +bloodshed. The trial and execution of Jesus were the natural outcome of +religious intolerance. The greatest service to God a Jew thought +possible was to persecute the Christians. Rabbi Tarphon said that the +Gilion, that is, the Gospels and all the writings of the Minim, that is, +the Apostolic Epistles, should be burned even with the holy name of God +in them. He maintained that Christianity was more dangerous than +paganism and he would rather fly to a heathen Temple than to a meeting +house of the Minim. A curse against the Minim was inserted into the +Jewish daily prayers at that time, which is still used by the +congregations. Bar-Kosibah, the false Messiah, persecuted the Christians +without mercy. Even in the time of Justinian, in the sixth century, the +Jews massacred Christians in Caesarea and destroyed their churches. When +Stephanus, the governor, attempted to defend the Christians, the Jews +fell on him and slew him. In 608, the Jews of Antioch fell upon their +Christian neighbors and killed them with fire and sword. The Patriarch +Anastasius, surnamed the Sinaite, was disgracefully illtreated by them +and his body dragged through the streets, before he was finally put to +death. About 614, the Persians advanced upon Palestine and the Jews, +after joining their standard, massacred the Christians and destroyed +their churches. Ninety thousand Christians perished in Jerusalem alone. +The Jews expected fair play from the Persians as a reward, but were +treated worse by them than by the Christians. In 628, the Emperor +Heraclius had retaken Palestine from the Persians and when marching +through Tiberius, he was entertained by a wealthy Jew named Benjamin, +the same man who invited the Jews to join the Persians against the +Byzantines; the emperor asked him what had induced him to betray so +great an animosity against the Christians, to which he replied that they +were the enemies of his religion. _Yet they claim the prophecy of Isaiah +in the fifty-third chapter, to have been fulfilled in them. ‘He was +oppressed, and he was afflicted yet he opened not his mouth.’_ They even +persecuted Mohammed in the incipient stages of his career. They +prejudiced the chief Arabs against him, helped his enemies to discredit +him and endeavored to alienate his followers.” + +The article continues to give in detail the persecution to which the +Jews subjected their own people who were progressive. It reminds one of +the warning given to Rabbi Isaac M. Wise by Rabbi Lilienthal, when the +former was urging the reform of Judaism: “If you want to be Christ you +must expect to be crucified.” (“Isaac Meyer Wise,” p. 92) + +Readers of Gibbons’ “Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire” will recall that +in Volume 1, Chapter 16, he wrote severe words about the cruelty of the +Jews. It will be agreed that only records of the most staggering cruelty +could have driven the calm historian to the use of such terms. Readers +will also observe, in the passage herewith quoted, that the desire for +“the empire of the earth” which actuated the Jews of that period is the +same as that discovered in the Protocols: + +“From the reign of Nero to that of Antonius Pius, the Jew discovered a +fierce impatience of the dominion of Rome, which repeatedly broke out in +the most furious massacres and insurrections. Humanity is shocked at the +recital of the horrid cruelties which they committed in the cities of +Egypt, of Cyprus and of Cyrene, where they dwelt in the treacherous +friendship with the unsuspecting natives; and we are tempted to applaud +the severe retaliation which was exercised by the arm of the legions +against a race of fanatics, whose dire and credulous superstitions +seemed to render them the implacable enemies not only of the Roman +Government but of human kind. The enthusiasm of the Jews was +supported ... by the flattering promise which they derived from their +ancient oracles, that a conquering Messiah would soon arise, destined to +break their fetters and to invest the favorites of heaven with the +empire of the earth.” + +In footnotes to this passage, Gibbons gives revolting details of the +methods used by the Jews of that period. + +In all this work the Jewish Idea has the assistance of certain Christian +sects who gloss over the inhumanity and immorality of certain courses of +actions by saying that “these are doubtless the means by which God is +giving the Jew his promised control of the world.” This is one form of +the un-Biblical conception, the un-Scriptural teaching, that the Jews +are God’s Chosen People. + +Of all the sects following this error, none is more active than the +so-called “Russellites,” the followers of Pastor Russell, and officially +known as the International Bible Students’ Association. + +It has been reported to THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT by numerous witnesses +that Jewish interpreters at points of debarkation in Canada and the +United States have circulated Russellite literature. The fact that a Jew +would circulate any kind of Christian literature is sufficiently +astonishing to cause inquiry. It is explained by the elaborate +pro-Jewish propaganda which Russellism is conducting. + +Not to go into this extensively at this time, suffice it to refer to +handbill advertising in the Russian quarters of American cities. The +fact that the literature is circulated among Russians and that meetings +are held in Russian sections of our cities would seem to indicate a +desire to explain to credulous Russians that Bolshevism, too, should be +received as part of the circumstance by which the Jews are to obtain +world rule. The handbills are headed “The Fifth Universal Kingdom,” and +in every meeting reported the speakers have declared that in 1914 the +rule of the world was taken away from “us”—that is, the non-Jews who are +the so-called “Gentiles”—and was given to God’s Chosen People, who, +according to this sect, are the Jews. Thus, acquiescence in Bolshevism +and every other form of revolutionary overturning is acquiescence in the +will of God. + +The teaching that world rule is already in the hand of the Jew is so +novel, so unrelated to Biblical sources, as to warrant careful scrutiny +for possible pro-Jewish connections. + +But Palestine is not yet a fact, and other Bible students see in the +present political movement a daring and God-defiant scheme destined to +failure. Certainly there are great obstacles in the way—moral obstacles, +matters of honor and humanity—which do not promise easily to disappear. +The Jews of the world are discovering that they read too much into the +Balfour Declaration and that Great Britain is not ready to violate her +obligations to the Arabs. Jewish leaders are beginning to feel the +weight of realities in the settlement of the land itself. The Jews are +not going back. Those who have gone back are, a considerable and +influential number of them, tainted with Russian Bolshevism. + +The English people themselves are becoming dubious about the situation +as is shown by the dispatch of the London correspondent of the Detroit +News printed in the August 14 issue of that paper: + +“Then there is the scarcity of accurate information from Palestine. The +high commissioner Sir Herbert Samuel, transmits reports to the British +Government, but they are not published. Even the report which he made on +going to Palestine two years ago to inquire into the exact status of +affairs never has been made public. Lord Sydenham asked for it in the +House of Lords, and, though Lord Curzon replied that the report +contained nothing unsuitable for publication, it has never been given +out. It is also charged that the Zionist Commission maintains a strict +censorship; that even a petition to the king disappeared in transit; +that letters have to be written guardedly. A series of articles by the +special correspondent of the _Times_ suddenly ceased, though the last, +May 17, bore the line, ‘To Be Continued.’ + +“News from Palestine is exceedingly scanty, and no one knows whether +what does come through is trustworthy. It has been printed that Sir +Herbert Samuel does not dare ride through the streets of Jerusalem +without an armored car in attendance. For these reasons there is a great +deal of suspicion in England that all is not well in Palestine.” + +The most outspoken word that has yet been uttered on the political +dilemma in which Zionism places the Jew, appeared in an editorial +entitled, “Political Judaism” in the _Christian Century_, of Chicago, a +publication of weight and character: + +“Political loyalty is one. Under the present world order it does not +admit of division. The citizens of any nation may maintain a Platonic +admiration for the political systems of neighboring nations, but their +ultimate loyalty cannot be ‘Platonized.’ Spiritual Judaism is one thing. +A Palestinian state, or a Jewish political organization anywhere else, +is a very different thing—at least in Gentile estimation.... + +“Once a Jewish state is set up in Palestine, in so far as it is accepted +as the proper expression of Judaism, the Jew of the diaspora must +surrender his religion. Is there any escape from this issue? The Jew can +be a Jew anywhere, so long as his religious adherence carries with it no +political implications. At least he can be an acknowledged Jew in every +land where religious freedom is guaranteed or practiced. And even in +states where an established religion other than Jewish debars him from +the fullest and highest participation in the affairs of state, he can +still hold to his religion without too serious embarrassment. + +“But what would be the status of the Jew in any land of the present +world when the profession of his religion would inevitably identify him +with the fortunes and aspirations and diplomacy, even with the military +policies, of a political state alien to the society of his residence and +citizenship? The status seems, at least to the Gentile mind, altogether +impossible. A revival of anti-Semitism, and its spread to lands where +heretofore it has not prevailed, is not the least embarrassing of the +inevitable results of such a move. How can the Jewish outlander maintain +his own spiritual and mental integrity? It is not even necessary to +imagine a possible precipitation of war between the new Jewish state and +the land of his citizenship. War is not, let us hope, the necessary +condition or even potentiality among separate political states. But it +remains true, by the very nature of the present system of political +organization, that political loyalty is one, and cannot be divided. +Hyphenation, discriminating Americans are by this time well aware, must +remain spiritual, or racial, or sentimental; it dare not become +political under any circumstances. + +“If the proposed new Jewish state in Palestine is to be and remain a +province or dominion of the British Empire the way is smoothed for any +Jew residing and claiming citizenship in any portion of the British +Empire. But the way is decidedly roughened for the Jew elsewhere. The +Briton is honored, especially in times of peace, in most regions of the +world for his connection with so magnificent a political structure, but +for that very reason his political loyalty is the more emphasized in his +own mind and scrutinized by citizens of other political units. A Jew +identified with so insignificant a power as an independent Palestinian +state must forever be, would, in many lands and on many occasions, be in +a far more advantageous position when a resident of an outlying nation, +than if he were recognized as a Briton. The anticipated dependence of a +new Palestine upon British sovereignty thus fails to relieve the +embarrassment of Zionism; it would seem rather to compound it.” + + +—— + +Issue of August 27, 1921. + + + + + LXXVI. + America’s Jewish Enigma—Louis Marshall + + +Something of an enigma is Louis Marshall, whose name heads the list of +organized Jewry in America, and who is known as the arch-protester +against most things non-Jewish. He is head of nearly every Jewish +movement that amounts to anything, and he is chief opponent of +practically every non-Jewish movement that promises to amount to +something. Yet he is known mostly as a name—and not a very Jewish name +at that. + +It would be interesting to know how the name of “Marshall” found its way +to this Jewish gentleman. It is not a common name, even among Jews who +change their names. Louis Marshall is the only “Marshall” listed in the +Jewish Encyclopedia, and the only Jewish “Marshall” in the index of the +publications of the American Jewish Historical Society. In the list of +the annual contributors to the American Jewish Committee are to be found +such names as Marshutz, Mayer, Massal, Maremort, Mannheimer, Marx, +Morse, Mackler, Marcus, Morris, Moskowitz, Marks, Margolis, Mareck—but +only one “Marshall,” and that is Louis. Of any other prominent Jew it +may be asked, “Which Straus?” “Which Untermeyer?” “Which Kahn?” “Which +Schiff?”—but never, “Which Marshall?” for there is only one. + +This in itself would indicate that Marshall is not a Jewish name. It is +an American, or an Anglo-Saxon name transplanted into a Jewish family. +But how and why are questions to which the public as yet have no answer. + +Louis Marshall is head of the American Jewish Committee, and the +American Jewish Committee is head of all official Jewish activity in the +United States. + +As head of the committee, he is also head of the executive committee of +the New York Kehillah, an organization which is the active front of +organized Jewry in New York, and the center of Jewish propaganda for the +United States. The nominal head of the Kehillah is Rabbi Judah L. +Magnes, a brother-in-law of Louis Marshall. Not only are the American +Jewish Committee and the Kehillah linked officially (see chapter 33, +Volume II, reprint of this series), but they are linked domestically as +well. + +Louis Marshall was president of all the Jewish Committees of the world +at the Versailles Peace Conference, and it is charged now, as it has +been charged before, that the Jewish Program is the only program that +went through the Versailles conference as it was drawn, and the +so-called League of Nations is busily carrying out its terms today. A +determined effort is being made by Jews to have the Washington +Conference take up the same matter. Colonel House was Louis Marshall’s +chief aid at Paris in forcing the Jewish program on an unwilling world. + +Louis Marshall has appeared in all the great Jewish cases. The +impeachment of Governor Sulzer was a piece of Jewish revenge, but Louis +Marshall was Sulzer’s attorney. Sulzer was removed from the office of +governor. The case of Leo Frank, a Jew, charged with the peculiarly +vicious murder of a Georgia factory girl, was defended by Mr. Marshall. +It was one of those cases where the whole world is whipped into +excitement because a Jew is in trouble. It is almost an indication of +the racial character of a culprit these days to note how much money is +spent for him and how much fuss is raised concerning him. It seems to be +a part of Jewish loyalty to prevent if possible the Gentile law being +enforced against Jews. The Dreyfus case and the Frank case are examples +of the endless publicity the Jews secure in behalf of their own people. +Frank was reprieved from the death sentence, and sent to prison, after +which he was killed. That horrible act can be traced directly to the +state of public opinion which was caused by raucous Jewish publicity +which stopped at nothing to attain its ends. To this day the state of +Georgia is, in the average mind, part of an association of ideas +directly traceable to this Jewish propaganda. Jewish publicity did to +Georgia what it did to Russia—grossly misrepresented it, and so +ceaselessly as to create a false impression generally. It is not without +reason that the Ku Klux Klan was revived in Georgia and that Jews were +excluded from membership. + +Louis Marshall is chairman of the board and of the executive committee +of the Jewish Theological Seminary of America, whose principal +theologian, Mordecai M. Kaplan, is the leading exponent of an +educational plan by which Judaism can be made to supersede Christianity +in the United States. Under cover of synagogal activities, which he +knows that the well-known tolerance of the American people will never +suspect, Rabbi Kaplan has thought out and systematized and launched a +program to that end, certainly not without the approval of Mr. Marshall. + +Louis Marshall is not the world leader of Jewry, but he is well advanced +in Jewry’s world counsel, as is seen by the fact that international +Jewry reports to him, and also by the fact that he headed the Jews at +the “kosher conference”—as the Versailles assemblage was known among +those on the inside. Strange things happened in Paris. Mr. Marshall and +“Colonel” House had affairs very well in hand between them. President +Wilson sent a delegation to Syria to find out just what the contention +of the Syrians was against the Jews, but that report has never seen the +light of day. But it was the easiest thing imaginable to keep the +President informed as to what the Jews of New York thought (that is, the +few who had not taken up their residence in Paris). For example, this +prominent dispatch in the New York _Times_ of May 27, 1919: + + “Wilson Gets Full Report of Jewish Protest + Here. + + “Copyright, 1919, by the New York Times Co. + + “By Wireless to _The New York Times_. + + “Paris, May 26.—Louis Marshall, who has succeeded Judge Mack as head + of the Jewish Committee in Paris, was received by President Wilson + this afternoon, and gave him a long cabled account of the Jewish + mass meeting recently held in Madison Square Garden, including the + full text of the resolutions adopted at the meeting ... and + editorial comment in _The Times_ and other papers....” + +When Russia fell, Louis Marshall hailed it with delight. The New York +_Times_ begins its story on March 19, 1917: + +“Hailing the Russian upheaval as the greatest world event since the +French Revolution, Louis Marshall in an interview for the New York +_Times_ last night said”—a number of things, among which was the +statement that the events in Russia were no surprise. Of course they +were not, the events being of Jewish origin, and Mr. Marshall being the +recipient of the most intimate international news. + +Even the new Russian revolutionary government made reports to Louis +Marshall, as is shown by the dispatch printed in the New York _Times_ of +April 3, 1917, in which Baron Gunzburg reports what had been done to +assure to the Jews the full advantage of the Russian upheaval. + +This glorification of the Jewish overthrow of Russia, it must be +remembered, occurred before the world knew what Bolshevism was, and +before it realized that the revolution meant the withdrawal of the whole +eastern front from the war. Russia was simply taken out of the war and +the Central Powers left free to devote their whole attention to the +western front. One of the resulting necessities was the immediate +entrance of America into the conflict, and the prolongation of the +hostilities for nearly two more years. + +As the truth became known, Louis Marshall first defended, then +explained, then denied—his latest position being that the Jews are +against Bolshevism. He was brought to this position by the necessity of +meeting the testimony of eye-witnesses as given to congressional +investigation committees. This testimony came from responsible men whom +even Mr. Marshall could not dispose of with a wave of his hand, and as +time has gone on the testimony has increased to mountainous proportions +that _Bolshevism is Jewish in its origin, its method, its personnel and +its purpose_. Herman Bernstein, a member of Mr. Marshall’s American +Jewish Committee, has lately been preparing American public opinion for +a great anti-Semitic movement in Russia. Certainly, it will be an +anti-Semitic movement, because it will be anti-Bolshevist, and the +Russian people, having lived with the hybrid for five years, are not +mistaken as to its identity. + +During the war, Mr. Marshall was the arch-protester. While Mr. Baruch +was running the war from the business end (“I probably had more power +than perhaps any other man did in the war; doubtless that is true”), Mr. +Marshall was running another side. We find him protesting because an +army officer gave him instructions as to his duties as a registration +official. It was Mr. Marshall who complained to the Secretary of War +that a certain camp contractor, after trying out carpenters, had +advertised for Christian carpenters only. It was to the discrimination +in print that Mr. Marshall chiefly objected, it may be surmised, since +it is the policy of his committee to make it impossible, or at least +unhealthy, to use print to call attention to the Jew. + +It was Mr. Marshall who compelled a change in the instructions sent out +by the Provost Marshal General of the United States Army to the effect +that “the foreign-born, especially Jews, are more apt to malinger than +the native-born.” It is said that a Jewish medical officer afterward +confirmed this part of the instruction, saying that experience proved +it. Nevertheless, President Wilson ordered that the paragraph be cut +out. + +It was Mr. Marshall who compelled the revision of the Plattsburg +Officers’ Training Manual. That valuable book rightly said that “the +ideal officer is a Christian gentleman.” Mr. Marshall wrote, wired, +demanded, and the edition was changed. It now reads that “the ideal +officer is a courteous gentleman,” a big drop in idealism. + +There was nothing too unimportant to draw forth Mr. Marshall’s protest. +To take care of protests alone, he must have a large organization. + +And yet with all this high-tension pro-Jewish activity, Mr. Marshall is +not a self-advertising man, as is his law partner, Samuel Untermyer, who +has been referred to as the arch-inquisitor against the Gentiles. +Marshall is a name, a power, not so much a public figure. + +As an informed Jew said about the two men: + +“No, Marshall doesn’t advertise himself like Sam, and he has never tried +to feature himself in the newspapers for personal reasons. Outside his +professional life he devotes himself exclusively to religious affairs.” +That is the way the American Jew likes to describe the activities +referred to above—“religious affairs.” We shall soon see that they are +political affairs. + +Mr. Marshall is short, stocky, and aggressive. Like his brother-in-law, +Rabbi Magnes, he works on the principle that “the Jew can do no wrong.” +For many years Mr. Marshall has lived in a four-story brownstone house, +of the old-fashioned type, with a grilled door, in East Seventy-second +street. This is an old-time “swell” neighborhood, once almost wholly +occupied by wealthy Jews. It was as close as they could crowd to the +choice Fifth Avenue corners, which had been pre-empted by the +Vanderbilts, the Astors, and other rich families. + +That Mr. Marshall regards the whole Jewish program in which he is +engaged, not in its religious aspect alone, but in its world-wide +political aspect, may be judged from his attitude on Zionism. Mr. +Marshall wrote in 1918 as follows: + +“I have never been identified and am not now in any way connected with +the Zionist organization. I have never favored the creation of a +sovereign Jewish state.” + +_BUT_— + +Mr. Marshall says, “Let the Zionists go on. Don’t interfere with them.” +Why? He writes: + +“_Zionism is but an incident of a far-reaching plan. It is merely a +convenient peg on which to hang a powerful weapon. All the protests that +non-Zionists may make would be futile to affect that policy._” + +He says that opposition to Zionism at that time would be dangerous. “I +could give concrete examples of a most impressive nature in support of +what I have said. I am not an alarmist, and even my enemies will give me +credit for not being a coward, but my love for our people is such that +even if I were disposed to combat Zionism, I would shrink from the +responsibilities that might be entailed were I to do so.” + +And in concluding this strange pronouncement, he says: + +“_Give me the credit of believing that I am speaking advisedly._” + +Of course, there is more to Zionism than appears on the surface, but +this is as close as anyone can come to finding a Jewish admission on the +subject. + +If in this country there is apprehension over the Jewish Problem, the +activities of Louis Marshall have been the most powerful agents to evoke +it. His propagandas have occasioned great resentment in many sections of +the United States. His opposition to salutary immigration laws, his +dictation to book and periodical publishers, as in the recent case of G. +P. Putnam’s Sons, who modified their publishing program on his order; +his campaign against the use of “Christological expressions” by Federal, +State and municipal officers; all have resulted in alarming the native +population and harming the very cause he so indiscreetly advocates. + +That this defender of “Jewish rights,” and restless advocate of the +Jewish religious propaganda, should make himself the leader in attacking +the religion of the dominant race in this country, in ridiculing Sunday +laws and heading an anti-Christianity campaign, seems, to say the least, +inconsistent. + +Mr. Marshall, who is regarded by the Jews as their greatest +“constitutional” lawyer, since the decline of Edward Lauterbach (and +that is a tale!) originated, in a series of legal arguments, the +contention that “this is not a Christian country nor a Christian +government.” This argument he has expounded in many writings. He has +built up a large host of followers among contentious Jews, who have +elaborated on this theme in a variety of ways. It is one of the main +arguments of those who are endeavoring to build up a “United Israel” in +the United States. + +Mr. Marshall maintains that the opening of deliberative assemblies and +conventions with prayer is a “hollow mockery”; he ridicules “the absurd +phrase ‘In the name of God, Amen,’” as used in the beginning of wills. +He opposes Sunday observance legislation as being “the cloak of +hypocrisy.” He advocates “crushing out every agitation which tends to +introduce into the body politic the virus of religious controversy.” + +But Mr. Marshall himself has spent the last twenty years of his life in +the “virus of religious controversy.” A few of his more impertinent +interferences have been noted above. These are, in the Jewish phrase, +“religious activities” with a decidedly political tinge. + +The following extracts are quoted from the contentions of Mr. Marshall, +published in the _Menorah Journal_, the official organ of the Jewish +Chautauqua, that the United States is not a Christian country: + + _IS OURS A CHRISTIAN GOVERNMENT?_ + + BY LOUIS MARSHALL + + When, in 1892, Mr. Justice Brewer, in rendering the decision of the + Supreme Court of the United States in the case of the Church of the + Holy Trinity against the United States (144 U. S. 457), which + involved an interpretation of the Alien Labor Law, indulged in the + obiter remark that “this is a Christian nation,” a subject was + presented for the consideration of thoughtful minds which is of no + ordinary importance. + + The dictum of Mr. Justice Story in Vidal against Girard’s Executors + (2 How. U. S., 198), to the effect that Christianity was a part of + the common law of Pennsylvania, is also relied upon, but is not an + authoritative judicial determination of that proposition. The remark + was not necessary to the decision. + + The remarks of Mr. Justice Brewer, to which reference has already + been made, were also unnecessary to the decision rendered by the + court. + + The fact that oaths are administered to witnesses, that the hollow + mockery is pursued of opening deliberative assemblies and + conventions with prayer, that wills begin with the absurd phrase, + “In the name of God, Amen,” that gigantic missionary associations + are in operation to establish Christian missions in every quarter of + the globe, were also instanced. But none of these illustrations + affords any valid proof in support of the assertion that “this is a + Christian nation.” + + Our legislation relative to the observance of Sunday is such a mass + of absurdities and inconsistencies that almost anything can be + predicated thereon except the idea that our legislators are + impressed with the notion that there is anything sacred in the day. + According to the views of any section of the Christian church, the + acts which I have enumerated as permitted would be regarded as + sinful. Their legality in the eye of the law is a demonstration that + the prohibitory enactments relating to Sunday are simply police + regulations, and it should be the effort of every good American + citizen to liberalize our Sunday legislation still more, so that it + shall cease to be the cloak of hypocrisy. + + As a final resort, we are told by our opponents that this is a + Christian government because the majority of our citizens are + adherents of the Christian faith; that this is a government of + majorities, because government means force and majorities represent + the preponderance of strength. This is a most dangerous doctrine.... + +If the Christianity of the United States is to be questioned, the last +person to initiate the inquiry should be a member of that race which had +no hand in creating the Constitution or in the upbuilding of the +country. If Christian prayers in public are a hollow mockery, and Sunday +laws unreasonable, the last person in the world to oppose them should be +a Jew. + +Mr. Marshall has the advantage of being an American by birth. He was +born in Syracuse, New York, in 1856, the son of Jacob and Zilli +Marshall. After practicing law in Syracuse, he established himself in +New York, became a Wall Street corporation lawyer, and his native +country has afforded him generous means to win a large fortune. + +The question arises whether it is patriotic for Mr. Marshall to implant +into the minds of his foreign-born co-religionists the idea that this is +not a Christian country, that Sunday laws should be opposed, and that +the manners and customs of the native-born should be scorned and +ridiculed. The effect has been that thousands of immigrant Jews from +Eastern Europe are persistently violating Sunday laws in the large +industrial centers of the country, that they are haled to court, +lectured by judges, and fined. American Jews who are carrying into +practice the teachings of Mr. Marshall and his followers are reaping the +whirlwind of a natural resentment. + +Mr. Marshall was the leader of the movement which led to the abrogation +of the treaty between the United States and Russia. Whenever government +boards or committees are appointed to investigate the actions, conduct +or conditions of foreign-born Jews, great influences are immediately +exerted to have Mr. Marshall made a member of such bodies to “protect” +the Jewish interests. + +As head of millions of organized Jews in the United States, Mr. Marshall +has invariably wielded this influence by means of a campaign of +“protests,” to silence criticisms of Jewish wrongdoing. He thus +protested when testimony was made before the Senate Sub-Committee in +Washington, in 1919, that the Jewish East Side of New York was the +hotbed of Bolshevism. Again he protested to Norman Hapgood against the +editorial in _Harper’s Weekly_, criticising the activities of Jewish +lobbyists in Washington. + +Mr. Marshall describes himself in “Who’s Who” as a leader in the fight +for the abrogation of the treaty with Russia. That was a distinct +interference in America’s political affairs and was not a “religious +activity” connected with the preservation of “Jewish rights” in the +United States. The limiting expression “in the United States” is, of +course, our own assumption. It is doubtful if Mr. Marshall limits +anything to the United States. He is a Jew and therefore an +internationalist. He is ambassador of the “international nation of +Jewry” to the Gentile world. + +The pro-Jewish fights in which Mr. Marshall has been engaged in this +country make a considerable list: + +He fought the proposal of the Census Bureau to enumerate Jews as a race. +As a result, there are no official figures, except those prepared by the +American Jewish Committee, as to the Jewish population of the United +States. The Census has them listed under a score of different +nationalities, which is not only a non-descriptive method, but a +deceptive one as well. At a pinch the Jewish authorities will admit of +3,500,000 Jews in the United States. The increase in the amount of +Passover Bread required would indicate that there are 6,000,000 in the +United States now! But the Government of the United States is entirely +at sea, officially, as to the Jewish population of this country, except +as the Jewish government in this country, as an act of courtesy, passes +over certain figures to the government. The Jews have a “foreign office” +through which they deal with the Government of the United States. + +Mr. Marshall also fought the proposed naturalization laws that would +deprive “Asiatics” of the privilege of becoming naturalized citizens. +This was something of a confession! + +Whenever there were extradition cases to be fought, preventing Jewish +offenders from being extradited, Mr. Marshall was frequently one who +assisted. This also was part of his “religious activities,” perhaps. + +He fought the right of the United States Government to restrict +immigration. He has appeared oftener in Washington than any other Jew on +this question. + +In connection with this, it may be suggested to Mr. Marshall that if he +is really interested in upholding the law of the land and restraining +his own people from lawless acts, he could busy himself with profitable +results if he would look into the smuggling of Jews across the Mexican +and Canadian borders. And when that service is finished, he might look +into the national Jewish system of bootlegging which, as a Jew of +“religious activities,” he should be concerned to break up. + +Louis Marshall is leader of that movement which will force the Jew by +law into places where he is not wanted. The law compelling hotel keepers +to permit Jews to make their hotels a place of resort if they want to, +has been steadily pushed. Such a law is practically a Bolshevik order to +destroy property, for it is commonly known what Jewish patronage does +for public places. Where a few respectable Jews are permitted, the +others flock. And when one day they discover that the place they +“patronize” is becoming known as “a Jew hotel” or “a Jew club,” then all +the Jews abandon it—but they cannot take the stigma with them. The place +is known as “a Jew place,” but lacks both Jew and Gentile patronage as a +result. + +When Louis Marshall succeeded in compelling by Jewish pressure and +Jewish threats the Congress of the United States to break the treaty +with Russia, he was laying a train of causes which resulted in a +prolongation of the war and the utter subjugation of Russia. Russia +serves the world today as a living illustration of the ruthlessness, the +stupidity and the reality of Jewish power—endless power, fanatically +mobilized for a vengeful end, but most stupidly administered. Does Mr. +Marshall ever reflect on the grotesque stupidity of Jewish leadership? + +It is regretted that space does not permit the publication here of the +correspondence between Mr. Marshall and Major G. H. Putnam, the +publisher, as set forth in the annual report of the American Jewish +Committee. It illustrates quite vividly the methods by which Mr. +Marshall secures the suppression of books and other publications which +he does not like. Mr. Marshall, assisted by factors which are not +mentioned in his letter, procured the suppression of the Protocols, +after the house of Putnam had them ready to publish, and procured later +the withdrawal of a book on the Jewish Question which had attracted wide +attention both here and in England. + +Mr. Marshall apparently has no confidence in “absurdities” appearing +absurd to the reader, nor of “lies” appearing false; but he would +constitute himself a censor and a guide of public reading, as well as of +international legislation. If one might hazard a guess—Mr. Marshall’s +kind of leadership is on the wane. + + +—— + +Issue of November 26, 1921. + + + + + _James Russell Lowell always declared “that he was of Jewish + extraction and proud of his ancestry.”_ + + _If anybody has achieved an exceptionally high grade in a + difficult course, he or she was probably Jewish.—Syracuse Jewish + Monthly._ + + + + + LXXVII. + The Economic Plans of International Jews + + +The strength of Jewish money is in its internationalism. It stretches a +chain of banks and centers of financial control across the world, and +plays them on the side of the game that favors Judah. This center was, +and for the moment is, in Germany, at Frankfort-on-the-Main, but +feverish anxiety now accompanies the fear that it may have to be moved. +Destiny is overtaking the Jewish World Power. The gold which is their +god—“the God of the living” is what they call their gold—is being +brought overseas on every available ship and locked up in the vaults of +Jewish bankers in North and South America, not to enrich this hemisphere +but to mobilize Jewish financial power for any desperate stroke. +Financial Jewry is afraid. It has a right to be afraid. Its conscience, +still bloody from the war whose gains have not yet stopped, is in a +troubled state. + +Single Jewish banking houses in any country, however great such banks +should grow, would be no menace. In spite of the fact that the richest +bankers in the world are Jews, as mere bankers in their several +countries they would not occasion alarm. In straight out-and-out +banking, the Jew is not a success. The Rothschilds were never bankers in +a proper sense; they were money-lenders to nations whose representatives +they had corrupted to seek the loans. They did business precisely on the +plane of the money-lender in the side street who induces the rich man’s +son to borrow a large sum, knowing that the father will pay. That is +scarcely banking. Brains of that sort may “get” money, but will not +“make” money. The deposit banking of the world is not done in Jewish +banks anyway, even Jewish depositors preferring banks which are managed +by non-Jews. + +It is not, therefore, the success of the individual Jewish banking house +that concerns us. Flabby-minded non-Jews who have been blinded by +pro-Jewish propaganda find difficulty in seeing that point. They say +that the individual Jewish business man has as much right to his +business success as has anyone else. Which is a perfect Jewish +platitude! Certainly he has. Who ever stated that he had not? But when +you are dealing with a world chain of financial consulates, all of them +linking up in a world system, none of them to be regarded as American +banks, or British banks, or French banks, or Italian banks, or German +banks, but all of them members of the Jewish World Banking System, you +are obviously not dealing with individuals who are trying to make a +living. You are then dealing with a mighty force for good or ill, and +thus far, sad truth to know, the ill is mountainous in comparison. + +Nor does this Jewish banking system require that in each country a +Jewish house be the most important. It is not the wealth and importance +of single houses, but the wealth and importance of the world chain, that +gives the strength. Kuhn, Loeb & Company is far from being the most +important financial house in the United States, but with its foreign +connections, all Jewish, it takes on a new aspect. Kuhn, Loeb & Company +is far from being the most important banking house in the United States, +and yet it was an idea that came out of Kuhn, Loeb & Company’s office +that now dominates the monetary system of the United States. Paul +Warburg, a German Jew, scion of the Jewish world banking group, is +boosted into undue prominence and power through the pressure of +banker-bought prestige in government circles. It is his +connections—Jewish ones—that count. + +The Warburg idea in the United States, dovetailing with the Sterns, the +Furstenbergs, the Sonnenschiens and the Sassoons and Samuels and +Bleichroeders overseas, was something to wonder at. Jewish bankers ran +this war as they have run every great war. No informed Jew will deny +that. Most informed Jews have boasted of it as indicating the importance +of their people. Above the nations at war was an international financial +committee, all Jewish, looking down upon all the ruction and blood as +serenely as American baseball league directors look down upon a pennant +series. Separated, each man tied to his country by ties of undivided +nationalistic loyalty, none of these would have amounted to much. +United, as a super-national financial board, knowing the secrets of all +the nations, conferring one with another in all sorts of ways, even +during the hardest days when all communication between countries was +supposed to be locked by war, deciding the duration of the war and the +hour of so-called peace, these groups constitute a danger which no one +doubts after once having clearly seen it. + +Men who can thus manipulate money in time of war can do so in time of +peace. The United States is living under some of that peace manipulation +now. + +The reader of the Protocols is much impressed by the financial notes +that are sounded throughout their proposals. The Jewish defense against +the Protocols, that they were written by a criminal or madman, is +intended only for those who have not read the Protocols, or who have +overlooked the financial plans they offer. Madmen and criminals do not +coolly dissect one money system and invent another, as do the +Protocolists. + +It will be worth while, in view of the sidelights that these articles +have thrown on the money question, to recall some of the forecasts and +plans made in these most remarkable documents which have been attributed +to the Wise Men of Zion, the world leaders of the inner council. + +“When we sink, we become a revolutionary proletariat, the subordinate +officers of the revolutionary party; when we rise, _there rises also our +terrible power of the purse_.” So wrote the great Jewish Zionist leader, +Theodor Herzl, in his work, “A Jewish State,” (p. 23). It is precisely +that union of revolutionary tendencies and financial power that the +world is facing now. Look at Russia, and look at the people who swarmed +at Versailles and made the Peace Treaty. The Peace Treaty was written by +financiers; it is the bill presented, not to a beaten foe, but to the +world. Very few people have ever read it; but its operation is evident +everywhere. The Jewish bankers the world over are shoveling in the gold. + +Protocol VI is interesting in this connection: + + “We shall soon begin to establish huge monopolies, colossal + reservoirs of wealth, upon which even the big Gentile properties + will be dependent to such an extent that they will all fall, + together with the government credit, on the day following the + political catastrophe.” + +Although these words were written with Europe in view (the United States +not yet having been Judaized) their import is clear. At the present +moment the number of business concerns in the hands of Jewish creditors, +through “loans,” is very large. The Jewish idea in business is to +“borrow,” instead of making the business stand on its own feet. The +trail of that idea is seen all over our land today. + + “At the same time it is necessary to encourage trade and industry + vigorously, _and especially speculation_, the function of which is + to act as a counterpoise of industry. _Without speculation, industry + will cause private wealth to increase and tend to improve the + position of agriculture by freeing the land_ from indebtedness for + loans by the land banks. _It is necessary for industry to deplete + the land_ both of laborers and capital, and, through speculation, + transfer all the money in the world into our hands.... + + “To destroy Gentile industry, we shall, as an incentive to this + speculation, encourage among the Gentiles a strong demand for + luxuries, all-enticing luxuries.” + +There is the Idea—Extravagance and Debt support the Jewish +money-lender’s power. He does not lend to build industry, but to drain +it. Independent industrial or agricultural wealth menaces his rule. +Industry must be curbed by speculation; speculation must be encouraged +by extravagance; an industrious people soon works itself free of its +debt slavery; therefore invent new excitements to keep it in debt. +Entice people from the farms, and so forth, and so forth, all which +devices are now well known to the world. + + “_We will force up wages_, which, however, will be of no benefit to + workers, for _we will at the same time cause a rise in the price of + prime necessities, pretending_ that this is due to the decline of + agriculture and cattle raising. _We will also artfully and deeply + undermine the sources of production_ by instilling in the workmen + ideas of anarchy and encourage them in the use of alcohol....” + +That wages were forced up, that they were of little profit to the +workers, that prices did rise, that the above excuses were given, that +anarchistic ideas now being circulated among the workers are Jewish and +are circulated by Jews, that the illicit liquor business (as once was +the legal liquor business) is entirely in the hands of Jews—these things +everyone knows to be true. + +The Protocols have been in non-Jewish knowledge since 1896. The British +Museum has possessed a copy since 1906. Were they written by a _prophet +who foresaw_, or by a _power that foreordained_? + +The Jewish World Program is shown in these Protocols to be largely +dependent on the _false economic ideas_ it can induce the governments +and peoples to accept. The false economic ideas—not only false, but +cruelly deceptive and impossible—which are being sown among the masses +of the people are the counterpart of the other false economic propaganda +being sown in the upper circles of banking and government. + +_Jewish economic ideas are quite different from the ones which Jewish +thinkers put out for others to follow._ + +Jewish bankers know better than anyone else the utter falsity of the +present system, but they profit by that falsity, and they are ruining +non-Jewish rule by that falsity, and they are establishing Judah by that +falsity, and they will try to maintain that falsity until it brings the +inevitable collapse, after which they hope to reorganize the world on +Jewish monetary principles. So, at least, the Protocols indicate. This +bad régime is for the so-called Gentile period only. + +The temporary nature of the present Jewish system, and the destruction +it is meant to work in the world, is shown in the Third Protocol, where, +after discussing ways and means to make the lower classes hate the +well-to-do, it says: + + “This hostility will be still more accentuated as the result of + crises which will close stock exchange operations and stop the + wheels of industry. Having organized such a general economic crisis + by all the underground means available to us, and thanks to the + assistance of gold, all of which is in our hands, we will throw + whole crowds of workingmen into the streets simultaneously in all + the countries of Europe. These crowds will gladly shed the blood of + those whom they, in the simplicity of their ignorance, have envied + since childhood and whose property they will then be able to loot.” + +All this, as the world knows, has occurred in Europe. The weapons first +used were economic. The subjection of the people, the revolution, was +first economic. The Jewish program profited by the split which Jewish +ideas had been able to make between the upper and lower classes of +“Gentile” society. “Divide and Rule,” is the Jewish motto, as quoted in +the Protocols. “Divide the working class from the directing class. +Divide the Catholic and Protestant churches.” In brief, divide +Christendom on economic, creedal, social and racial lines, while the Jew +remains a solid body, able because of his solidarity to handle a divided +world. And this plan has succeeded. Out of the disorder of the World War +look how high the government of Judah has been placed in Russia, +Austria, Germany, France, Italy, England and in the United States. + +All the Jewish bankers are still in Russia. It was only the non-Jewish +bankers who were shot and their property confiscated. Bolshevism has not +abolished Capital, it has only stolen the Capital of the “Gentiles.” And +that is all that Jewish socialism or anarchism or Bolshevism is designed +to do. Every banker who is caricatured with dollar marks on his clothes +is a “Gentile” banker. Every capitalist publicly denounced in Red +parades is a “Gentile” capitalist. Every big strike—railroad, steel, +coal—is against “Gentile” industry. That is the purpose of the Red +movement. It is alien, Jewish and anti-Christian. + +Now, one of the interesting points about the Jewish financial scheme for +the future as shown in the Protocols is the way in which it contrasts +with the financial scheme which the Jewish groups now favor. As before +stated, what the Protocolists now advise is not what they will adopt +when their present advice has worked its hoped-for results. + +The Protocols which detail the future financial plan of Jewish control +are numbered XX and XXI. Protocol XX opens thus: + + “Today we will speak of the financial program, the discussion of + which I have postponed to the close of my report as it is the most + difficult, decisive and concrete of our plans.” + +Throughout the recital the Protocolist harks back to the old (our +present) financial system, and some of his remarks are worth +transcribing here: + + “You know that _the gold standard destroyed the governments that + accepted it_, for _it could not satisfy the demand for currency_, + especially as _we removed as much gold as possible from + circulation_.” + +Whether the first statement is true remains to be seen; the others are +demonstrably true. The gold in the ground and the gold that is money is +under Jewish control, and they withdraw it when they will. + +The stupid so-called “Gentile” says, “Why should they withdraw it? They +cannot make any money that way!” Once again remember the distinction: it +is not a matter of “making” money but of “getting” it; panics are more +quickly profitable than is a long period of prosperity for men whose +commodity is money. Indeed, men who deal in money as a commodity and on +the Jewish plan, lose their prestige if prosperity continues too long. +The banker who is a banker, who lives to serve industry and the +community—he profits by prosperity, but not so the money sharks. + + “We created economic crises for the Gentiles _by the withdrawal of + money from circulation_. Mass capital stagnated, money was withdrawn + from use by the various governments, and they in turn were obliged + to turn back to the capitalists for loans. Such loans naturally + embarrassed the governments, owing to the payment of interest + charges, and made them subservient to the capitalists....” + +The withdrawal of money from circulation will create panics; everyone +knows that. Such withdrawal of money is within the decision of a very +small group of men. Here in the United States we have been for a long +fifteen months witnessing such a withdrawal and its effects. The word +went by wire across the land, setting a date. On that date values began +to crash all over the country, and honest bankers tried to help, while +others who knew the game profited hugely. As shown in the last article, +money was withdrawn from legitimate use, that it might be lent to money +speculators at six per cent, who in turn lent it to desperate people at +rates as high as 30 per cent. + +No intelligent person will attempt to explain such events on the ground +of natural law or of honest practice. These things occurred in this +country within recent days. It is the “elastic” system, you know, with +the public as a monkey on one end of the “elastic.” A splendid idea, no +doubt, if administered by the non-Jewish method of doing the greatest +possible good to the greatest number, but a deliberate assassination of +life and property as it has been administered. + +The Protocolists then pay their respects to governmental finance with +the keenness that is well justified: + + “Owing to methods allowed by irresponsible Gentile governments, + their treasuries became empty. Then came the period of contracting + loans and using up the assets that remained. This brought all the + Gentile governments to bankruptcy.” + +As operating groups, the governments are bankrupt now. Only their power +of confiscation keeps them up. The United States, commonly referred to +as the richest country in the world, is just as poor as a government as +is any other. It has nothing; it is in debt and borrowing. And its +creditors are constantly discounting their obligations and are putting +it into worse hands than ever. Even the Liberty Bonds are almost passed +out of the hands of the people into the hands of Jewish fiscal agents +who “get” money out of the necessities of the people who sell and out of +the necessities of the government which borrowed. And if all signs do +not fail, we shall one day be hearing in Congress pleas for special +legislation in behalf of “the poor bond-holders.” It is to be hoped when +that day comes, some one will have mettle enough to stand up and declare +who the “poor bond-holders” are. A list should be made now, for future +reference. + + “Every loan proves government inefficiency and ignorance of + governmental rights. Loans, like the sword of Damocles, hangs above + the heads of the rulers, who, instead of placing temporary taxes on + their subjects, stretch forth their hands and beg for charity at the + hands of our bankers. Essentially, foreign loans are leeches, which + in no instance can be removed from the government body until they + fall off of their own accord or the government itself removes them. + But Gentile governments, instead of removing them, continue to place + more. They must perish inevitably through exhaustion by voluntary + blood-letting.” + +This is the plainly expressed criticism of the Jewish World Government +upon the governments of the nations, and the truth of it cannot be +gainsaid. It represents a statement of common wisdom upon which the +Jewish World Program hopes to commend itself to the common people. + +“Then why do not the Jewish world financiers help the nations out of +this false financial policy?” Why, indeed? Jewish financiers are the +inventors of such loans as they here describe, the barriers to such +direct taxes as they here recommend. Listen—in the same page as the +above: + + “_You may well understand that such a policy, although inspired by + us, cannot be followed by us._” + +That is historically true, whether it will prove prophetically true or +not. Compromising loans and interest are Jewish devices, historically +Jewish. Practically and at present the Jew prefers not to borrow except +in such a way as to place all business risks on other people’s money +while he keeps his own safely, and the payment of interest is an +abomination to him. These statements of the Protocols have at least +these historical and racial confirmations. + +The whole stupidity of the “Gentile” system by which Jewish +International Financiers are enriched, is clearly set forth in the same +XXth Protocol: + + “What is the effect of a loan, especially of a foreign loan, other + than this? A loan is the issuance of government notes, pledging + interest in proportion to the sum of borrowed capital. If the loan + pays five per cent then in twenty years the government has paid the + interest in vain, for it is equal to the sum of the loan; in forty + years it has paid out an amount equal to the loan twice over; and in + sixty years, three times, _while the original debt remains unpaid_.” + +Extremely simple, and yet it is the most generally ignored fact of all. + +We live in a democracy, yet loans are contracted that always cost more +than the amount of the loan, and no one has a word to say about it. We +Americans do not know how much interest we pay every year, and we don’t +know to whom we pay it. We are still living under the lie that “A +National Debt Is a National Blessing,” the most delusive doctrine ever +promulgated. + +The amount of our National Debt is the measure of our enslavement to +Jewish World Finance. + +The reader may observe in passing that Jewish apologists, John Spargo, +Herman Bernstein, and others, say that the Protocols were put out by the +secret police of the Russian Czarist régime. It is very unusual, is it +not, to find the Czar’s police interested in plans to remove graft from +high finance, and preaching doctrines exactly contrary to the +established system? The reader will find some amusement in searching for +Russian police spies in the further development of the Jewish financial +philosophy. + +The purpose of Protocols XX and XXI is not to describe the present +financial chaos in which the Gentiles are encouraged to continue; that +system was described in previous Protocols; their purpose is rather to +describe how the Jewish World Power plans to run things when the time +comes. + +This is well worth considering, for there are portions of the plan which +would be worth adopting. The Jewish expectation of World Rule is, of +course, absurd, although the mass of Jews sincerely hold it. Their +condemnation is that they regard every degeneracy in society as bringing +them a step nearer their goal, which explains the great assistance they +give to all degenerative processes. + + “_When we ascend the thrones of the world, such financial + expediencies, not being in accord with our interest, will be + definitely eliminated._” + +That is the opening note. It is another version of the statement—“You +may well understand that such a policy, although inspired by us, cannot +be followed by us.” + +What, then, did the Protocolists, looking for world power, propose to +eliminate? + +(1) “_The stock exchanges will be permanently suppressed_, for we will +not allow the prestige of our authority to be shaken by price +fluctuations on our stocks. We will fix the full value legally without +permitting any power to raise or lower it. Raising prices gives the +pretext for lowering them—which was _what we started with the stocks and +bonds of the Gentiles_.” + +(2) “The lawful _confiscation of money_ in order to regulate its +circulation.” + +(3) “We must introduce a _unit of exchange based on the value of labor +units_ regardless of whether paper or wood are used as the medium. We +will issue money to meet the normal demands of every subject (citizen), +adding a total sum for every birth and decreasing the total amount for +every death.” + +(4) “Commercial paper will be bought by the government, which, instead +of paying tribute on loans as at present, will _grant loans on a +business basis_. A measure of this character will prevent the +_stagnation of money, parasitism and laziness, qualities which were +useful to us as long as the Gentiles maintained their independence_, but +which are not desirable to us when our kingdom comes.” + +(5) “We will replace stock exchanges by great _government credit +institutions_, whose functions will be to tax trade paper according to +government regulations. These institutions will be in such a position +that they may market or buy as many as half a billion industrial shares +a day.” (The reader will bear in mind that “police spies” of +agricultural Russia “forged this document” in 1896. As a gentleman +remarked: If this is the forgery, what must the original have been!—Ed.) +“Thus all industrial undertakings will become dependent on us. You may +well imagine what power that will give us.” + +The Protocolist now being quoted also gives his attention to taxation +(observe again the “Russian police spy” doing some “forging”). The +builders of this plan for World Rule recognize that when the overturn +comes they will have to be in a position to offer the people something +extremely good in order to win their favor. This, of course, was the +plan in Russia, although Russia presents no parallel to what the +Protocolists hope to do for what they call their “kingdom.” Russia was +simply tortured in punishment. Russia was a passover offering. Russia is +an example of Jewish vengeance, destruction, rage, not of the rule which +International Jewry hopes to put over a world economically conquered +through its own weakness and lust. Hear then the taxation plan: + +(1) “When we become rulers, our autocratic government, as a first +principle of self-protection, will _avoid burdening the people with +heavy taxes_. It must not forget to play the part of father and +protector. But, as government organizations are costly, it is necessary +to raise money for maintenance. Consequently, it is necessary to study +carefully in this particular the problem of checks and balances.” + +(2) Kinds of taxes to be raised: (a) “The best method of taxation is to +establish _a progressive tax on property_.” (b) “The receipt of +_purchase money_ or an _inheritance_ will be subjected to a progressive +stamp tax.” (c) “Any transfer of personal property, whether in money or +other form of value....” (d) A luxury tax—“the latter will be taxed +through the medium of a stamp impost.” + +The rich are to be taxed in proportion to their wealth: “A tax on a poor +man is the seed of revolution and it is detrimental to the government +which loses the big things in its pursuit of the small.” But there are +other shrewd reasons for thus taxing the rich (a) “Aside from this, the +tax on capitalists will _lessen the growth of wealth in private hands, +where we have concentrated it at present as a counterweight to the +governmental power of the Gentiles_....” (b) “Such a measure _will +destroy the hatred of the poor toward the rich_, who will be regarded as +the financial support of the government and the exponents of peace and +prosperity. The poor will realize that the rich are paying the money +necessary to attain these things.” + +This was written at least as early as 1896. How many forms of taxation +have come precisely as here outlined! + +How illuminating also the following remark: “Money should circulate; and +to hinder free circulation has a fatal effect upon the government +mechanism, which it lubricates. The thickening of the lubricator may +stop the correct functioning of the whole machine. _The substitution of +a part of money exchange by discount paper has created just such an +impediment._” + +Remember that when next you hear the Jewish plan that “Gentiles” shall +do business with their own bits of paper, while Jews keep the gold +reserve safely in their own hands. If the crash comes, “Gentiles” have +the paper and Jews the gold. If bits of paper serve ordinarily, the +world may some time decide to do away with the gold. Certainly a system +which rests on Cash yet works with Not-Cash, has disadvantages which +depression and panic reveal. Says Protocol XXII—“We hold in our hands +the greatest modern power—gold; in two days we could free it from our +treasuries in any desired quantities.” + +The Jews are economists, esoteric and exoteric; they have one system to +tangle up the “Gentiles,” another which they hope to install when +“Gentile” stupidity has bankrupted the world. The Jews are economists. +Note the number of them who teach economics in the state universities. +Says Protocol VIII: + + “We will surround our government with a whole world of economists. + _It is for this reason that the science of economics is the chief + subject of instruction taught by the Jews._” + + +—— + +Issue of July 23, 1921. + + + + + LXXVIII. + A Jew Sees His People As Others See Them + + +This week we present another Jew’s comment on his race and for the good +of the race. Bert Levy has said these things before Jewish Women’s +Councils, and B’nai B’rith lodges, and they will assist readers of this +series to an understanding of some of the truer, though minority, +influences which are at work in American Jewry. He sincerely exposes +every obvious defect, and it is to be hoped that one day, with as +sincere a pen, he will go deeper. Mr. Levy’s chosen title is: + +FOR THE GOOD OF THE RACE + +From a far-off land I came, a sad-eyed, pale-faced, poetic young Jew, +with an unspeakable love of my people burning in my heart. Of +Polish-Russian parentage, there was implanted in my nature an +indefinable sorrow (born perhaps of my father’s and mother’s +persecution), which left me high-strung and sensitive to the +anti-Semitic taunts of my schoolmates. + +Given to idle dreaming by some old abandoned shaft or roaming the +deserted alluvial diggings of the little mining town of my youth, I +would conjure up visions of that new world I had so often read +about—that great country where there was no prejudice against my +race—the New Jerusalem. + +Shyly hugging to my breast some borrowed American book or magazine I +would seek the shadows of the huge decaying poppet legs and dream over +the pages containing many Jewish faces, and I read with pride and +gratitude of the high places occupied by my people in music, art, +literature and the drama. Filled with Jewish names and good Jewish deeds +was the story of this new Zion, and a longing to be among the great ones +of my people took possession of me. Between my dear father and myself +there was a bond of love too sacred for words, and when I looked upon +his dear face for the last time in this world and bade him a sorrowful +goodby before my departure for the New Jerusalem, he held me close to +his breast and whispered: + +“Don’t forget that you are a Jew, and if you need sympathy, love or +help, go to your own race and show your Arba Kanfoth.” (According to +Deuteronomy XXII., 12, the Jews are commanded to wear fringe upon four +corners of their vestures and this command is observed to the present +day by wearing a special garment with these fringes, generally hidden by +the ordinary clothes.) + +I carried my father’s words across the ocean in my heart and the memory +of his tear-dimmed eyes and the pressure of his big loving arms has +never left me; in fact, it is so strong at times that I find it hard to +believe that he is not by my side telling me, in spite of many +disappointments, that after all, the Jews are still my brethren and +sisters. + +Words fail to describe my feelings as the beauties of the New World +unfolded to me. In wonderful contrast to the melancholy aspect of my own +country was the joyous color of Samoa, with its hallowed memories of +Robert Louis Stevenson, lifted like some fairy veil out of the midst of +the Pacific to give me a glimpse, as it were, of my dream of America—the +New Jerusalem. + +Oh, the wonderful days and wonderful nights out on that vast blue +expanse, where God and His stars seemed so near that one formed a good +resolution with every throb of the great engine far down below. On one +of those nights I sat listening to some one playing in the music salon +and I was inwardly thanking the Creator that there was a Puccini in the +world and that he had given us “La Boheme.” There we were, thousands of +miles from anywhere, languidly rolling under a perfect moonlit sky, +listening to the plaintive airs that Puccini had coined for Mimi. There +was hardly a sound but the gentle lapping of the waves breaking against +the vessel’s side till a slight commotion on deck up ahead caused some +of the listeners to investigate. One of the passengers, an ex-Harvard +man, returned with the remark: + +“Oh, it’s only some damned Jew. He’s fallen and hurt himself pretty +badly.” + +Like a smudge on some beautiful picture was this anti-Semitic sentiment +on such a night, and considering its source I felt deeply grieved. As I +was the only other Jew in the first cabin I made my way to the stateroom +where they had carried the victim of the accident and found him to be a +tender-hearted old man who I subsequently learned had spent a long life +in acts of charity toward his fellow men and women, regardless of creed. +He was returning to end his days in Jerusalem (his Jerusalem, not the +one of my dream), where he could touch again the beloved stones of the +wailing wall. + +Something in the old man’s face, that “something” which was in the face +of my father, my brother, that “something” which is in the face of every +Jew, drew me to him, as it has drawn me to all Jews always, and I spent +many intellectual hours by his bedside, picking up grains of wisdom +which he had translated from the Talmud. I wished that the ex-Harvard +man could have known that the old man’s wrinkles were but the pathetic +records of the massacres of his kith and kin which he had witnessed in +his homeland and that he daily prayed for death to efface the awful +memories. + +Later on the ex-Harvard man asked me to join in a deck game. I reminded +him that I also was a “damned Jew.” + +“I’m sorry,” he said. “I know what you refer to—that was an unfortunate +slip I made the other night—merely a figure of speech, I assure you.” + +I found him a charming companion and soon in a cozy corner of the +smoking room we became fast friends and I tried to win him over to think +better of our people. + +“I would like to hear your opinion of your fellow Jew after you have +spent, say, twelve months in America,” he said. + +Since then I have walked the length and breadth of the great cities of +America, and my very soul has cried out to my fellow Jew: “Suppress +Thyself!” The day I arrived in New York I learned that my dearest +friend, my father, had passed away, and naturally my first thought was +to say the kaddish, a prayer of the Jewish liturgy recited by orphans +for the welfare of the souls of their deceased parents, somewhat after +the fashion of the Catholic mass. Every male of Jewish blood at some +time of his life recites this beautiful prayer. It does not matter how +far one strays from the fold or how much one has denied the faith, there +comes a time when the Jew in him asserts itself and he says the kaddish. + +Public prayer among Jews can be recited only in the presence of ten +males above the age of religious maturity, and this assembly is called +minyan. Surely in this great city I would easily find a minyan, I +thought; so I followed the line of least resistance, like any stranger +in a strange land, and sought out the Jewish names best known to the +public. I called at a business house uptown with the name of a great +Hebrew over the door. He was the great man of whom I read with such +pride in the little mining town at the other end of the world. Yes! The +same Jewish face depicted in the huge photograph in the lobby I had seen +in the magazine I had hugged so lovingly at home. + +I made my way, full of hope, to his office and was asked by a doorkeeper +my mission. I explained—the doorkeeper was a Hebrew—that I desired to +say kaddish for my father and that I wanted to form a minyan. With a sly +wink he passed me on to several Hebrew clerks and office boys, each of +whom smiled, sneered, and made his little joke about “greenhorns.” Then +I was ushered with many grimaces into the presence of the big man. + +Just a minute’s conversation convinced me that he was a Jew in +appearance only, and that he had never known anything of the traditions, +the romance, the art or the literature of our race. He didn’t exactly +know what minyan was, or pretended he didn’t, but recommended me to “one +of our people,” as he put it, who ran a very popular chophouse close by. +I began to realize that I was a stranger among my own people and that +night I walked the streets of great New York with an aching heart. +Everywhere in the hurrying crowds I saw the faces of my brethren and +sisters, thousands, hundreds of thousands of them, hurrying, pushing, +shoving brethren they were, with all the tenderness, the friendship and +the Semitic look gone from their eyes. + +“Oh, God!” I thought, “are these the children of Israel? Is this the +persecuted race—that people who had been scattered to the four corners +of the earth?” + +Hungry and weary, I made my way as if in a dream to the café of a great +hotel. Everything in the huge room was glaringly false—marble pillars, +oak beams, flowers, were all imitation: a big orchestra sat in a balcony +with an artificial moon and a painted sky as a background; everywhere +were lights, lights and more lights. + +From table to table I went but I was roughly reminded that “this” was +reserved and “that” was reserved. Presently glaringly gowned, +bediamonded Jewish women, accompanied by equally vulgar Jewish men, +filed in and occupied every seat, and between mouthfuls of food and +drink their bodies would sway to the voices of other Jews who sang only +of “Mississippi” and “Georgia.” How these people did laugh when they +caught sight of my foreign clothes and my pale, poetic face, and how +they would have screamed with laughter had I shown them my Arba Kanfoth, +that beautiful little token which my poor father fondly imagined would +have made me understood in the New World. + +Out into the night I went and found myself struggling in a torrent of +humanity. Every time I received an extra bump or hard push I looked only +to see that my antagonist was a Hebrew. On the street, in the cars, in +the subway, or at the soda fountain, wherever I saw my fellow Jews +blatantly shouting and rudely pushing, I, in spite of my indignation, +felt the love of my race uppermost in my heart, and I wanted to cry out: + +“Oh, Jew; dear brothers and sisters, suppress yourselves for the good of +the race! Stand back! For the good of the race!” + +Never in the world have our people known such a free country as this, +and it is a privilege to be here, but at times a great fear comes over +me that we are abusing that privilege. Amid the din of Jewish music and +laughter, the newsboys are shouting the names of Jewish murderers (the +Rosenthal case), the gunmen of the city. The bribe givers and the bribe +takers depicted in the news sheets have Jewish countenances. The +gambling house keepers—yes! yes! I know that there are Christians who +are murderers, gamblers and informers, but the Jew is a marked man. He +is distinct, apart, so distinct that in a crowd he is the first noticed. + +It is for this reason that I would have my brethren and sisters suppress +themselves, stand back! I would have real Jews take the worst of a +bargain once in a while for the sake of the race. I would have them once +in a while give up their seats in public conveyances, behave modestly in +cafés, dress quietly, and give up the use of assumed Christian names. + +There is nothing so pathetic as the man who, with a Hebrew face, assumes +a Christian name. I never go to a public place without wishing that my +fellow Jew would talk less and appear less ostentatious. When one Hebrew +comes in late to a show, marches down the aisle and on the front row +deliberately obstructs the view of people in the audience as he stands +slowly removing and folding his coat and gloves, he seems to cause more +annoyance than if half a dozen Gentiles did the same thing. When a Jew +stands aside and waits patiently at a ticket window, gives his seat to a +lady on a street car or behaves in a refined manner in any walk of life, +he immediately makes friends for our people. + +Most of our people, I have found, have aggressive personalities: it is +this aggressiveness which has enabled many immigrants to pass through +Ellis Island to the ownership of fine apartment houses all within a +couple of years—but sometimes this aggressiveness becomes absolutely +cruel, crushing from the very soul all the tender elements which go to +make up a happy life. + +Recently I thought with much bitterness of my father’s last words to me: +“If you need sympathy, love or help, go to your own race.” Ill-health +overcame me and I became involved in debt for a trifling amount. Each +stage of my embarrassment and consequent suffering was contributed to by +a brother Jew. First, the shyster lawyer, without principle or mercy, +then his brutal clerks, sly and grafting. Next, a collector, absolutely +callous, then the process server, and, at last, the “bouncer,” sans +heart, sans soul, sans everything. + +If all these agents of misfortune were Gentiles I could have borne it, +but the greatest heartbreak of all was the fact that one and all of them +were brother Jews. Why must a Jew always be in at the death, as it were? + +There came a time soon after this when I walked the streets almost +penniless. Seeking work, I applied at the store of a wealthy Hebrew. I +explained to the well-groomed proprietor that I was an orthodox member +of his race and appealed on that ground for a chance. He pooh-poohed the +idea. + +“My dear fellow,” said he, “these are the enlightened days, when Judaism +is not taken seriously, in fact, it doesn’t pay. I am a Christian +Cultist, I meet nice people and it helps my business.” + +Here was a poor fool with his head like the ostrich’s—in the sand. I +explained to him that being a Jew was not a question of religion but a +question of blood. I told him that if a Jewish leopard ceased visiting +the synagogue to go to a Christian Cultist chapel it did not necessarily +get rid of its spots. I left him scratching his head, and I also lost +the chance of a job in his store. + +In and out of offices presided over by men with Jewish faces I trudged +all day. Most of these men, I subsequently learned, belonged to New +Thought, Christian Cultist and other up-to-date churches and +societies—it was good for their business. They called themselves +Christians, but nature’s marks cannot be changed like one’s clothes. + +In the great theatrical districts I found thousands of my fellow Jews +who had grown rich over night by coining perhaps a popular song that had +pleased the cabaret-mad crowd or by ridiculous impersonations of their +race upon the music hall stages. A good many of these were young men, +sons of fathers and mothers who had been driven from their own country +with fire and sword. + +The mothers and fathers stay at home blessing God every hour of the day +and night for guiding them to such a country as this, while the sons and +daughters are out at the theaters, in the halls and cabarets singing +songs of Dixie. Passing by in this great throng are prominent actors, +critics and playwrights, many under assumed names, simply because their +own names are Jewish. + +Flashing across the horizon as I write is a notorious Jewish doctor with +a consumption cure. He could have been famous and honored had he but +suppressed himself, instead of which he, with his commercial instinct +and his press agent methods, made more enemies for the race. Many +Gentiles, I will admit, have had consumption cures, but it remained for +one of our people to float companies and open institutions before the +“cure” was even reported upon by the government. + +Tramping the city tired and weary of looking for friendly Jewish faces I +found myself near the City Hall. I approached a milk station and bought +a cent’s worth of the most delicious milk I have ever tasted. A +rough-looking fellow next to me said, as he smacked his lips: + +“Pretty good stuff, that,” and perhaps noting that I was a stranger, he +added: “The guy who is doing this milk thing is saving the babies all +right—he’s some rich Jew—God bless him—I’ve got three babies of my own.” + +Hungering to hear a Jew praised I talked with this man for an hour, +listening with keen enjoyment to the story of one of my race who had +caused his millions to do good for the people irrespective of creed, and +had kept himself suppressed. I learned of this Jew’s efforts for the +dying babies at home and for his starving co-religionists in Palestine +and felt proud. Proud and happy for the first time, I sat in the little +park watching the passing procession till I dozed off into a sound +sleep. My happiness continued in my sleep, for I had a most beautiful +dream. + +Before me in my dream passed a grand parade; it was a series of “For the +good of the race” tableaux. All the prominent professional Jews headed +the procession with their real names and the name of their race +emblazoned upon silk banners in letters of gold. Then came all the +Hebrew gambling house keepers bearing aloft broken roulette wheels and +other emblems of a discarded and disgraced “business.” + +Next in order was a large army of Hebrews who were professional bondsmen +for arrested street walkers headed by two crooked ward politicians +carrying a huge streamer with the words: “Henceforth we will go to +work.” These men looked a little sad as they marched along thinking of +the easy money they were leaving behind, but the cheers of the multitude +exulting over their great sacrifice somewhat atoned for their agony of +mind. Next followed the amalgamated Jewish usurers, real estate and +company promoters’ union. This part of the parade took four hours and a +half to pass a given point. + +All the marchers had discarded their expensive clothing and their +diamonds and were modestly attired. They had also discarded their +automobiles—many of the prominent men in this section carried flags and +banners upon which were inscribed the legends: “We will not lie about +values.” “We will not charge exorbitant interest” and “We will not water +our stock.” These inscriptions were received with incredulous looks of +astonishment, and many of the crowd called out: “We’re from Missouri,” +whatever that meant. + +Then came a beautiful torchlight brigade called “The Hebrew Firebugs’ +Union.” Nearly all these men had their hair close-cropped and wore +prison clothes, a fact which filled the crowd with relief. Next came +that part of the procession which showed the greatest following among +its marchers. It was the large army of Hebrew “aggressives.” Hundreds +and thousands of them passed by with reformed looks upon their faces. +Oh, I felt so happy as I read the buttons they wore and saw the flags +they carried. Most of the streamers read: “We will suppress ourselves.” +“We will stand back and keep quiet.” “We will be unostentatious.” There +they were, hundreds of well-known faces and types—end-seat hogs, +front-seat hogs, loud talkers, inconsiderates, bargainers and the +terrible army of people that go to make up the crowd which is directly +responsible for the anti-Semitic feeling. The line of them was miles +long. + +I was awakened from my happy dream by a rude thump from a Jewish +policeman who hurried me to a police station, where I was surrounded by +shyster lawyers, my brethren, who wanted money with which they could +square other brethren. I could not gain the services of a Hebrew +bondsman because I had no pull. A Hebrew magistrate called me a “bum” +and a loafer for going to sleep in a public park. + +“Keep awake in the future,” he said as I was roughly bundled out of the +court. + +Keep awake! This is the worst advice he could have given me, for I was +so happy asleep and dreaming that my brethren and sisters had reformed +and had become real Jews for the sake of the race. + +I now look upon my police court humiliation as the best thing that could +have happened to me, for a kindly old Jewish scholar, who acted as court +interpreter, was attracted by my appearance. His long contact with human +misery and his great experience with foreigners stranded in a strange +country enabled him to understand me. + +That night he took me to his poverty-stricken little room behind a +delicatessen shop in the Ghetto. After supper he went to the street door +and called the neighbors from their stoops. He called them by their +first names and I said kaddish for my father as they stood around among +the pickle barrels. + +Since then I have lived among Jews, real Jews. I have learned that +beneath the ragged coat of a push-cart vender there may beat a heart of +gold, and that a poor seller of collar buttons or suspenders may be a +student of the Talmud with a mind that is a gift of the gods. + +Leaving the seething, modern, fashionable life of upper Broadway to +enter the religious atmosphere of the numerous schools of Jewish +literature on the East Side entails a violent contrast in conditions. + +To see the deeply furrowed, time-scarred faces of the grand old men +pouring over their beloved Talmud is to get a glimpse of another world—a +world of resignation, peace and love. + +Within earshot of the thundering traffic of Broadway I stood gazing at +the bowed figures engaged in study and prayer. As I gazed the sordid +walls of the poverty-stricken room faded from my sight, and in their +stead I saw (in my mind’s eye) the wailing wall of Jerusalem or some +ruin of the Holy City—a more fitting background to the rabbinical +figures so strangely out of place in hustling America. + +The great passion for the dead and gone past reflected in the +Rembrandtesque faces of the aged students lends to their lives a +religious grandeur which the uptown tourist (hastily passing on a +rubber-neck wagon) would never suspect. Behind many a shabby-looking +little store, or maybe above some corner saloon, are the societies for +the study of Hebrew literature, where congregate the types of Jewish +scholars and philosophers that make the heart of the writer and artist +glad. + +Gray-haired, bewhiskered, sad old men, many of whom have tasted only the +bitterness of life—yet such is their faith in the Almighty that they +cling to the praying shawl and Bible to blot out the memory of a +Kishineff—their lives of study and prayer amid abject poverty giving the +lie to the fallacy that the Jew lives but for money. + +I have often wandered among these scholars picking up the crumbs of +wisdom which fall from the lips of the old men, grateful that my Jewish +face and blood gave me the privilege to sit and sketch among them. +Somehow or other my ramblings on the East Side are like the calm after +the storm of the uptown struggle. + +Many times I have felt the heart tug—the longing to be among my +people—the real Jews—and, leaving theatrical uptown, the land of +make-believe and unrest, I have sought the little schools of study where +the wonderful real old men who live by optimism and nourish their souls +by faith teach me the lesson of patience and the love of humanity. + +There is something restful and inspiring when an old man—long, long past +the Biblical three score and ten—places his hand on your shoulder and +murmurs in Yiddish, “It is God’s will.” I have envied the profound peace +of many of these aged students living in the past and undisturbed by +thoughts of the future. Their Jewish view of life is as beautiful as it +is simple. It disregards neither earth nor heaven. It looks to earth and +observes the evil prevailing among men; it thinks of heaven and ponders +on the bliss of “the future state,” and it urges man to strive to bring +heaven on earth, to establish by justice and equity those blessed +conditions on earth which so many associate with heaven. + +Their Jewish view of death is equally beautiful. For those who die they +feel no sorrow. Having once torn aside the veil which parts the known +and the unknown, having once entered into the shadow, or rather the +sunshine, of the beyond, they are better off in the other life. Whether +death means eternal sleep or eternal life, those who have left our side, +having passed into the arms of pitiless death, repose in a condition +which should give survivors no cause for anxiety on account of their +beloved dead. + +In the pathetic chapter of “The Old Curiosity Shop,” in which Dickens +tells of the death of Little Nell, he makes the Schoolmaster utter these +words of wisdom, on which all who mourn for their dead may well ponder. +“If,” said he, “one deliberate wish expressed in solemn terms above the +bed could call her back to life, which of us would utter it?” + +Dickens took this view of death from the Talmud. + +The interpretation of a difficult passage from the Talmud, or the +coining of an epigram, is as food and wine to the wise old students, and +there is not an ill in their lives that cannot be soothed or a blessing +that cannot be acknowledged in a quotation from their beloved book. To +watch them at their study and devotions undisturbed by the turmoil about +them is to marvel at the faith which has enabled some of them to live +more than one hundred years with no other interest in life than their +God and their books. + +From the dingy windows of the schools the mass of sordid buildings looks +to their eyes like the hills of Palestine, and the shriek of the passing +elevated trains and the clanging of the car bells and the din of passing +traffic disturb them not, for they live in the past. + +The alleged Jew of the fashionable uptown lobster palaces—the blatant, +pushing type, who is the direct cause of much anti-Semitic feeling—knows +and cares nothing for the submerged student of his race. The latter is +equally oblivious of the alleged Jew who is contemptuously referred to +as a meshumad (apostate). But while the former stands out in the world +of money and worldly success as a target for much abuse and hatred, the +latter lives with books, unknown and unheeded, drawing from the Talmud a +joy that riches cannot buy and solacing himself with the love of +humanity. + +In strong contrast to their fathers and grandfathers are the children of +these old men. Modern America, with its opportunities for all, has torn +them from the religious atmosphere and sent them uptown to become the +lawyers, the artists and the actors. + +The Jewish comedian of the vaudeville theater who nightly sets the +audience shrieking at his Yiddish idioms is in nine cases out of ten the +son of a scholar, and though the glamour of Broadway success claims him +and he no longer lives home, in his heart of hearts he is a Jew and +never forgets the old people. He will tell many stories of his parents +to his Gentile friends, imitating and exaggerating their many +characteristics, but he is mighty sore when he hears a Gentile do the +same thing. But, after all, the comic Jew of the modern stage is but an +imaginary sketch. + +There is absolutely nothing humorous in these old men of Judea. Even in +the sordid surroundings where you find them engaged in prayer or study, +their attitude is one of quiet dignity—a dignity enhanced by their +extreme old age. + +In a little dark den behind a poultry store I was sketching some of the +old men at study. One old fellow one hundred and four years old was +explaining to a young fellow of sixty a passage in the Talmud about +which the latter was in doubt. Both men were without coats. The younger +man had left his push-cart at the door, entirely forgetting the +perishable goods thereon and quite oblivious to the fact that hundreds +of dirty children were surrounding his cart and fooling with his wares. + +Other old men were in the school, and the background to their somber +faces was the shop with its ghastly poultry suspended by the necks. One +of the old Talmudic students would now and again leave his ponderous +Bible to serve in the shop, returning, after wrapping a fowl in a +newspaper, to the verse he had been propounding. There was absolutely +nothing humorous in all this, but I would love to have had some of my +non-Jewish friends see how little thought of money and business the real +Jew has. + +Sometimes when I have felt full of shame at the behavior in public +places of men and women with Jewish faces but with no Judaism in their +hearts, I have wished that the simple, studious lives of the old men of +the East Side could be the standard by which our race is judged, and +that the Talmudic saying so aptly put into verse by Rabbi Myers was +better known: + + “Which is the path, both right and wise, + That for himself a man should find? + That which himself much dignifies, + And brings him honor from mankind.” + + +—— + +Issue of May 7, 1921. + + + + + “_It can hardly be an accident that antagonism directed against + the Jews is to be found pretty much everywhere in the world + where Jews and non-Jews are associated. And as the Jews are the + common element of the situation it would seem probable, on the + face of it, that the cause will be found in them rather than in + the widely varying groups which feel this antagonism._” + + —_Jesse H. Holmes, in The American Hebrew_ + + + + + LXXIX. + Candid Address to Jews on the Jewish Problem + + +This is a candid address to the Jews of the United States. Without +subterfuge, without flattery, wholly without fear of all that they may +threaten or can do, this attempt is made to set before them the Jewish +Question as _their_ question, theirs to acknowledge, theirs to consider, +theirs to solve. + +It is not a question of THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT at all. This paper has +merely become the vehicle of unwelcome facts which have finally thrust +themselves up for final disposal in this country. + +Damning this paper, compelling cheap city politicians to interfere with +its sale, indulging a ribald humor concerning it, will not affect the +facts at all. What THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT says is true or it is +untrue. If true, it ought to be considered. If untrue, it ought to be +disproved. The present policy of Jewish leaders is to do neither, but to +indulge in antics which go a long way toward illustrating what this +paper has said. + +What THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT says is true, and tens of thousands of +Jews know it is true. + +No representative Jew has ever approached us with a denial of the truth +of what has been stated in this paper. Neither has any unrepresentative +Jew. + +The chief objection made against the publication of the facts is always +stated in this form: “What you say is true. Certain Jews are guilty of +the things you charge. But why do you say ‘Jew’? Why do you not say Al +Wood, Morris Gest, Louis Marshall, Samuel Untermyer, ‘Wolf’ Lamar, +Edward Lauterbach, Felix Warburg—why not let it go with these men’s +names, why say ‘Jew’? When you say ‘Jew,’ it sounds as if you blamed all +the Jews.” + +This objection has been seriously and courteously made by a number of +Jews who have conferred with THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT on this series of +articles, and has been as seriously and courteously considered. + +What is the answer? First, that these men _are_ Jews. Second, that being +Jews these men constitute a problem for the Jews themselves. Third, it +is time for some one to call attention to the necessity of cleaning up +on that problem. There has been too much mincing of words. There has +been too much concealment of names and relationship. The method which +Jews were taking in this country with regard to concealment was heading +them swiftly toward the same conditions which have menaced their race in +Europe, and THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT would count no labor lost that +would rouse the Jews to a sense of the responsibility which rests on +them to solve the Jewish Question in this country, possibly the only +country where it can be solved. + +Let us be frank: if this paper had mentioned only the names of +individual Jews, never mentioning their race, and had exposed them as +isolated persons, it would have made no difference in the general Jewish +reaction, the cry would still have been that “the Jews were being +attacked”; whereas the other people of the country would have been just +as much in the dark regarding the close bonds which unite all the groups +of evil influences in this country. The purpose of this series of +articles is to let in the light—to show the Jews generally that the +stench had become too great, and to show the rest of the people where +the stench arose. + +The list of charges for the Jews of the United States to consider as +affecting the distinguished members of their race is very serious. And +the charges are true. + +It is true that there is a distinct “Jewish idea” in business and +professional life which has eaten away the traditional principles of +honor on which Anglo-Saxon life was erected. Every Jew knows that, every +non-Jew knows it. Here and there a Jew in business or professional life +makes a breakaway from trickery, deception, dishonesty, and exploitation +of the gullible public, and achieves success with honor, but that Jew +also knows that the majority of his brethren in the same line practice +different methods. + +It is true that behind the amazing degeneracy of the modern stage and +motion picture is a solid wall of Jewish ownership and control. This +ownership and control must bear the responsibility for the rapid and +dangerous deterioration which has come since such ownership and control +was achieved. + +It is true that behind all the shoddy and make-believe and adulteration +in the staples of life is the Jewish idea of profits, “making the ephah +small and the shekel great,” and that the initiators of American +business into these shady practices were Jewish. It is idle to retort +that apt pupils have been found among non-Jews; the point is that before +Jewish influence began to be felt in American business, sound quality +and a fair price were the rule. It is the Jews’ ceaseless boast that +wherever they go they change business, but not for the better. + +It is true that beneath all the network of trivializing influences in +literature, art, politics, economics, fashion and sport, is Jewish +influence controlled by Jewish groups. Their Orientalism has served as a +subtle poison to dry up the sound serum of Anglo-Saxon morality on which +this country thrived in its formative years. Is it necessary to specify? +In every movement toward a lower standard, a looser relationship, +especially toward the overthrow of the old Christian safeguards, do not +Jewish names predominate? + +These charges and many more have all been made in detail with evidence +submitted, and need not be repeated here. The present purpose is simply +to get the problem squarely before the Jews of the United States. + +These charges are true, they cannot be disproved, Jewish leaders have +not attempted to disprove them. Thousands of Jews have said that they +are true. + +Then where is the obstacle to a settlement? + +This question is best answered by three typical replies made by Jews +during the course of the present series. + +1. “_What you say is true, but you should not say it._” + +There is a principle, seldom expressed among the Jews, but always acted +on, that Jews should not have public attention called to them except by +themselves or their chosen spokesmen. This is unfortunate, because any +establishment of the Jews as an accepted and trusted part of the general +citizenry must include their being known as such. In this country the +Jew should not only welcome the widest knowledge (unless he has +something he fears to have known) but should himself undertake the +exposure of those things which will eventually bring a shadow on the +name of his race. The Jew has never done this. When exposure could no +longer be suppressed, the Jewish attitude has always been one of +defense, regardless of the merits of the case. “The Jew can do no wrong” +is the principle acted upon. Never must a “Gentile” charge be admitted, +however true it may be. Never must a “Gentile” reform be assisted, no +matter how much needed. + +Now, that principle may do for other countries, but not for the United +States. If the Jew is wise, he ought speedily to take warning that in +this country the old line of action will not succeed. If Jews continue +to show a disposition to defend the malefactors of their race against +the just expostulations of the rest of the people, they must not be +surprised if the public begins to view them as all one crowd—an inner +nation set against the outer nation. + +2. “_What you say is true, but your conclusion is wrong: it is not for +the Jew to change to your standards, it is for you to change to the +Jew’s standards._” + +This is the fighting view. It admits that there are two ideas in +conflict in the United States, what it unfairly terms the “Puritanic” +idea, opposed by what it calls the Jewish Universal idea. + +This view would command respect if it represented a superior morality in +conflict with a lesser morality, if it represented a higher civilization +against a lower civilization. Will any Jew contend that it does? Will +any Jew deny that the influence of the Jewish idea in this generation is +to break down such morality as we had? Will any Jew deny that the +civilization of the United States before the advent of the Jews thither +was superior to the highest civilization ever achieved by the Jews +anywhere at any period of their history? + +There are _two_ ideas in conflict—that is certain. The Jewish idea has a +tremendous infiltrating force and a serious degenerative power. It is a +powerfully disintegrating influence. It eats the substance out of the +civilization which it attacks, destroys its moral virility, throws down +its reverence, saps its respect for authority, casts a shadow on every +basic principle. + +That is the way the Jewish idea works in American civilization. Moral +gravitation being, like physical gravitation, downward, it is not +difficult to seduce human nature to lower levels, but it is a massive +task to lift it to higher levels of morality and reverence and sober +justice. And this latter task, organized Jewish effort has never +attempted. The campaign in the United States is a campaign for the +breakdown of the ideas that now obtain, not a lifting of them to a +higher degree of nobility. + +If it were an attempt to substitute the austerity of the Mosaic law—the +law given _to_ Moses, not the ordinances decreed _by_ Moses—for the +half-hearted Christian idealism of the day, even that would be a task in +which all right-hearted men could join. But _Moses condemns the modern +Jews_ more severely than anyone else could. They have rejected the +Mosaic law. They have built their international power upon the exact +opposite of the Mosaic law. Moses was given a law of human society which +would have saved civilization its greatest tragedies. Moses has a social +program, obedience to which for one day would completely wreck the +Jewish international power. Moses is their judge, and when the Law is +established Moses will be their destroyer. + +Let the Jews think seriously what is this idea which they set up to +follow. Let them penetrate the mists and seek out where this idea +originated. Let them think forward and visualize the effect if this idea +should become regnant. It will not become regnant here; there are +safeguards here which the true Israelite will understand; but it is as +certain as day that the idea will in the end destroy, utterly destroy, +all who trust in it. + +This much is gained, however, from the attitude we are now discussing: +we have gained clarity of understanding as to just what it is that is in +collision; it is _two ideas_, and one of them is the idea of disruption, +fostered by the false and delusive hope that disruption will spare the +disruptor. + +3. “_What you say is true, and we Jews could change it if we only would. +The trouble is, we don’t want to seem to be driven to it. But I don’t +see how otherwise we are to do it._” + +Many Jews will recognize this sentiment as their own, but they will be +readier to express it to a non-Jew than a Jew. Why? Because prophets +must be prepared to suffer in Judah. “Well, if you insist on playing +Christ, you must expect to be crucified,” said Lilienthal to Isaac Wise. +“O Jerusalem, that stonest them that are sent to thee!” + +Yet there is need of prophets in Judah today, men who will rise among +the people and tell them plainly. The rabbinate is utterly bankrupt of +the prophetic spirit. It has fallen into the blindness of the old +priesthood. Here and there a literary man attempts to speak, but Jewish +“art” has so accustomed the Jews to make-believe that the writing is +looked upon as a performance, nothing more. + +No one with a sense for such things—and there are believers still left +in Judah—will doubt that the times are ripe for a great change +respecting the Jews. So strong is the feeling among the remnant of +believing Jews that it is interpreted as forewarnings of the Messianic +period. Among the Judaized Christian sects, other interpretations are +given to the times, most of which are used to support political Zionism +which represents the materialism and unbelief of present-day Judaism and +which will undoubtedly fail as a national restorative and as a political +program. But however misinterpretative these sectarian and Jewish +conclusions may be, they indicate a sense of imminent change. A greater +change is indicated than migration to Palestine would be—for that would +not mean any change at all in the world, and certainly no change for the +better in the fortunes of the Jews. Christians—misguided Christians, one +must say—who see God’s alleged will of universal Jewish dominion +fulfilled by means of the Jews’ defiance and despite of the Law given to +Moses, ought to re-examine their ground for so strange and immoral a +conclusion. The break up of this civilization, this age of civilization, +will occur because of the collapse of this system by which the Jew has +obtained his hold on the nations. The system that gives him his hold is +doomed, is passing, and the fallacy of Jewish tribal destiny to rule the +world will pass with it. + +With this change already on the threshold, prophets should be expected +to arise in Judah to recall their people to the Law whose previous +denial meant their overthrow. These prophets will not be of the “Reform +school” which denies the God of Israel as a divine Person, nor will they +be of the ultra-orthodox school which makes much of fringes and +cookery—they will be of the race of the ancient prophets who spake +boldly against Judah’s violation of the fundamental law. + +Our confidence is that a sufficient number of Jews will see the truth, +and act upon it. + +What would be the greatest overturn the present Jewish idea, the +disruptive Jewish idea, could possibly have? This: _a knowledge that the +way they are going is the way their own Law foredooms to failure_, and +that _the people they hope to triumph over are the people their own +Scriptures say they are not to triumph over_. + +The first is beyond dispute: there is no success for the Jew, no +establishment of him in the world except upon the basic law given to +Moses. In any other attempt he must fall when the structure collapses. + +The second is in dispute, but is by no means beyond consideration, +especially by Jews. In these matters the Jews are much wiser than the +so-called Christians. There is among the Jews “the law of the brother” +and “the law of the stranger.” The “law of the stranger” permits several +important things which the “law of the brother” prohibits. The Jews have +been treating the rest of the world, often intentionally, sometimes as a +matter of course, according to the “law of the stranger.” This is one of +the influences which has helped to solidify Jewry against the rest of +the world. + +Suppose it should be shown that the people in whose lands the Jews have +never been persecuted, the people of those lands to which the Jews have +never been “driven” but to which they have hopefully and joyfully come, +are not “strangers” and are not to be treated as “strangers” and, so far +from being “strangers,” are really the leaders and rulers of that +ethical stream of influence of which the Jews, but for their disloyalty +to their destiny, might have been an important part! + +Suppose it should be shown that Judah, the “driven” part of Israel, has +been blindly attacking the “led” part of Israel. Suppose it should be +shown that Judah is not the Israel upon whom great destiny is to come, +but a small part of that Israel and not even a participating part, until +it “returns, returns, returns.” + +If these things should once take hold of the intensified consciousness +of Judah, as facts, there would be such a change in human society in +general, such a change in the Jewish situation in particular, as would +make a return to Palestine a mere summer excursion in comparison. + +Jews are thinking about these very matters now. They are thinking from +within. They are seeking a reason (the thoughtful among them) for the +sense of unfitness which they feel when they adopt the traditional +attitude of enmity toward the “others,” the “others” in this case being +the Anglo-Saxon peoples. The reason for this sense of impropriety is +that here, in this land, the Jew will have to change his attitude of +antagonism and dwell in peace as in a land prepared for him. Not as lord +of it, by any means, but as a grateful wanderer at last come home. Not +as ruler, but as adding his bit to the righteousness, prosperity and +peace of the people. + +It is not a question of religion. Let the Jew get back his Mosaic +religion—it is the most perfect social system ever devised and directly +contrary to the practical modern Jew’s idea of things. + +It is not a question of intermarriage. Let the Jew keep as long as he +pleases his idea that he is racially different. The suggestion of +intermarriage is a crude one and always indicates a lack of grasp of the +Jewish Question. + +Let the Jew keep all his traditions. They are not objectionable in any +way; the slightest regard for them can only hold them as romantic. + +But let him shed his false notion of “the Jew against the world!” + +Let him shed his false program of breaking down Christendom by the +infiltration of Orientalism into business, art, entertainment and the +professions. + +Let him abolish the false ideal that it is an honor to Jewry to save a +guilty Jew from the common law, and a disgrace to Jewry to see a guilty +Jew punished by the common law. + +Let him draw up notice on all the Jews of the United States who by hook +or crook are sowing vile seed in society, that the Jewish community +charges itself with their misbehavior and will use methods well known to +Jews to bring that misbehavior to an end. + +Let the Jew end forever the disgrace of an anti-defamation committee +which grows frantic over innocent remarks on the part of “Gentiles,” and +is absolutely indifferent to the misdeeds of thousands of Jews who do +more damage to the Jewish name than all the “Gentile” critics and +newspapers could do in twenty years. No one can give the Jews a bad +reputation but the Jews themselves. + +Most Jews who have given this matter a thought will agree. A good deal +of bad temper exists among them, no doubt, and it will be hard for them +to admit that anything THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT may contend for is +right, but the idea here expressed, when divorced from this paper, does +command respect from many Jews. + +The question remains: When will they start on the program here +suggested? + +Human nature being what it is, they will hate to start at all if it will +seem that the present agitation has compelled them. But would they have +started without the agitation ? + +It is possible for an additional number of Jews to catch the thought +that this series of articles cannot be so easily explained away—we are +not referring to the contents now, but to the fact that these articles +exist at all—as being the creation of prejudice, or hatred or +vindictiveness or ignorance? + +Suppose these articles should be truly a sign of the times for American +Jewry! Suppose they offer a warning word, however unwelcome, and a +light, however undesired, which it would be most unwise for Jews to +ignore. + +Suppose these articles were conceived in a spirit far different than the +average pro-Jewish spouter is competent to understand. Suppose the +ultimate benefit will be mostly Judah’s. Suppose the set time has now +come for the Jews to quit their attitude of attacking everyone who shows +them the truth, and to profit by this report of the poor figure they cut +in American life today. Suppose these people who are moved to search and +report the truth about Judah are truly the shophar calling the people to +a new day—is it wise to let stubbornness counsel? Is it wise to let +pride close the ear? + +The enemies of the Jews are those who defend them for the pay of hire or +praise or votes. The enemies of the Jews are those who bespeak them fair +to their faces, and express quite different thoughts behind their backs. +The writer of this personally knows that two of the principal “Gentile” +defenders of the Jews, men who have shouted and ranted through the Press +on the Jews’ behalf, are men who privately hold and express thoughts +about the Jews which are sheer hatred and enmity and—fear. Mostly fear! +The enemies of the Jews are those who encourage them to take an attitude +that they cannot hold in America—not as affecting their personal liberty +at all, but their social attitude and the Public Right. These are the +enemies of the Jews, and yet these are the ones whom Judah counts his +friends. They are hired friends, false friends, incapable of realizing +for a moment what this whole Question means. Judah’s friends today are +those who will speak the surgical truth to him, braving his fury in the +knowledge that the future will justify the word. + +Judah’s leaders have betrayed him in this country—they do not know they +have crossed the Jordan. The Jews are as sheep without shepherds in this +land. And the chief objection which the Jewish leaders have to THE +DEARBORN INDEPENDENT is that _the Jews may read it and learn how +shepherdless they are_, the Jewish leaders’ opposition to THE DEARBORN +INDEPENDENT rises mostly from _the fear that the Jews may read it_! The +Jews have read it, and they have not found hatred, they have not found +abuse and calumny, they have not found ignorance and malice; they have +found statements of fact calmly set forth, not to arouse hatred among +the non-Jews, but to arouse a sense of social responsibility among the +Jews. + +These are significant times. The emergence of the Jewish Question is a +part of the culmination of destiny that has come upon us, not for harm +but for good. The Jews must uncover their eyes and unstop their ears, +and they will see the beginning of the end of their travail, and they +will hear that to which they have been too long heedless. + +The justification of a discussion of the Jewish Question is the good of +the Jews, and the greatest present obstacle to that good is the Jews +themselves. The time is here when they shall see it. + + +—— + +Issue of January 7, 1922. + + + + + “_Everywhere they wanted to remain Jews, and everywhere they + were granted the privilege of establishing a State within a + State. By virtue of these privileges and exemptions, and + immunity from taxes, they would soon rise above the general + condition of the citizens of the municipalities where they + resided; they had better opportunities for trade and + accumulation of wealth, whereby they excited jealousy and + hatred._” + + —_Lazare._ + + + + + LXXX. + An Address to “Gentiles” on the Jewish Problem + + +The heading of this article presents difficulties. The correct use of +the term “Gentile” is in question. It is a name that has been given us, +not by ourselves, but by Jews, and it is by no means certain that it is +accurately given. A very great chance exists that it is not. That, +however, is a matter which “gentiles” do not bother to understand; they +think, of course, that if one is not a Jew one must be a gentile. This +is only another instance of the Jewish view being “put over” without the +“gentile” understanding or even questioning it. + +There is another difficulty: how shall one address “gentiles” +collectively? When one addresses Jews he knows that the Jew is always a +Jew; that every Jew acknowledges every other Jew; that Jews understand +each other and are loyal to each other as against “outsiders”; that they +think together and act together; that they stand together for Jewish +defense, no matter how just the charge brought against them. When you +address Jews you address a unit, and when you discuss Jews you get a +united reaction from them. + +This cannot be said of gentiles. They are of many races, many +nationalities, many religions, many tongues. They never think of +themselves as being united under the name “gentiles.” They are not race +or class conscious; certainly they do not think of themselves as a unit +with reference to the Jews as an opposite unit. “Gentiles” cannot be +organized into one group nationally, let alone internationally, as Jews +can. Jews of every shade of opinion, of every degree of religion and of +unreligion, can unite all round the world, and do unite, having their +own news service, their own telegraph service, their own “foreign +department” (as they themselves describe it), by which they keep +themselves united and informed for mass action. There is nothing even +remotely approaching that among “gentiles.” + +Not that this fact can be urged against the “gentiles” as a fault. There +are reasons why the “gentiles” never can be united. And one reason is +that among the so-called “gentiles” there is a regnant superior strain +that is not “gentile” at all; no more is it Jewish. There are racial and +moral strains among the non-Jewish section of the world which never can +be brought into agreement. And, outside this superior strain, among the +gentiles proper, the very basis for enduring union is lacking. + +So that the only union that can be expected is a union of the superior +strain, which physically and morally is unconquerable, and whose task it +is to liberate the lesser peoples who easily fall victims to subversion +and have no reactive power to rescue themselves. + +It is to this human Gulf Stream that flows through the ocean of +humanity, blessing it, that this address is offered. As to the identity +of this section of humanity—“He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.” +The others will not, because they cannot. There are many genuine +gentiles mixed up in our common population, but it is not to them that +these words are offered. + +The Jewish Question has existed for a long time, as the Jew knows and +admits, and is a consequence of certain un-Jewish, or rather +un-Israelitish ideas held by Jewish persons of power. The disability +under which the Jew labors is that he is _not_ a Jew, properly speaking, +and does not desire to be. Just at that point is the soil and the root +of the Jewish Question. + +Tackling the Jewish Question is not congenial work. The Race which this +article now addresses has always shrunk from tackling it. Our Race has +little disposition to chastise any portion of humanity, to arouse +feeling or resist it. We have little taste for this surgical work which +becomes absolutely necessary when certain corrupt influences deeply +dislocate and seriously injure the common life. Nothing but a clear +vision of the danger, nothing but an imperative sense of duty would +impel any one of us to embark on a course which is subject to +misunderstanding and which must, in the nature of things, wait long for +its complete justification. Our Race is too fair, and has always been +too fair, to enter hastily into judgment—and upon this fairness and +long-suffering the offending groups have often seriously trespassed. + +Regarded by itself, as a separate entity, the Jewish Power is most +impressive. International Jews today occupy literally every controlling +lever of power. Building up for centuries, perfecting their teamwork +from generation to generation, from country to country, they have +practically reached the summit. Nothing but the Christian religion +remains unvanquished by them, though through false “liberalism” even +that has felt the Jewish assault. So great is this power that the very +knowledge of it kills hope that any movement can ever dislodge it. +Earnest, honest men have walked round it, surveyed it, measured its +strength, and have given up the dream of changing it. In Russia they +tried to segregate it, but while segregation went on from one side, +infiltration proceeded from the other, and even the “anti-Semitic” +Russian Government was honeycombed with Jews, as the end showed. In +Germany they endeavored to vote the Jewish power out of politics, only +to find the root deep set in finance—and no country has yet attacked the +sacred image of gold. In England the policy of absorption was adopted, +and the result is that wherever a Jew was put in power the British +Empire has reaped trouble, in Ireland, in India, in Palestine, the +present vice-regents of all these possessions being Jews. Other little +countries, exasperated beyond endurance, tried violence, and failed just +as miserably as the others. + +Why? Because every one of these methods is precisely the method that the +Jew prefers to have people try. He knows their futility first; they find +it out later. He knows how these methods positively help him; they +discover that later. The knowledge thus won would be pure gain, were it +not that it also seems to discourage the hope of men who know how +seriously wrong the situation is. + +Besides this massive array of power, immovable as it appears, there is +the veil cast over the Christian mind as to the supposedly peculiar +destiny of “God’s chosen people.” The Christian cannot read his Bible +except through Jewish spectacles, and, therefore, reads it wrong. The +idea of “the chosen people” is one of the two great Biblical ideas, but +that the Jews constitute this Chosen People is entirely opposed to the +statement of the Bible—even of the Bible which the Jews acknowledge, the +Old Testament of the Christians. The blessings of world possession, +world rule, superior population, commercial greatness, military power, +constituted governments, “a great nation and a company of nations”—all +of these as means by which to spread light and healing among the +nations—were truly promised to one people, to Israel, not to Judah. +Judah’s destiny was to be quite different. Very few Bible readers ever +note the distinction between the House of Israel and the House of Judah, +yet this distinction was marked from the time of Jacob; the prophets +absolutely insist upon it. Israel seceded from Judah, being unable to +live with that people any longer. Israel’s destiny took them out into +the world, and if the Bible be true, then Israel’s destiny of greatness +is being fulfilled in Israel and not in Judah. The two Houses are +distinct to this day, although a future reunion, a spiritual reunion, is +prophesied to come. + +Yet the false idea that the Jews constitute All Israel has penetrated +the Christian consciousness to an alarming extent, so that when the +Jewish press insists, as it does every week, “We gave you your God, we +gave you your Bible, we gave you your Christ,” even Christian ministers +cannot find an answer. The answer is that the Old Testament is +nine-tenths an Israelitish book, and not a Jewish book. Abraham was not +a Jew; Isaac was not a Jew; Jacob was not a Jew; Moses was not a Jew; +Joshua was not a Jew; Gideon was not a Jew; Samuel was not a Jew; even +Esther and Mordecai were not Jews, but Benjaminites; the majority of the +prophets were not Jews, but Israelites. Upon the coming of Judah into +power, in the persons of David and Solomon, the misrule was so great +that Israel seceded, and the secession was sanctioned by the prophets. +In the New Testament, Jesus Christ found his disciples in Galilee, far +out of Judea, and of them there was but one, Judas, whose name indicates +that he was a Jew. St. Paul was of the tribe of Benjamin, “the light +tribe,” which was left with Judah “for a light.” + +But there is a constant patter of preaching (the Russellites make it the +great theme) that “the Jews are to rule the world because it is so +prophesied.” The amazing blindness with which Christians have regarded +the open pages of their Bible is the only explanation of this one-sided +teaching which is confusing to the Christians and exceedingly dangerous +to the Jews. In the Bible, Israel is the Chosen People of Blessing, and +the time is announced when Judah shall walk to Israel and recognize them +and become one with them. There is a chosen racial breed, a select seed, +a superior strain of blood and soul in the world, but it is not Judah. +One thing, therefore, that Christians can do, as a contribution to the +solution of the Jewish Question, is to read their Bibles carefully. + +The Jewish Question will be solved, and its solution will begin in the +United States. But that does not mean that it will come as the result of +a popular movement. Great changes do not occur that way. It makes little +difference whether the mass of the people see this Question or not; the +mass of the people are not always called into such matters. Their work +is to hold the world steady while the change takes place. But a +sufficient number of qualified persons have seen the Question to insure +that now the era of solution has set in. The timid, the soft literary +men in pulpits (with whose ilk Jeremiah had a keen acquaintance), the +false preachers of “Peace, peace,” the hush brothers and sisters of +every name, the shallow shouters for “fairness,” and all who are afraid +of the truth in its surgical forms—these have no place in the healing of +the hurt of these times; they are wedded to their softness. Nothing has +been more shameful in the last two years than the spectacle of men +bidding for the applause of bootleggers, and gamblers, and the lecherous +masters of the modern stage, and the sinister Kehillah, and the +anti-Christian American Jewish Committee, because, forsooth, some one +has fulfilled the duty to tell the truth. However, these things must +always be, and the evil influences among the Jews have learned just what +kind of help they may expect and from what kind of men. + +THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT has not been making a fight but fulfilling a +duty to shed light on a matter crying for light. THE DEARBORN +INDEPENDENT, therefore, has never urged any individual or organization +to join it in this work. Nor has it charged with cowardice those who for +prudential or other reasons have kept silent. Editors especially have +been absolved; not one of them was asked to lend his aid, although the +files of this office hold thousands of written assurances from newspaper +men all over the land, and from all parts of the world, testifying to +the truth of our statements. Organizations have been proposed, for +various purposes; strong organizations have offered themselves as +vehicles for the carrying out of any plan THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT might +propose. But all such undertakings have been avoided, our belief being +that simply to state the truth, and let it work its own right will, was +sufficient at this time. And to that belief and policy we have adhered. + +“But what shall we do?” is the constant question; “How shall we balk +this system which surrounds us and infects so much of our common life?” + +Observe it, identify it, eschew it—that is more powerful than active +opposition. The clear eye of the man who sees and understands is +something that even the evil powers of Jewry cannot endure. + +But the most potent action any awakened person can take is this: to +erect again our own moral landmarks, which the Oriental Jewish invasion +has broken down. This would spell sheer doom to the whole evil system +sponsored by Jews. And this is the course which has never been tried. To +go back to the principles which made our race great, the principles to +which we have been recreant and therefore have fallen an easy prey—this +is the only invincible course. It is an opposition which evil Jews +cannot understand and cannot defeat. + +In place of the way of doing business which Jewish dealers have +introduced, let the business men of the country adopt the old way of the +white man, when a man’s word was as good as his bond, and when business +was service and not exploitation. + +Let the men and women of the country learn how to buy, let them learn +how to test quality in fabric and food, instead of being dependent on +price tags. The merchandising practices of this country, in the hands of +ruthless exploiters, have all but ruined honest merchants. Let any +dweller in a great city recall the last twenty years, how the Christian +merchants have been growing fewer and fewer. Why? Is it because the +owners of Jewish department stores are better business men? No! The +Jewish merchants began the practice of filling their store windows with +goods that looked like the goods in reputable merchants’ windows, and +sold them for a much lower price. The helpless public, no longer able to +determine the quality of goods, and guided solely by price tags, flocked +to the Jews’ store. The result is that one hears everywhere in ordinary +conversation the complaint that “everything is shoddy.” Of course it is, +and it will remain so, until we educate people in the art of buying. +That of itself will break down three-fourths of the abuses practiced in +the commercial world today. + +Another contribution that can be made to the defeat of Jewish subversive +influence is the examination of so-called “liberal” ideas, their source, +their effect, their whole tendency. Men are thinking ideas today that +poison them morally, socially and economically. These ideas are as +deliberately shot into society as poison gas was shot into ranks of +soldiers in France. Our mental hospitality has been grossly abused, the +public mind has been made a sewer. The time has come for a custom +barrier to be raised for the examination of imported ideas. Unrestricted +immigration of ideas has been as bad for the American mentality as +unrestricted immigration of people has been for American society. + +We have taken our amusements without thought of what was behind them in +the way of deliberate intent to make us common and careless and coarse. +We have read our newspapers, wholly innocent of the propaganda mixed +with the news. We have even taken our religion in a Judaized form, +without troubling to inquire whether it squared with the Bible, the +textbook of religion. We have read our novels and have failed to see +what serum the author was injecting along with his story. And all this +has been possible because we have been asleep, enjoying, as we thought, +a life which was swiftly being taken from us, and dreaming that the old +principles still held sway. + +It is perfectly obvious that the cure for all this is to become awake, +alert, to challenge the foreign influence, and to seek out again the +principles which gave us our greatness. + +We have been weaned away from our natural leaders. We have been taught +to look to those who cannot even speak our language and who do not hold +our institutions dear. A people that turns from its own leaders, or a +people whose leaders have been turned from the sacred responsibilities +of the high office of leading, is in a precarious position, and becomes +an easy victim to confusion of soul. There is a dearth of voices in the +land today, the prophets are dumb, or are reading beautiful essays to +the people. Suspicion has been sowed like darnel seed between classes of +the same race, the people have been broken up, and the subversive Jewish +influence supports the oligarchy of unserviceable wealth at one end of +the social scale, while it stimulates the baser elements of industrial +unrest at the other end. And the race thus rent asunder to its own +undoing, does not see this—capital does not see, and labor does not +see—that the leaders of chaos are alien in blood and soul. + +To keep American and Christian the school, the church, the legislature, +the jury room and the Government, is the most potent resistance that can +be made to the evil influences which have been upon us and which this +series of articles has partly uncovered. The strength of all subversive +influence is in proportion as we cease to be what we ought to be. The +evil influences surrounding this people can succeed only as they change +this people into something less than it ought to be. Therefore, to go +back to the old landmarks, whereby we made all the progress we ever +made, is not only the part of wisdom, but the need of the hour. The +school must be cleansed. The jury box must be kept inviolate—trial by +jury has almost disappeared in Jewish New York. The church must be +un-Judaized and Christianized. The Government must be Americanized. Let +there be the utmost freedom of thought and speech, but let there be also +with it a discrimination which will prevent the people being victimized +by every spurious idea, every “gold brick” economic proposal which comes +along. It needs only that men be awake to their better interests and to +leave no place in their scheme of life for the practices which destroy +the very foundations of confidence. + +Surely it must be understood by this time that the Jews rule, not by +reason of their brilliance or their money, but by ideas which are not +even properly Jewish, but Babylonian. They have captured the castle from +within. They have been able to do so only because of our ignorance of +the lineage and dignity of the stock of ideas upon which our +civilization has been founded. Our people needs to engraft itself again +on the parent tree and draw again the sustenance which made it great and +fruitful. + +Many so-called “gentiles” are somewhat affected by the Jews’ wails of +“persecution.” This has been sufficiently discussed in previous +articles, but “gentiles” can further contribute to the solution of the +Jewish Question by looking about them to see if they can discover any +evidence of “persecution” here—unless it be persecution of the +Christians by the organized agencies of the Jews! In this month’s +_Atlantic Monthly_ a Jewish rabbi, who undoubtedly knows better, assumes +that his race is a hated race. He rather enjoys the thought and accepts +it as a distinctive honor. Our “gentile” might also observe how untrue +this is—how, indeed, in this mixture of nations, the Jew gets off with +less even of the harmless kind of racial animosity than any other +foreign admixture. + +Above all, the “gentile,” so-called, who in ninety cases out of every +one hundred is no gentile at all (as the Jews may well admit) will do +well to avoid fear. Nothing is more abject than “the fear of the Jew,” +and nothing more disastrous to the Jew than the tactics he employs to +sustain that fear. The Jewish subversive power has been powerful only +for evil and only where there was a disposition to evil. It has never +yet succeeded in bringing shame or confusion to the right. + +Indeed, there is one sure way of gaining the respect of the Jew, and +that is, _Tell The Truth_. No one knows better than the Jew whether +statements made about Jews are true or not. “Gentiles” may never be +certain whether a statement made about the Jews may be relied upon, but +Jews always know. That is why prejudice, abuse, hatred, scorn, ridicule, +false charges roll off them as water off a duck. The Jews have never in +all their history feared the lies of their enemies; but they have feared +the truth. And if they only fear the truth in the ancient sense, not to +be afraid of it but to fear to violate it, and to fear to have the truth +testify against them, then the day of Judah’s return to standing has +come. The truth is Judah’s friend, and Israel’s friend, and the world’s +friend. It makes hard demands; it is sometimes not easy to speak and +harder still to hear; but the truth heals, as Judah is due to discover. + +There is this to say, that among the many thousands of persons who have +written to THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT confirming out of their own +observation and experience the statements made in this series of +articles, there has been a most gratifying absence of the spirit of +violence. At the beginning a few rabid Jew-baiters made themselves known +and expressed their hope that at last a regular program of pogroms was +to be instituted. We never knew how far these advances were made with +knowledge of the Jewish leaders, but we do know that for a year and a +half in this United States the Jewish press, and Jewish thugs, and +Jewish politicians, and even some of the most respectable of the Jewish +organizations did their utmost, and in some of the strangest ways, to +compel this Study of the Jewish Question to lead into violence and +disorder. There was nothing that the Jewish leaders more desperately +desired or more tirelessly worked for. + +That was their first setback. Everywhere else in the world they had +always been able to foment this sort of thing and label it +“anti-Semitism.” The label “anti-Semitism” is one of the choicest +weapons in the Jewish armory. But in the United States their plan +failed. It is their first notification that in this country the Question +is going to be solved; it is not to be given a new lease of life by +following the old mistakes. + +THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT knows the temper of the American people on this +question, that it is cool, fair, and somewhat more determined than it +formerly was. But the Jews know this temper better than anyone else. +Hence the magnitude and superb rashness of the propaganda with which +they are literally flooding the country. THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT is +grateful for the flood of Jewish propaganda. It has served in hundreds +of important cases to give the confirmation to our statements which was +wanted. Jewish literature has been a powerful informer of the gravity of +the Jewish Question in the United States. The result was not what the +Jewish leaders wished, of course, but it was serviceable to the truth +just the same. + +Now that the Question is open, now that the press is able to print “Jew” +when necessary, now that a bunch of keys has been provided by which the +people may unlock doors and make further inquiries, THE DEARBORN +INDEPENDENT will follow other aspects of the Question, discussing them +from time to time as circumstances may warrant. + + +—— + +Issue of January 14, 1922. + +------------------------------------------------------------------------ + + + + + TRANSCRIBER’S NOTES + + + ● Typos fixed; non-standard spelling and dialect retained. + ● Enclosed italics font in _underscores_. + + + +*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 76770 *** |